I have not infrequently read the petulantly declamatory Blog, known as Mundabor. It’s a blog that can be counted on to insult Bergoglio at every turn and nearly every day. As its author often says, in other words, what is worthy of vituperation, should be daily excoriated. He has in the past identified himself as an Italian living in the U.K., and an ardent fan of Ronald Reagan and Pius XII
I am all for excoriating heretics and Antipopes. But as a Catholic I realize the danger in putting oneself up in judgement over a pope, because then you are putting yourself in a position between him and Jesus Christ, if not above Jesus Christ Himself.
The munus of the office of Saint Peter is something tremendous. If you really believe that Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of the Eternal Father, then you must cower at the words: You are the Rock, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail over Her. . . I give to thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven, whatsoever you bind on earth, shall be bound in Heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth, shall be loosed in Heaven.
I know from experience and by faith and reason, that I am not God. I know from the facts of history I am not the Pope. The conclusion I draw is that I cannot judge the man who is the pope.
Pope Innocent III said it clearly, though not exactly in these words: My status is such that no man can judge me, except in matters of the Faith.
Thus my preamble.
Now, my critique of Mundabor’s recent post, entitled, The Celestine Issue, which was published today, where the author goes after Pope Benedict with knives. The post is his commentary on Dr. Roberto de Mattei’s piece at Rorate Caeli.
Let me start by saying, that I welcome a discussion on the Resignation. It shows that both Dr. de Mattei and Mundabor have come to the point, psychologically, that the feel they must address the issue of who is the real pope. They are both convinced, therefore, implicitly that evidence is so overwhelming that it appears to many that it cannot be Francis. However, they both publicly still hold that Bergoglio is the Pope.
And in this vein, Mundabor writes of de Mattei’s assertion that Benedict acted out of theological error, thus:
I do not think that Benedict confuses the papacy with the Episcopacy. The man is, if you ask me, far too smart for that. I also think that, when he abdicated, Benedict did not have in mind a Bishop Emeritus, but rather the well-known figure of the Professor Emeritus in the University system; that is, a title that indicates the persistence of the role and of the attached prestige in the relevant person, without any reference to sacraments.
Why Benedict did this is evident enough to me: a man deeply rooted in history, and extremely informed about the Italian cultural environment, Benedict wanted to eat his cake and have it, which is what he has done his entire life.
Bishop Ratzinger wanted to look progressive to “revolutionary” V II thinkers, but still appear conservative to the solid faithful when he was a theologian. As a Pope, he wanted to look like the Pope of the Latin Mass to us decent Catholics, whilst proceeding to countless progressive appointments and not only tolerating, but promoting inter faith rubbish to appease the progressive lobby.
From that point onwards in the piece, however, Mundabor descends to character assassination of a Roman Pontiff. He has no idea at all what really went on in the Vatican, at any time — none of us do — and he presumes that everything was such as to merit the judgement he imposes.
He wrote this attack piece after I tried to gentle correct him in a comment, some days ago, which he promptly erased. I pointed out that a man cannot be blamed for accepting the Papacy without knowing how difficult a job it is.* The ones we should blame are those around the pope that do not help him when he has good will, to do what is good and do it well. Pope Benedict XVI had good will, but was clearly badly served by all about him. They did not fear Benedict and Benedict was not the kind of man to make others fear him. He had seen to much of that in Nazi Germany, and he found none of that in the Life of Jesus Christ.
But Mundabor would hear none of it.
So, in critiquing Mundabor’s arugment, I ask all to first recall here the words of Our Lord: With the measure you measure out, so shall it be measured back unto you.
Whenever I hear these words, I shudder. These words should make everyone cringe with terror and urge them to reexamine themselves in their judgements of others. Yes, we might have to condemn the deeds of others, but we must be always open to being merciful to all.
It would be crude and inaccurate to say that Mundabor’s argument boils down to: Accept the Resignation as valid, because, you see, Ratzinger was a whishy-washy, two-faced coward, who wanted it both ways and did not get what he bargained for. But I think that is an approximate summation, even if it is but a petulant act of emoting which does not amount to a rational argument. For, a Pope does not renounce, unless he renounces the munus, cf. Canon 332 §2. That is what the law says, and you cannot argue around it. Not even with psychology or insults.
As an ironic aside, the subtitle of Mundabor’s blog is, Tradidi quod accepi, which is Latin for I have handed down what I have received. From this post, I guess that means that Mundabor studied under Freud or Jung, the founders of psychiatry and psychology, because he certainly did not receive this way of speaking about a Pope from Pope Innocent III or the Catholic Church.
__________
FOOTNOTES
* Moreover, this faultlessness in accepting being elected in Ratzinger’s case has solid historical grounds, for, in the conclave of 2005, the Cardinals only succeeded in presenting Ratzinger as a viable candidate to the St. Gallen Mafia’s man, Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Accepting his own election, therefore, would then have been the duty of every man, not only of Cardinal Ratzinger, even if he felt disinclined to the magnitude of it.
___________
CREDITS: The Featured image is a screen shot of the Article discussed above. The quotation is verbatim, and is republished here according to fair use standards.
+ + +
Support FromRome.Info
Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.
For centuries, contemplative religious have been recognised as the ‘heartbeat of the Church’. Indeed, even
1 the 2018 Vatican document, “Cor Orans ,” calls contemplative nuns the “praying heart” of the Catholic
Church; an acknowledged truth from which the document itself derives its name. However, this document, together with the (so-called) Apostolic constitution “Vultum Dei Quaerere2” which preceded it in 2016, is a massive push for the extinction of such powerhouses of prayer.
All over the world in recent years, there has been a great deal of effort made to introduce and promote euthanasia; or in other words, the termination of elderly or disabled people who are considered a burden to society, by depriving them of food and water, removing a life support or giving them a deadly dose of medication. Especially noteworthy is the recent case of Arline Lester; a 91-year-old woman who clearly wanted to live. Despite this fact, the publicity her case received and the efforts of her son, Edward, to prevent the murder of his mother, Arline passed away earlier this month (17/1/20) after having her feeding
3
Pope Francis has spoken out strongly against euthanasia, but at the same time he has approved the publication of official Vatican documents which are quite obviously working for the hastened demise of contemplative life. The rules and guidelines laid down in these documents have already caused many religious communities to be divided, amalgamated, or disbanded completely, against the wishes of many of
4 the religious involved. A few examples (out of many!) are: the Poor Clare’s convent of Montalto ,
56 Carmelites of the Holy Face in USA , Mariawald Trappist Abbey in Germany , Little Sisters of Mary,
78 Mother of the Redeemer and the Cistercian Nuns in Bolivia . Why is this happening?
The reasons are similar to those behind the push for the murder of Arline and other elderly or handicapped people who are considered a burden to society. Those in control of the Vatican see such contemplative religious – especially “conservative” ones attached to the charism received from their founders – as a hindrance rather than a help to their plans for the Church. The measures imposed upon these nuns by “Cor Orans” and “Vultum Dei Quaerere,” are the equivalent of saying “Quite plainly they have passed their expiry date, and it’s therefore high time they are done away with.”
9 Hilary White has written some excellent articles , backed up by many quotes from the documents in
question, so there is no need for us to repeat what she has done already. We would like to just concentrate on the comparison (which struck us quite forcefully after hearing of the death of Arline Lester) between the hastened death of those considered a “burden to society”, and the death sentence which has been pronounced upon contemplative nuns. Obviously we are not the first to have noticed this striking similarity; yet, with the grace of God, we hope that by devoting a whole article to this theme, we may be
tube and ventilator deliberately removed.
1
able to benefit our readers in bringing to light even more clearly the serious condition which the Roman Catholic Church is in today.
The writing is on the wall for those who wish to read it. Despite the many attempts which have been made throughout the centuries to suppress monasteries and convents (all of which took place at the instigation of Satan, who hates such powerhouses of prayer), not once have they ever come as close to success as in the present day. A glance at some of the historical facts would appear to suggest that the reason for such near- success is that this time the attack has come, not from without, but from within the Church itself.
Prior to the Second Vatican Council, religious life was thriving and there was an abundance of generous souls dedicating their lives to prayer and sacrifice; not only in contemplative orders, but in every form of priestly and religious life. This Council, described by one of the top Cardinals, Leo Josef Suenens, as “the 1789 [i.e. the Revolution] of the Catholic Church,” resulted in a tragic decline in religious vocations. As well as this, many souls already solemnly consecrated to God returned to live as seculars in the world. Of the small percentage of religious who remained, many began to modify and ultimately abandon their habit altogether, so as to appear no different than the rest of the laity. There is not even any need to glance at the statistics to prove this point. Anyone over the age of 60 will undoubtedly recall the way it used to be when one could see nuns everywhere: teaching, nursing, walking down the streets…etc. There were also many more who remained behind grilles, unseen by men; but through prayer and penance performing the most beneficial assistance to all people.
What remains of all this today? Very little. The majority of nuns are elderly, with their average age in many countries being well over 60, if not 70. Despite the fact that such communities are already slowly dying out, Pope Francis seems determined to accelerate their demise with the dramatic measures imposed by the document “Cor Orans”.
A wise archbishop once said:
“For the good of our beloved Church, more monasteries must be founded. The Church will never recover from this present crisis without monasteries, without the contemplative life, and without the example of monks and nuns who consecrate their lives entirely to prayer and intercession.”
It is clear that if the heartbeat of the Church is stopped, the Mystical Body of Christ will inevitably be unable to survive, just as it is obvious that if you deprive a person of food and water, they cannot remain alive for long. Those who are working for the destruction of Contemplative Religious Life cannot at the same time be working for the good of the Mystical Body of Christ. It is impossible. Without a doubt, they view these religious who provide no active and visible service to society in the same way that certain others view elderly, infirm or handicapped people. They regard them as having already fulfilled their mission in life, unnecessarily remaining a burden on society, and therefore as useless anachronisms ready to be snuffed out. In almost all cases there is covetousness involved as well. Hilary White has shown clearly that this case is no exception.
Poor misguided individuals, who value money more than prayer! The time will come when they will realise that in pursuing the one at the cost of the other they have lost everything, including their souls.
Dear Readers, please do not be shocked or scandalised by these words. Jesus said:-
“Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit shall be cut down and shall be cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.” (Matt.7:19-20)
The fruits of Vatican II and its aftermath of modernism are bad fruits. And since a good tree cannot produce bad fruit, it is logical to conclude that wolves have entered the flock to scatter and destroy. Chaos, confusion and destruction are the work of the devil. God’s work brings peace and unity.
2
Jesus tells us clearly:
“No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one and love the other: or he will sustain the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.” (Matt.6:24)
Unfortunately ever since the Second Vatican Council, Church leaders have failed to heed this warning. They have been openly seeking to unite the Church and the world; not in the Catholic way by promoting and adhering to the Gospel teachings, but by adapting the Church to fit in with the world. Their focus today is therefore no longer on obtaining the conversion of mankind by preaching and prayer, hence the reason why they do not value the contemplative religious whose primary purpose is prayer. They have forsaken the Catholic view for the worldly view which is only concerned with man’s temporal welfare. St. James refers to those men who attempt to unite the Church with the world by separating Her from Christ, Her Spouse, in the following terms:
“Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world becometh an enemy of God.” (James 4:4)
The official letter composed in 2015 by Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, one of the churchmen chiefly responsible for communities of religious, is very telling. He wishes the focus to be placed upon social works like “taking in the refugees and the poor,” and criticises religious who remain attached to their habit, way of prayer and other traditions received from their founders, for a “tendency to give importance to certain things that are not so important, giving little importance to other things that really matter.” Since these recent documents have been aimed particularly at contemplative nuns who place a great importance on prayer while performing no active services of charity for the public, it is clearly their particular vocation which this cardinal is criticising.
“Thou hast made us to be a contradiction to our neighbours: and our enemies have scoffed at us.”
(Ps.79:7)
Israel, God’s chosen people to whom this Psalm refers under the figure of a vineyard, is generally understood to be a figure of the Catholic Church. However, there is a prayer to St Teresa based upon this Psalm, well known among Carmelites, in which the Order of Carmel is referred to as this vineyard. After speaking of the former glory of the vineyard planted by God, the Psalmist continues:
“Why hast thou broken down the hedge thereof, so that all they who pass by the way do pluck it? The boar out of the wood hath laid it waste: and a singular wild beast hath devoured it.”
(Verses 13-14)
Surely today we are witnessing the fulfilment of these words, both in Carmel (and likewise all contemplative orders) as well as within the Church on a larger scale.
The only hope for the survival of the “praying heart” of the Church is to recognise that as long as the Vatican is filled with men who are eager for the death of the Church, it is futile to hope that it will be beneficial to seek recognition and approval from it. In former times we could be guaranteed that the approval of Rome meant the approval of God. Now we are forced to choose between the two. It is a matter of life and death.
“Consider that I have set before thee this day life and good, and on the other hand death and evil….I call heaven and earth to witness this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Choose therefore life, that both thou and thy seed may live.” (Deut.30:15,19)
5 This was a new branch of OCD Carmelites, which had received a gift of land and funds, full planning permission to begin a new foundation and had already two white veiled novices; nevertheless, due to lack of professed nuns to bring the number up to five, according to the new Vatican documents, they were told to end the project and return to the motherhouse.
In parables prophets have uttered, The Church as a vineyard is seen; Planted by God, and beloved, Beautiful, fruitful and green.
But in spite of the favour God showed it, Wild were the grapes it produced; Like His people who proved so ungrateful, And now to a remnant reduced.
For the hedge of Her solid doctrine (As the Lord in His justice allowed) Is downtrodden, enabling the entrance Of men who are godless and proud.
The beast is destroying the vineyard, No longer without but within; And few are the people who realise The disguise he is currently in.
For many are under illusion And all his bad fruits ignore; While his reign has achieved such confusion That few have the Faith anymore.
“Is he really the Pope?” Some inquire, Although he is wearing the white; “A wolf in disguise” is the answer His actions have proved to be right.
Now Carmel and other such orders Devoted to penance and prayer, Attacked by the force of his teaching Behold Satan’s hour is here.
So we pray in the words of the Psalmist: “Look down from Heaven, O Lord; Perfect and visit Thy vineyard; Let the work of Thy hands be restored.” (cf. Isaias Ch.5, Psalm 79)
Archbishop Gerhard Müller in his capacity as Grand Priore of the Constantinian Order of Saint George, celebrated Solemn High Mass at the Church of St. Agnes, on the Piazza Navona, here at Rome, on her feast day, this Tuesday. Announcements were on social media everywhere.
During the Mass the Archbishop gave a brief but evocative homily, a section of which FromRome.Info presents here in its own English translation, which we think needs to be read carefully:
With the blood of her young life, Saint Agnes testified to Christ, the Son of God and sole Savior of the world. And in this way she encourages us also, here at Rome and in Europe, to profess our Catholic Faith publicly and without fear of men. The Faith of the Apostles Peter and Paul is the root of the culture, which from Rome and Italy, has stretched forth to all of Europe, conferring upon her her Christian identity. Only in Christianity is there a future for Italy, neo-paganism, on the other hand, will bring her to certain ruin. Every possible dialogue with the the old man, Scalfari, is wasted if the atheist, in his confusion, draws the conclusion that the Pope has denied the Divinity of Christ. In fact, for what other reason is the Bishop of Rome the Pope of the whole Catholic Church, if not because he confesses night and day, with Saint Peter: “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God” (Matthew 16:16)
Catholics would do well to collaborate with everyone spiritually and morally capable of assuming responsibility for the economic, political, cultural and religious future of Europe. The unique source from which there flows clear water for the rebirth of the Eternal City and of all Italy is the Christian image of man. And the politician who holds a rosary in his hand as a symbolic gesture is more worthy of truth than one who removes the Cross of Christ with a concrete gesture.
(bold face added by FromRome.Info)
Ostensibly the comments are in reference to the bitter denunciation made by Bergoglio against Matteo Salvini earlier this week, when after Salvini pointed out that the rise of anti-semitism in Europe was do to unbridled illegal immigration, Bergoglio addressing the Simon Wisenthal members, said that populism leads to anti-semitism.
However, if you read more closely, the Archbishop is making a parallel between Bergoglio speaking to Scalfari, the renowned Marxist atheist who is always telling the world what Bergoglio really thinks, with the Minister of Education in Italy, who recently resigned after causing a storm of criticism by a proposal to remove the Crucifix from the public schools of Italy, where it has been for decades.
To the intelligent observer, the argument is thus: if you act like a politician, and not like Saint Peter, then you are no more worthy of trust than a Left wing politician who will be soon removed from office by popular resentment.
Perhaps, I am reading to much into it. But as it is a German speaking in Italian, I think not, because my sources indicate that discussions among the Cardinals are maturing in just that direction.
Read the Full Text in Italian, of the Archbishop’s homily, at Chiesa e Post Concilio Blog:
CREDITS: The Featured Image is a screen shot of the home page of the Royal Italian Commission of the Constantinian Order of Saint George, used according to fair use standards.
+ + +
Support FromRome.Info
Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.
HERE IS THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE DEMONSTRATION BY A GROUP OF PROMINANT LAY CATHOLICS IN FRONT OF THE EPISCOPAL PALACE OF GERMAN CARDINAL MARX
Michael Matt blows lid off German church, calls on Catholics to be ‘militant’. John-Henry Westen
Our pro-life reporting is being attacked. So is the truth.
We can’t back down in the fight against abortion!
View this email in your browser Bishop Rene Henry, This past weekend I joined other prominent traditional Catholic leaders to participate in a prayerful protest outside the the German Bishop’s Conference in Munich.
This act of charity was aimed at Cardinal Reinhard Marx and the rest of the German bishops to urge them to stop teaching heresy, repent of their ways, and to confirm lay Catholics in the faith. Michael J. Matt, long-time editor of the Remnant and a friend to LifeSiteNews, was there.
Tune in to hear his clarion call for Catholics to step up and defend the faith!
Many Catholics in the Church, right now, are extremely worried and upset at the ongoing apostasy and silence of nearly the entire Catholic Hierarchy. Many believe that we have entered the Great Apostasy, foretold by Saint John the Apostle in the Book of the Apocalypse.
But there is one Bishop who gives the faithful hope, by his words and example: the Most Rev. René Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi. This is because, since February 2013, he has been an outspoken critique of the Resignation of Pope Benedict, the election of Jorge Bergoglio and the consistent heretical and erratic behavior of that man. You can read his writings and musings at his blog, Abyssum.org.
Narrative controlled Catholic Media have concealed from nearly the entire Church the strong Catholic stance of Bishop Gracida, who has not only written many Cardinals and Bishops urging a canonical investigation into the election irregularities perpetrated before and during the Conclave of 2013, but has publicly supported calls for an Imperfect Synod, publicly condemned Bergoglio for his idolatry in the Vatican Gardens, and holds that Bergoglio should be tried for heresy.
FromRome.Info as a truly Catholic Media Outlet praises Bishop Gracida for acting as all Bishops and Cardinals should act, and urges all Cardinals and Bishops to do the same! We should constantly encourage and reprove Bishops who are not doing their duty in this most urgent crisis in the Church, in which the Catholic party should prove itself by at least doing what Bishop Gracida has done.
But since Bishop Gracida is not so well known, let me first relate a little of his personal history, and then explain how the teaching of the Church on Patients’ Rights, as regards nutrition and hydration, was formulated thanks to Bishop Gracida’s defense of the Deposit of the Faith on the Fifth Commandment of the Decalogue: Thou shalt not kill.
It all began in Louisiana
René Henry Gracida was born on June 9, 1923, nearly a 100 years ago, in New Orleans. His father was an engineer and architect of Mexican descent, and his mother a 5th generation Cajun lass. His great uncle was a vicar general of a diocese in Mexico and rather well know for his strictness in matters of religion.
303 Air Expeditionary Bomber Group Emblem
When the Second World broke out, the future Bishop became a tail gunner in the 303 Hell’s Angels Air Expeditionary Bomber Group, the most active Bomber Group in the US Military during the war. It became active in February 1942, and flew more than 75 combat missions. If you know anything about Areal Warfare during the Second World War, then you know how horrific, harrowing, and down right terrifying it was for men to fly Bomber missions through enemy territory and relatively undefended from German Fighter plans and Flak attacks. Each mission was a possible no return.
After the War , he attended Rice University, the University of Fribourg, in Switzerland, and the University of Houston, where he earned a degree in Architecture.
Under the Rule of Saint Benedict of Nursia . . .
Then the grace of God hit him. — Having read the lives of the Jesuit Martyrs as a youth, and familiarized himself with the life of Saint Benedict of Nursia, he decided to become a monk and dedicate himself to the divine service of God. — So you can imagine how his father, who disliked his own uncle for that reason, reacted when his son revealed he wanted to follow Saint Benedict and become a Monk!
He entered the Benedictine Order in 1951, and went on to study at St. Vincent’s College and St Vincent Seminary, in Latrobe, PA, where he earned a Masters in Divinity. He took solemn vows in 1956 and became a Deacon in 1958.
He was ordained a Priest on May 23, 1959, at the age of 36, just before the Second Vatican Council opened.
Following reprisals for a sincere critique of his Abbots plan for a new Monastery, he separated from the Benedictine Order and was accepted as a priest in the Diocese of Miami, which had need of an Architect. He was incardinated there in 1961, and on account of his faithful service to the Church was nominated by Pope Paul VI, on Dec. 6, 1971, as Auxiliary of the Diocese.
In the footsteps of the Apostles . . .
He was consecrated Bishop, on January 25, 1972. — That means, in just 2 days, he will celebrate the 48th anniversary of his episcopal consecration!
On account of his being consecrated by Archbishop Dearden, he traces his episcopal lineage back to Saint Pius X, and then to Popes Clement XIII, Benedict XIV and Benedict XIII.
He was so highly respected as an administrator of God’s House that Pope Paul VI promoted him to the Bishopric of Pensacola-Talahasse in 1975. Pope John Paul II, in 1983, then promoted him again to the Bishopric of Corpus Christi, Texas, where he served until his retirement for reasons of health at nearly 74 years of age, in 1997.
As Bishop of Corpus Christi he was known for his refusal of communion to public sinners. He also published a pastoral letter rebuking all the other Bishops of Texas for their official public statement on Patient’s Rights, in which they taught that food and water could in some circumstances be denied patients.
In response, Bishop Gracida, in full fidelity to his duty as a Successor of the Apostles, published a public Letter correcting the errors of his brother Bishops, on May 25, 1990.
The doctrine he handed down would be taken up by Pope John Paul II in 2004 and affirmed as the official position of the Catholic Church on the right of patients to food and hydration.
For your edification, I share here, with the permission of His Excellency, the text of his Pastoral Letter of 1990.
A Dissent From the ‘Interim Pastoral Statement on Artificial Nutrition and Hydration’
Authored By: Bishop Gracida
INTERIM PASTORAL STATEMENT ON ARTIFICIAL NUTRITION AND HYDRATION
Bishop Rene H. Gracida
A Dissent From The “Interim Pastoral Statement On Artificial Nutrition And Hydration” Issued By The Texas Conference Of Catholic Health Facilities And Some Of The Bishops Of Texas
Recently the Texas Catholic Conference in Austin released the final text of the document approved by the Texas Catholic Conference of Health Facilities and sixteen of the twenty-one Bishops of Texas. I had declined to sign the document because I consider it to be seriously flawed.
It seems to me that the document gives a higher priority to efforts to relieve the burden caused by a serious illness rather than efforts to protect the sick person’s right to life. The document deals with the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration from a seriously ill patient.
This whole matter is one which is being debated by the legal and medical professions as well as by theologians and ethicists. The Holy See has this whole controversial area of morality under review and will undoubtedly issue a major declaration on the subject sometime in the next year or two.
In the meantime, I would have preferred to see my fellow Bishops of Texas issue a document which would have made a stronger statement in support of the sick person’s right to receive food and drink as the basic necessities of life.
My specific objections to the text of the statement which was recently made public, are:
1. In the title and throughout the text, the phrase “artificial nutrition and hydration” is used. This is inaccurate: the food and water used are not artificial. It is medically appropriate to speak of “artificially assisted nutrition and hydration.” It is the mode of assistance that is artificial.
2. Under “Basic Moral Principles” the Declaration on Euthanasia is used selectively. As the title of that document indicates, one must begin with a rejection of euthanasia—defined by the Declaration as “an action or an order that all suffering may in this way be eliminated.”
Only “after” one has established that an omission of care or treatment is not directly intended to bring about death should one turn to the complex task of assessing benefits and burdens. The question of intention is central here: If the removal of a life-sustaining procedure is intended to avoid an unreasonable burden of the procedure, so that a quicker death is only an unintended side-effect of the decision, it is not a case of euthanasia.
3. Also not treated here is the question whether artificially assisted feeding may be classified as “normal care” rather than “treatment.” The “Declaration” says normal care must be provided even when one has removed “forms of treatment that would only secure a precarious and burdensome prolongation of life” for an imminently dying patient.
Whether tube feeding may constitute “normal care” is not currently resolved by the magisterium; three non-magisterial bodies (Pontifical Council Cor Unum, editorial board of La Civilta Cattolica, and a working group of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences) have issued statements answering the question in the affirmative. If tube feeding has some aspects of “normal care,” this would strengthen the presumption in favor of providing it in most cases.
4. The inclusion of burdens on “others—family, care provider, or community”—is more broadly stated than in existing Church documents. The Declaration on Euthanasia speaks of the “patient himself” validly making a self-sacrificing decision not to burden other: when those “others” are the agents making the decision, other factors (including the Golden Rule) come into play.
“All” long-term care for seriously impaired patients is a “burden” on the community, but it may be a burden that has to be willingly shouldered: “The respect, the dedication, the time and means required for the care of handicapped persons, even of those whose mental faculties are gravely affected, is the price that a society should generously pay in order to remain truly human” (Document of the Holy See for the International Year of Disabled Persons, 1981.)
5. The phrase about “investment in medical technology and personnel disproportionate to the expected results” is taken from a paragraph in the Declaration on Euthanasia that concerns “the most advanced medical techniques,” especially those “at the experimental stage.” This document applies the phrases to life-supporting means generally.
6. I know of no Church document that says treatment is disproportionate when it involves “inequitable resource allocation.” This could be a broad loophole for communities saying that severely impaired persons are not worth the money. The phrase should be clarified or deleted.
7. The restrictive statement that “maintenance of life” is a benefit only when it involves reasonable hop of recovery” could ground discriminatory withholding of life preserving means from people with incurable disabilities.
It vitiates the principle that everyone has the same basic “right to life” regardless of age or condition, which in Catholic social teaching means that every person has the same basic right to the necessities that sustain life. Life is “always a good.” How can it be a good without being a benefit?
8. The equation between “foregoing” and “withdrawing” is an oversimplification. What of cases where initiation of tube feeding entails the transient risks and burdens of minor surgery under general or local anesthesia, but its maintenance does not involve these burdens? Must this change in the burden/benefit calculus be ignored?
9. The claim that the NCCB Pro-Life Committee came to the “same conclusion” is overstated. The Committee’s chief message was rejection of any efforts at “intentionally hastening the deaths of vulnerable patients by starvation or dehydration”; as was said in point #2 above, the text under consideration does not have this focus.
Also, the Pro-Life Committee document clearly supports tube feeding that can “effectively preserve ‘life’ without involving too grave a burden”; the present draft, as noted above, judges effectiveness in terms of preserving “life with reasonable hope of recovery,” which is a different standard.
10. The question of “cause of death” is a major open question in the current debate. This text overstates the importance of that question, because traditional moral teaching puts great weight on “intention.”
It also understates the causal role of an omission of nutrition and hydration in hastening death, in cases where a patient could have survived in a medically stable condition for years with continued feeding. The phrase “proximate physical means” is obscure, and should have been replaced by “proximate physical cause of death.” One can recognize that the omission is the proximate cause leading to death, while reaffirming that the hastening of death is “praeter intentionem” in some cases.
11. The claim that all these decisions are made “by the patients themselves and by no one else” is not supported in the Church documents. The Declaration says “account will have to be taken of the ‘reasonable’ wishes of the wishes of the patient ‘and the patient’s family,’ as also of ‘the advice of the doctors’ who are specially competent in the matter.”
In cases of doubt “it pertains to the conscience either of the sick person, ‘or’ of the doctors, to decide, in the light of moral obligations and of the various aspects of the case.” In the Declaration a major “moral obligation” binding on “all” decision makers is the rejection of euthanasia by action or omission. Theses qualifications are all absent from (even explicitly rejected by) the document.
12. To say the “morally appropriate” withdrawal of tubal feeding is not “abandoning the person” is a truism. It is equally true to say: “The morally inappropriate withdrawal of tube feeding ‘is’ abandonment of the person.”
This leaves us nowhere, because the text gives no guidelines on when the burdens of artificially assisted feeding are grave enough to render this means optional (except for the overboard standard cited above that whatever the patient says is right).
13. The statement that the patient should not be impeded from “taking the final step” has an ominous sound to it; it might give the impression that hastening death can be directly intended. A phrase like “accepting the inevitability of death ” would have been better.
14. The phrase “threat ‘of’ life” on page 5, line 19 is, I hope, a misprint for “threat ‘to’ life.” The presumption seems to be that death from a life-threatening condition is the “normal consequence” that should occur, and one needs a special reason to “impede” this “normal” state of affairs.
The burden of proof should go the other way: We have a “prima facie” obligation to save someone’s life unless there is a special reason (e.g., ineffectiveness, grave burdensomeness) not to do so. One senses here a very passive model for human action in the world in cases of preventable death—one that does not comport well with the stated “presumption” in favor of averting death.
15. The document as a whole should have distinguished more clearly between two classes of patients: Those who are dying soon no matter what we do for them (e.g., terminal cancer patient), and those who are medically stable and are “not” dying if provided with continued nutrients and fluids.
A much more permissive standard is possible for the former class of patients, for whom continued feeding may become strictly useless in prolonging life. A strong presumption could be established in favor of life-sustaining feeding for the latter class, rebuttable in cases of excessive burden.
A strong presumption here is especially important because, in some celebrated cases, tube feeding has apparently been withdrawn from the latter class of patients precisely because they are “not” dying and someone wants death to occur (see ACLU brief in the Hector Rodas case, cautionary statements by ethicist Daniel Callahan, and concurring opinion by Judge Lynn Compton in the Elizabeth Bouvia case).
This statement was published in the May 25, 1990 edition of the Corpus Christi “Diocesan Press.”
Here follows the teaching of Pope John Paul II, on the same issue:
ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON “LIFE-SUSTAINING TREATMENTS AND VEGETATIVE STATE: SCIENTIFIC ADVANCES AND ETHICAL DILEMMAS”
Saturday, 20 March 2004
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
1. I cordially greet all of you who took part in the International Congress: “Life-Sustaining Treatments and Vegetative State: Scientific Advances and Ethical Dilemmas”.I wish to extend a special greeting to Bishop Elio Sgreccia, Vice-President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, and to Prof. Gian Luigi Gigli, President of the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations and selfless champion of the fundamental value of life, who has kindly expressed your shared feelings.
This important Congress, organized jointly by the Pontifical Academy for Life and the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, is dealing with a very significant issue: the clinical condition called the “vegetative state”. The complex scientific, ethical, social and pastoral implications of such a condition require in-depth reflections and a fruitful interdisciplinary dialogue, as evidenced by the intense and carefully structured programme of your work sessions.
2. With deep esteem and sincere hope, the Church encourages the efforts of men and women of science who, sometimes at great sacrifice, daily dedicate their task of study and research to the improvement of the diagnostic, therapeutic, prognostic and rehabilitative possibilities confronting those patients who rely completely on those who care for and assist them. The person in a vegetative state, in fact, shows no evident sign of self-awareness or of awareness of the environment, and seems unable to interact with others or to react to specific stimuli.
Scientists and researchers realize that one must, first of all, arrive at a correct diagnosis, which usually requires prolonged and careful observation in specialized centres, given also the high number of diagnostic errors reported in the literature. Moreover, not a few of these persons, with appropriate treatment and with specific rehabilitation programmes, have been able to emerge from a vegetative state. On the contrary, many others unfortunately remain prisoners of their condition even for long stretches of time and without needing technological support.
In particular, the term permanent vegetative state has been coined to indicate the condition of those patients whose “vegetative state” continues for over a year. Actually, there is no different diagnosis that corresponds to such a definition, but only a conventional prognostic judgment, relative to the fact that the recovery of patients, statistically speaking, is ever more difficult as the condition of vegetative state is prolonged in time.
However, we must neither forget nor underestimate that there are well-documented cases of at least partial recovery even after many years; we can thus state that medical science, up until now, is still unable to predict with certainty who among patients in this condition will recover and who will not.
3. Faced with patients in similar clinical conditions, there are some who cast doubt on the persistence of the “human quality” itself, almost as if the adjective “vegetative” (whose use is now solidly established), which symbolically describes a clinical state, could or should be instead applied to the sick as such, actually demeaning their value and personal dignity. In this sense, it must be noted that this term, even when confined to the clinical context, is certainly not the most felicitous when applied to human beings.
In opposition to such trends of thought, I feel the duty to reaffirm strongly that the intrinsic value and personal dignity of every human being do not change, no matter what the concrete circumstances of his or her life. A man, even if seriously ill or disabled in the exercise of his highest functions, is and always will be a man, and he will never become a “vegetable” or an “animal”.
Even our brothers and sisters who find themselves in the clinical condition of a “vegetative state” retain their human dignity in all its fullness. The loving gaze of God the Father continues to fall upon them, acknowledging them as his sons and daughters, especially in need of help.
4. Medical doctors and health-care personnel, society and the Church have moral duties toward these persons from which they cannot exempt themselves without lessening the demands both of professional ethics and human and Christian solidarity.
The sick person in a vegetative state, awaiting recovery or a natural end, still has the right to basic health care (nutrition, hydration, cleanliness, warmth, etc.), and to the prevention of complications related to his confinement to bed. He also has the right to appropriate rehabilitative care and to be monitored for clinical signs of eventual recovery.
I should like particularly to underline how the administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act. Its use, furthermore, should be considered, in principle, ordinary and proportionate, and as such morally obligatory, insofar as and until it is seen to have attained its proper finality, which in the present case consists in providing nourishment to the patient and alleviation of his suffering.
The obligation to provide the “normal care due to the sick in such cases” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Iura et Bona, p. IV) includes, in fact, the use of nutrition and hydration (cf. Pontifical Council “Cor Unum”, Dans le Cadre, 2, 4, 4; Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, Charter of Health Care Workers, n. 120). The evaluation of probabilities, founded on waning hopes for recovery when the vegetative state is prolonged beyond a year, cannot ethically justify the cessation or interruption of minimal care for the patient, including nutrition and hydration. Death by starvation or dehydration is, in fact, the only possible outcome as a result of their withdrawal. In this sense it ends up becoming, if done knowingly and willingly, true and proper euthanasia by omission.
In this regard, I recall what I wrote in the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae, making it clear that “by euthanasia in the true and proper sense must be understood an action or omission which by its very nature and intention brings about death, with the purpose of eliminating all pain”; such an act is always “a serious violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person” (n. 65).
Besides, the moral principle is well known, according to which even the simple doubt of being in the presence of a living person already imposes the obligation of full respect and of abstaining from any act that aims at anticipating the person’s death.
5. Considerations about the “quality of life”, often actually dictated by psychological, social and economic pressures, cannot take precedence over general principles.
First of all, no evaluation of costs can outweigh the value of the fundamental good which we are trying to protect, that of human life. Moreover, to admit that decisions regarding man’s life can be based on the external acknowledgment of its quality, is the same as acknowledging that increasing and decreasing levels of quality of life, and therefore of human dignity, can be attributed from an external perspective to any subject, thus introducing into social relations a discriminatory and eugenic principle.
Moreover, it is not possible to rule out a priori that the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration, as reported by authoritative studies, is the source of considerable suffering for the sick person, even if we can see only the reactions at the level of the autonomic nervous system or of gestures. Modern clinical neurophysiology and neuro-imaging techniques, in fact, seem to point to the lasting quality in these patients of elementary forms of communication and analysis of stimuli.
6. However, it is not enough to reaffirm the general principle according to which the value of a man’s life cannot be made subordinate to any judgment of its quality expressed by other men; it is necessary to promote the taking of positive actions as a stand against pressures to withdraw hydration and nutrition as a way to put an end to the lives of these patients.
It is necessary, above all, to support those families who have had one of their loved ones struck down by this terrible clinical condition. They cannot be left alone with their heavy human, psychological and financial burden. Although the care for these patients is not, in general, particularly costly, society must allot sufficient resources for the care of this sort of frailty, by way of bringing about appropriate, concrete initiatives such as, for example, the creation of a network of awakening centres with specialized treatment and rehabilitation programmes; financial support and home assistance for families when patients are moved back home at the end of intensive rehabilitation programmes; the establishment of facilities which can accommodate those cases in which there is no family able to deal with the problem or to provide “breaks” for those families who are at risk of psychological and moral burn-out.
Proper care for these patients and their families should, moreover, include the presence and the witness of a medical doctor and an entire team, who are asked to help the family understand that they are there as allies who are in this struggle with them. The participation of volunteers represents a basic support to enable the family to break out of its isolation and to help it to realize that it is a precious and not a forsaken part of the social fabric.
In these situations, then, spiritual counselling and pastoral aid are particularly important as help for recovering the deepest meaning of an apparently desperate condition.
7. Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen, in conclusion I exhort you, as men and women of science responsible for the dignity of the medical profession, to guard jealously the principle according to which the true task of medicine is “to cure if possible, always to care”.
As a pledge and support of this, your authentic humanitarian mission to give comfort and support to your suffering brothers and sisters, I remind you of the words of Jesus: “Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me” (Mt 25: 40).
In this light, I invoke upon you the assistance of him, whom a meaningful saying of the Church Fathers describes as Christus medicus, and in entrusting your work to the protection of Mary, Consoler of the sick and Comforter of the dying, I lovingly bestow on all of you a special Apostolic Blessing.
Thus, Pope John Paul II.
I think that what Bishop Gracida did for the weak and suffering and elderly has the blessing of God. For in the Old Testament, the care of the elderly has a blessing: Honor thy father and thy mother, and thou shalt have a long life on the land. Bishop Gracida is nearly 97 years of age, and is still a staunch defender of the Holy Catholic Faith. We owe him our support.
_________
CREDITS: The Featured Image is of Bishop Gracida and Pope John Paul II during a meeting in Poland. The text of John Paul II’s Address is from the Vatican Website. The Text of the Bishops Pastoral Letter can today be found on the website of EWTN. The Image of the Bomber Group Logo is in the public domain.
+ + +
Support FromRome.Info
Help us take on the established Catholic Media who are controlled opposition. They are promoting schism from Pope Benedict, and remain silent at the heresies and schisms of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. We cannot let the St. Gallen Mafia win the information war, which they are presently doing through controlled media. — TO FIGHT THIS WAR we need your generous financial support. — Funds go to Ordo Militaris Inc., and are capital gifts for this Apostolate.
$10.00
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on THE CONTROVERSY OVER THE WITHDRAWAL OF NUTRITION AND HYDRATION FROM COMATOSE PATIENTS REVISITED
I’m sitting in a small coffee shop near Nokomis trying to think of what to write about. I scroll through my newsfeed on my phone looking at the latest headlines of Democratic candidates calling for policies to “fix” the so-called injustices of capitalism. I put my phone down and continue to look around.
I see people talking freely, working on their MacBooks, ordering food they get in an instant, seeing cars go by outside, and it dawned on me. We live in the most privileged time in the most prosperous nation and we’ve become completely blind to it. Vehicles, food, technology, freedom to associate with whom we choose.
We Take Our High Standard of Living for Granted
These things are so ingrained in our American way of life we don’t give them a second thought. We are so well off here in the United States that our poverty line begins 31 times above the global average. Thirty. One. Times. Virtually no one in the United States is considered poor by global standards. Yet, in a time where we can order a product off Amazon with one click and have it at our doorstep the next day, we are unappreciative, unsatisfied, and ungrateful.
My generation is being indoctrinated by a mainstream narrative to actually believe we have never seen prosperity.
Our unappreciation is evident as the popularity of socialist policies among my generation continues to grow. Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently said to Newsweek talking about the millennial generation, “An entire generation, which is now becoming one of the largest electorates in America, came of age and never saw American prosperity.”
Never saw American prosperity. Let that sink in. When I first read that statement, I thought to myself, that was quite literally the most entitled and factually illiterate thing I’ve ever heard in my 26 years on this earth. Now, I’m not attributing Miss Ocasio-Cortez’s words to outright dishonesty. I do think she whole-heartedly believes the words she said to be true. Many young people agree with her, which is entirely misguided. My generation is being indoctrinated by a mainstream narrative to actually believe we have never seen prosperity. I know this first hand, I went to college, let’s just say I didn’t have the popular opinion, but I digress.
Capitalism Leads to Prosperity
Let me lay down some universal truths really quick. The United States of America has lifted more people out of abject poverty, spread more freedom and democracy, and has created more innovation in technology and medicine than any other nation in human history. Not only that but our citizenry continually breaks world records with charitable donations, the rags to riches story is not only possible in America but not uncommon, we have the strongest purchasing power on earth, and we encompass 25 percent of the world’s GDP. The list goes on.
However, these universal truths don’t matter. We are told that income inequality is an existential crisis (even though this is not an indicator of prosperity; some of the poorest countries in the world have low income inequality), we are told that we are oppressed by capitalism (even though it’s brought about more freedom and wealth to the most people than any other system in world history), we are told that the only way we will acquire the benefits of true prosperity is through socialism and centralization of federal power (even though history has proven time and again this only brings tyranny and suffering).
Why then, with all of the overwhelming evidence around us, evidence that I can even see sitting at a coffee shop, do we not view this as prosperity? We have people who are dying to get into our country. People around the world destitute and truly impoverished. Yet, we have a young generation convinced they’ve never seen prosperity, and as a result, elect politicians dead set on taking steps towards abolishing capitalism.
Destroying the free market will undo what millions of people have died to achieve.
Why? The answer is this, my generation has only seen prosperity. We have no contrast. We didn’t live in the Great Depression, or live through two world wars, or see the rise and fall of socialism and communism. We don’t know what it’s like not to live without the internet, without cars, without smartphones. We don’t have a lack of prosperity problem. We have an entitlement problem, an ungratefulness problem, and it’s spreading like a plague.
With the current political climate giving rise to the misguided idea of a socialist utopia, will we see the light? Or will we have to lose it all to realize that what we have now is true prosperity? Destroying the free market will undo what millions of people have died to achieve.
My generation is becoming the largest voting bloc in the country. We have an opportunity to continue to propel us forward with the gifts capitalism and democracy has given us. The other option is that we can fall into the trap of entitlement and relapse into restrictive socialist destitution. The choice doesn’t seem too hard, does it?
Rome, January 22, 2020 A.D.: In the last month, FromRome.Info has seen a dramatic spread of its readers to nearly every nation on Earth. Catholics from every land are at last coming to know that Pope Benedict XVI is still the pope and never resigned the office of the Papacy in accord with the norm of law.
Evidence for this is visible in the statistics gathered on our website:
This marks the most significant demographic shift in the PPBXVI Movement since FromRome.Info joined the cause in November 2018.
While the predominate number of readers remains in the U.S.A., on account of the fact that FromRome.Info is nearly entirely an English language publication, and because Catholics in the United States generally enjoy better connectivity to the internet and a greater cultural and political experience of individual liberty, it is the spread of interest in information regarding Pope Benedict and his ineffective resignation to other nations which is the most remarkable. The nations in which English is rarely or never spoken are no less registering visitors as those of the former British Empire.
This is another sign, that the Holy Spirit, the Lord of Truth, is stirring up the entire Church to return in allegiance to His Vicar on Earth Pope Benedict XVI! — Praise be to Him, now and forever more!
For more information, on the PPBXVI Movement, see ppbxvi.org, where you can find the Canonical Arguments, Videos, and detailed analysis in at least 8 languages.
Catholic sues US bishops for ‘misleading’ faithful to donate millions to ‘fraudulent’ Vatican charity
The suit alleges that US bishops ‘actively’ misled Catholics into believing their millions of dollars in donations to Peter’s Pence would be used to help the poor. Wed Jan 22, 2020 – 4:28 pm EST
RHODE ISLAND, January 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A Dallas law firm filed a class action lawsuit Wednesday against the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) for “unlawful, deceptive and fraudulent practices” in promoting and collecting funds for the papal charity Peter’s Pence.
The suit alleges the American bishops “actively” misled Catholics into believing their millions of dollars in donations to the collection would be used to help “victims of war, oppression, natural disaster, or disease,” when in fact much of the money was funneled into private investments, such as Hollywood’s sexually explicit Elton John biopic, “luxury condominium developments” and “hefty, multi-million dollar commissions” to fund managers.
Stanley Law Group filed the lawsuit January 22 in the United States District Court in Rhode Island on behalf of David O’Connell, a parishioner at Sacred Heart Church in East Providence, who is seeking a jury trial, it stated in a press release.
“USCCB must come clean and give back the money it took from well-intentioned people who thought they were giving urgently-needed funds to help the destitute around the world,” said lead attorney Mark Stanley.
“It’s regrettable and tragic that such a trusted and well-respected organization has been taking advantage of the generosity of Catholic donors.”
The firm is also asking American residents who contributed to Peter’s Pence between 2013 and 2019 to consider joining the legal action.SUBSCRIBEto LifeSite’s daily headlinesSUBSCRIBEU.S. Canada World Catholic
The lawsuit alleges that the USCCB is “liable for common law fraud, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty” for “misleadingly soliciting millions of dollars in charitable donations that were diverted into private investments,” the press release states.
According to the 23-page complaint, Peter’s Pence is a “special collection taken from Catholics every June” and is described by the USCCB as a fund that “supports the Pope’s philanthropy by giving the Holy Father the means to provide emergency assistance to those in need because of natural disaster, war, oppression, and disease.”
But a bombshell report in the Italian newspaper L’Espresso in October 2019 exposed a very different story.
L’Espresso reported that “secret internal Vatican investigative reports” showed most of Peter’s Pence funds had been “diverted into ‘reckless speculative operations,’ with 77 per cent of the collections” — “roughly $560 million” — channeled to the Swiss investment company Credit Suisse, the complaint detailed.
The newspaper also reported that a high-ranking Vatican official asked Italian financier Raffaele Mincione to invest $200 million of the collection, and that Mincione used the money to buy real estate in London “for a luxury apartment development” through a fund he managed, stated the complaint.
When the investment didn’t yield the expected returns, the Vatican pulled out of the fund and bought the property, and Minicone made $170 million on the deal, according to sources cited in the document.
Pope Francis responded in November, stating that the fact that the Vatican invests the money shouldn’t bother anyone, according to Catholic News Services (CNS), the complaint stated.
“The sum of Peter’s Pence arrives and what do I do? Put it in a drawer? No, that’s bad administration. I try to make an investment,” CNS quoted the pope as saying.
That was followed by a further bombshell report in December when Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera broke the news that $1 million of Peter’s Pence donations had been invested in the Elton John biopic Rocketman, and more than $3.6 million in the movie Men in Black: International, the complaint stated.
Moreover, Corriere della Sera reported that “millions of dollars” had been sunk into the Malta-based investment company Centurion Global Fund run by Italian financier Enrioco Crasso, “who received ‘millions of euros in commissions’ while losing 4.61 percent of the fund (approximately two million euros) by the end of 2018.”
The complaint also cited a Wall Street Journal December 2019 report stating that for “at least the past five years, only about 10 percent of the money collected—more than €50 million was raised in 2018—has gone to the sort of charitable causes featured in advertising for the collection.”
Meanwhile, in the summer of 2018, plaintiff O’Donnell’s priest at Sacred Heart made a plea from the pulpit at Sunday Mass for donations to Peter’s Pence, the complaint recounted.
“Nothing [O’Donnell] saw or heard, on that day or beforehand, told him or made him understand that his donations to Peter’s Pence would be used for anything other than emergency assistance to the neediest people around the world.”
The complaint asserted that if O’Donnell had known where the money was going, he would not have donated.
But the USCCB “actively concealed the true character and nature of the Peter’s Pence collection and made misrepresentations about the specified purposes of the collection” that “rendered their statements misleading.”
The USCCB “has always known the difference between a donation for emergency assistance and a donation to defray Vatican expenses” but “hid this distinction in its promotion, oversight, and administration of the Peter’s Pence collection in the United States,” stated the claim.
As a result, the USCCB “has effectively profited at the expense of David O’Connell and members of the public.”
The legal action defines USCCB as “composed of all active and retired members of the Catholic hierarchy in the United States.”
It is asking the district court to certify the proposed class, and for an order enjoining the USCCB “from continuing the unlawful, deceptive, and fraudulent practices alleged in this complaint.”
The complaint is also seeking “costs, restitution, damages and disgorgement in an amount to be determined at trial,” an order for the USCCB to pay pre- and post-judgement interest interest on any amounts awarded, as well as costs and attorney’s fees.
Frank Walker asks some hard questions, for which Trad Inc. needs to respond. He shows how the Munich protest was done not out of Faith but on the basis of secular concepts, emptied of the supernatural.
This is the same media which systematically ignores Bishop Gracida’s call for investigation and canonical responses to patent corruption and lawless behavior. Why?
This magnificent and timely commentary comes only from Canon212.com. Remember to make a donation on Mr. Walker’s YouTube Page to thank him for speaking the truth.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Frank Walker asks some hard questions !!!
It is not easy for Catholics to understand why Cardinals do and do not do what they do. Especially in these times, when the Cardinals should be warning and reproving and taking steps to clean up the mess at the Vatican, which is leading the apostasy of the world.
For this “why” I cannot give an explanation. But understanding where Cardinals come from and to which faction in the Church they may belong, may shed some light on this “why”, however so superficial.
With this in mind, let us examine the Faction of Cardinals which has as its co-consecrator, Giovanni Battista Re, one of the most important Cardinals in the College of Cardinals, which is seen by the fact that Bergoglio selected him to be Vice-Dean of his college of cardinals on June 10, 2017. A position he has weathered despite the unceremonious demotion of the Cardinal Dean of many years, Cardinal Sodano, in December.
Let me begin by saying that Cardinal Re’s episcopal lineage does not descend from Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro, the god-father of the St Gallen Mafia. It descends rather from Pope John Paul II.
Second, that Cardinal Re is an impressive Bishop in action. He has participated in over 165 Episcopal consecrations in his life time. A truly remarkable number, which makes him one of the greatest all time consecrators of bishops in the Church. This is due to the fact, that when Pope John Paul II consecrated Bishops, Cardinal Re was normally assisting as a co-consecrator, by some special arrangement of the Pope.
Normally, factions in the Church among Bishops are denoted by lineages of principal consecrators, not co-consecrators. A principal consecrator is the Bishop who presides over the consecration of a man who has been nominated to be a bishop. A co-consecrator is one of two or more Bishops who assist in the consecration of the nominated.
However, Cardinal Re was not the principal consecrator of any Bishop who later became a Cardinal. A fact which means, that no one upon whom his favor rested that much, was ever raised to the dignity of a Cardinal. However, he is the co-consecrator of 18 Cardinals, which is extraordinary. Nevertheless, this seems to be because these future Cardinals were all consecrated by Pope John Paul II, with few exceptions.
Let me list the names of those Bishops and Cardinals, in the order of the year they were co-consecrated Bishop by Cardinal Re. You might recognize someone you know:
Patriarch Michel Sabbah (1988) Archbishop Marian Oles † (1988) Archbishop Emery Kabongo Kanundowi (1988) Bishop Luís d’Andrea, O.F.M. Conv. † (1988) Bishop Victor Adibe Chikwe † (1988) Bishop Athanasius Atule Usuh † (1988) Bishop José Raúl Vera López, O.P. (1988) Bishop Srecko Badurina, T.O.R. † (1988) Bishop Luigi Belloli † (1988) Bishop John Gavin Nolan † (1988) José Cardinal Saraiva Martins, C.M.F. (1988) Bishop Giuseppe Matarrese (1989) ### Archbishop Giovanni Tonucci (1990) Archbishop Ignazio Bedini, S.D.B. (1990) Archbishop Mario Milano (1990) Archbishop Giovanni Ceirano † (1990) Archbishop Oscar Rizzato (1990) Antonio Ignacio Cardinal Velasco Garcia, S.D.B. † (1990) Archbishop Paul Runangaza Ruzoka (1990) Bishop Marian Błażej Kruszyłowicz, O.F.M. Conv. (1990) Bishop Pierre François Marie Joseph Duprey, M. Afr. † (1990) Archbishop Domenico Umberto D’Ambrosio (1990) Bishop Edward Dajczak (1990) Bishop Benjamin de Jesus Almoneda (1990) Archbishop Francesco Gioia, O.F.M. Cap. (1990) Archbishop Edward Nowak (1990) Archbishop Giacinto Berloco (1990) Archbishop Erwin Josef Ender (1990) Jean-Louis Pierre Cardinal Tauran † (1991) Vinko Cardinal Puljić (1991) Archbishop Marcello Costalunga † (1991) Archbishop Osvaldo Padilla (1991) Francisco Javier Cardinal Errázuriz Ossa, P. Schönstatt (1991) Bishop Bruno Pius Ngonyani (1991) Bishop Francis Emmanuel Ogbonna Okobo (1991) Bishop Andrea Gemma, F.D.P. † (1991) Bishop Joseph Habib Hitti (1991) Bishop Jacinto Guerrero Torres † (1991) Bishop Bl. Alvaro del Portillo y Diez de Sollano † (1991) Julián Cardinal Herranz Casado (1991) Archbishop Bruno Bertagna † (1991) Archbishop Ernesto Maria Fiore † (1992) Archbishop Rino Passigato (1992) Bishop Juan Matogo Oyana, C.M.F. (1992) Bishop Gastone Simoni (1992) Bishop Iñaki Mallona Txertudi, C.P. (1992) Bishop Philippe Nkiere Keana, C.I.C.M. (1992) Bishop Benjamin David de Jesus, O.M.I. † (1992) Bishop John Joseph Glynn † (1992) Bishop Petar Šolic † (1992) Michael Louis Cardinal Fitzgerald, M. Afr. (1992) Bishop Henri Salina, C.R.A. † (1992) Archbishop Diego Causero (1993) Archbishop Gabriel Charles Palmer-Buckle (1993) Elio Cardinal Sgreccia † (1993) Bishop Henryk Marian Tomasik (1993) Archbishop Henry Joseph Mansell (1993) Bishop Jan Kopiec (1993) Archbishop Alojzij Uran (1993) Bishop Luigi Sposito † (1993) Bishop Norbert Klemens Strotmann Hoppe, M.S.C. (1993) Bishop Elmo Noel Joseph Perera † (1993) Archbishop Csaba Ternyák (1993) Archbishop Domenico De Luca † (1993) ### Archbishop Peter Paul Prabhu † (1994) Archbishop Peter Stephan Zurbriggen (1994) Archbishop Jean-Paul Aimé Gobel (1994) Bishop Julien Mawule Kouto † (1994) Bishop Edward James Slattery (1994) Bishop Uriah Adolphus Ashley Maclean (1994) Bishop Emiliano Antonio Cisneros Martínez, O.A.R. (1994) Bishop Américo do Couto Oliveira † (1994) Bishop Christo Proykov (1994) Archbishop Ramon Cabrera Argüelles (1994) Bishop Ricardo Jorge Valenzuela Rios (1994) Bishop Paolo Gillet (1994) Bishop Antoni Józef Długosz (1994) Archbishop Bruno Musarò (1995) Bishop Petko Jordanov Christov, O.F.M. Conv. (1995) Bishop Antonio Napoletano, C.SS.R. † (1995) Bishop Zacharias Cenita Jimenez † (1995) Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke (1995) Bishop Javier Echevarría Rodríguez † (1995) Bishop Pierfranco Pastore † (1995) Bishop Stanislav Szyrokoradiuk, O.F.M. (1995) Bishop Paweł Cieślik (1995) Bishop Stefan Regmunt (1995) Archbishop Charles Asa Schleck, C.S.C. † (1995) Archbishop Luigi Ventura (1995) ### Carlo Cardinal Caffarra † (1995) Archbishop José Paulino Ríos Reynoso (1996) Archbishop Riccardo Fontana (1996) Archbishop Claudio Maria Celli (1996) Archbishop Jaime Vieira Rocha (1996) Kurt Cardinal Koch (1996) Bishop Ārvaldis Andrejs Brumanis † (1996) Bishop Antons Justs † (1996) Archbishop Francisco Pérez González (1996) Archbishop Richard Anthony Burke, S.P.S. (1996) Bishop Marko Sopi † (1996) Bishop Rafael Ramón Conde Alfonzo (1996) Bishop Riccardo Ruotolo † (1996) Bishop Antal Majnek, O.F.M. (1996) Stanisław Cardinal Ryłko (1996) Archbishop Francisco Gil Hellín (1996) ### Archbishop Luigi Conti (1996) ### Archbishop Luigi Pezzuto (1997) Paolo Cardinal Sardi † (1997) Titular Bishop of Sutri, Italy Varkey Cardinal Vithayathil, C.SS.R. † (1997) Bishop Delio Lucarelli (1997) Bishop Ignace Baguibassa Sambar-Talkena † (1997) Bishop Luciano Pacomio (1997) Archbishop Angelo Massafra, O.F.M. (1997) Bishop Florentin Crihălmeanu (1997) Archbishop Jean-Claude Périsset (1997) Bishop Piotr Libera (1997) Bishop Basílio do Nascimento (1997) Bishop Hil Kabashi, O.F.M. (1997) Leonardo Cardinal Sandri (1997) ### Mario Francesco Cardinal Pompedda † (1998) Archbishop Marco Dino Brogi, O.F.M. (1998) Bishop Peter Kwaku Atuahene (1998) Bishop Filippo Strofaldi † (1998) Archbishop Wiktor Paweł Skworc (1998) Bishop Franco Dalla Valle, S.D.B. † (1998) Archbishop Angelito Rendon Lampon, O.M.I. (1998) Bishop Tomislav Koljatic Maroevic (1998) Bishop Francesco Saverio Salerno † (1998) Archbishop Alessandro D’Errico (1999) Archbishop Salvatore Pennacchio (1999) Archbishop Alain Paul Charles Lebeaupin (1999) Bishop Cesare Mazzolari, M.C.C.I. † (1999) Bishop Pierre Trân Ðinh Tu (1999) Bishop Rafael Cob García (1999) Archbishop Mathew Moolakkatt, O.S.B. (1999) Archbishop Diarmuid Martin (1999) Bishop José Luis Redrado Marchite, O.H. (1999) (Layman) Józef Wesołowski † (2000) Archbishop Giacomo Guido Ottonello (2000) Archbishop George Panikulam (2000) Archbishop Alberto Bottari de Castello (2000) Bishop Ivo Baldi Gaburri (2000) Archbishop Gabriel Mbilingi, C.S.Sp. (2000) Bishop David Laurin Ricken (2000) Bishop Anton Coşa (2000) Bishop András Veres (2000) Péter Cardinal Erdő (2000) Bishop Giuseppe Pasotto, C.S.S. (2000) Bishop Franco Croci (2000) Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia (2000) ### Fernando Cardinal Filoni (2001) Archbishop Henryk Józef Nowacki (2001) Archbishop Timothy Paul Andrew Broglio (2001) Archbishop Domenico Sorrentino (2001) Archbishop Tomash (Tomasz) Bernard Peta (2001) Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo (2001) Marc Armand Cardinal Ouellet, P.S.S. (2001) Archbishop Giampaolo Crepaldi (2001) Bishop Đura Džudžar (2001) Bishop Fabio Fabene (2014) ###
Now look at that list again. I have colored in RED the Cardinals who were suspected as members of the group which engineered the election of Bergoglio in the uncanonical Conclave of 2013. They formed a group called by Austen Ivereigh, “Team Bergoglio”. There are at least 3, Cardinal Koch, Bishop of Basel Switzerland might be the fourth.
I have colored in Green, those who were Cardinal Electors in 2013, but whose allegiance in voting is not known. There are 7 of these, not counting Cardinal Koch.
I have colored in BLUE the men whom Bergoglio presumed to name Cardinals. I say presumed, because as an Anti-pope, he has no authority to name Cardinals (To do that you need to hold the petrine munus, which Pope Benedict clearly and textually never renounced.) There are 2 Cardinals in this category.
Three of the Cardinals on this list are publicly known for having criticized the Bergoglian regime: Cardinal Sandri, who is rumored to have bitterly denounced Bergoglio to his face for attacking the Discipline of the Sacraments; Cardinal Caffara who was renounced for denouncing relativism (God rest his soul); and Cardinal Burke, whose reputation is such it need not be summarized here, after his numerous public statements in favor of the Eternal Faith and in criticism of the policies of Bergoglio, even if he continues to hold Bergoglio as the Pope.
The Cardinals and Bishops whose episcopal lineage descends from Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro, are marked with a ### in Black (there are 3); those who descend from Cardinal de Lai, both of whose co-consecrators descend from Cardinal Rampolla, or from Cardinal Gasparri, the secretary of Cardinal Rampolla, are marked with a ### in Red (There are 5, nearly all Sodano men).
I think it is important to note, that in all the cases in which Cardinal Re is not assisting Pope John Paul II as principal consecrator, he is assisting an ally or direct descendant of Cardinal Rampolla del Tindaro.
The only reasonable inference that can be made from that, is that Cardinal Re was a member of the St. Gallen Mafia, by adoption. And that would explain why he is now Vice-Dean of Bergoglio’s college of cardinals.
The fact that he was trusted by Pope John Paul II in so many ceremonies of episcopal ordination, shows that he succeed so well in gaining the confidence of the Pope that he served as a sort of minder of his activities during his pontificate. This may imply that Cardinal Re was one of the chief St. Gallen Mafia secret agents in the Vatican for many years, hiding in plain sight.
So the next time you ask why any Cardinal on this list, like Cardinal Burke, may not be doing what you want him to do, read this list and contemplate what it might mean. They might be hedging, so that in the next conclave they elect someone from the House of Cardinal Re, which, alas, might not be a good thing after all.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on LINEAGE MAY NOT BE AS IMPORTANT IN THE COLLEGE OF CARDINALS AS IT IS IN ROYALTY BUT DON’T KID YOURSELF, IT IS IMPORTANT TO EVERY CARDINAL AND BISHOP
. John-Henry Westen 
Photo by Kaylah Otto on Unsplash
By Lianne Laurence
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.