lifesitenews--2020-05-06--Cdl. Müller: No bishop has the right to ban public Masses

May 6 , 2020 ( La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana ) – “ The Church is not dependent on the state , it must defend its freedom and independence ” .
“ Suspending Masses is an abdication of the task it has , which includes reading the sufferings of this period in the light of the faith , the mystery of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus ” .
“ Jesus became flesh , we believe in the resurrection of the flesh : therefore bodily presence is indispensable ” .
“ The Eucharist is the only true form of adoration of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the existence of any other liturgical form .
It is scandalous that there are bishops who say the Eucharist is overrated.
” Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller , former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , speaks to the Daily Compass .
“ This virus represented a tragedy for many people .
This is the precise reason the Church has the duty to propose a vision of human suffering and existence , in the perspective of eternal life , in the light of faith .
The suspension of public Masses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is the reduction of the Church to dependency on the state .
It is unacceptable.
” In a phone call with the Daily Compass , Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller , former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , is very clear in his judgement of what is happening in Italy and in many other countries .
Your Eminence , for many faithful the suffering of the disease has meant the additional suffering of the prohibition to attend Mass and the prevention of holding funerals ; worse still , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ecclesiastical hierarchy .
This is very serious , it ’ s the secularist thought which has made its way in to the Church .
It is one thing to take precautionary measures to minimise the risks of contagion , it ’ s another to ban the liturgy .
The Church is not a client of the state , and no bishop has the right to ban the Eucharist in this way .
Moreover , we have witnessed priests being punished by their bishops for celebrating mass for only a few persons , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But our supreme pastor is Jesus Christ , not Giuseppe Conte or any other head of state .
The state has its task , but the church has its own .
It seems many find it difficult to reconcile their duty to the state with the need for public worship to God .
We must also pray publicly because we know that everything depends on God .
God is the universal cause , then there is the secondary cause that goes through our freedom .
We , finite creatures , do not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the causality of God and how much depends on ourselves : this is the point of prayer .
We must pray to God to overcome the challenges of our personal and social life , but without forgetting the transcendental dimension , that vision of eternal life and intimate union with God and with Jesus Christ even in our suffering .
We are called to load our cross on our shoulders every day , but we must also explain their suffering to the faithful according to Gospel criteria .
Banning participation in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taking certain external measures is the task of the state , our task is to defend the freedom and independence of the Church ; and the Church ’ s superiority in the spiritual dimension .
We are not an agency subordinated to the state .
There are many , including priests and bishops , that are realising there is a strong risk of misunderstanding the meaning of the liturgy because of the proliferation of masses on TV and streaming .
These forms can not be considered a replacement of the Mass .
Of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or in a concentration camp or other exceptional circumstances , you can participate spiritually in the Eucharist , but it is not a normal situation .
God created us body and soul .
God accompanied His people throughout history , He freed them from the slavery in Egypt , He did not perform a virtual liberation .
Jesus , Son of God , became flesh , we believe in the resurrection of the flesh .
This is why physical presence is absolutely necessary for us .
For us , not for God .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ we need them .
God instituted the sacraments for us .
Marriage does not work only spiritually , there is a need for the union of body and soul .
We are not Platonic idealists , we can not follow mass from home , except in particular circumstances .
No , we must go to church , meet with others , communicate the Word of God .
The whole vocabulary of the Church also indicates this need : Holy communion ; communion is to convene ; the Church is the people of God @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` How good and beautiful it is that brothers live together '' .
There are theologians and bishops according to whom the Eucharist is overrated , that Sunday Mass is not necessary .
There is also a bishop such as Victor Fernandez , who prides himself on being Pope Francis ’ ghost writer , who claims that the duty to go to Mass on Sunday is a commandment that was introduced by the Church .
It is another example of disastrous theological formation .
The third commandment has its foundation in divine law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the day of the Lord .
For us Christians , it is the day of the Resurrection .
It is also a commandment Jesus gave us : `` Do this in memory of me '' .
And Saint Paul says : `` Every time you eat this bread and drink this cup , you proclaim the death of the Lord '' ( 1 Cor 11:26 ) .
This is the real and sacramental representation of the saving death of Jesus and of His resurrection .
In the mass we participate in the paschal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this clear in the Sacrosanctum Concilium and Lumen Gentium ( Nr .
11 ) .
Yet there are bishops who say that some faithful are too attached to the Eucharist .
It ’ s absurd .
The Eucharist is the only true adoration of God through Jesus Christ .
It is not one of the many forms of the liturgy , instead all the forms of the liturgy have the reason for their existence in the Eucharist .
Everything receives strength and consistency from the Eucharist .
Can you also see the manifestation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the heart of the Church ?
Yes .
Just think of those who before and during the Synod on the Amazon said forcefully that indigenous peoples absolutely needed the Eucharist and for this it was necessary to ordain married men as priests .
Now the same people shamelessly argue the exact opposite , that we do n't need the Eucharist .
They reason like Protestants , ignoring that the central point of controversy since the beginning of the Protestant Reformation , is the Eucharist .
And now there are bishops who call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ central value of the Eucharist .
It is a real scandal : these are the ones who are rigid , the true clericals , not those who take the word of Jesus and the doctrine of the Church seriously .
It is a perverted way of thinking .
And this `` modern '' Catholicism is a self-destructive ideology .
There is a need , especially in Italy , for bishops of the stature of San Carlo Borromeo , and whoever is in the Curia should take Cardinal Roberto Bellarmine as an example .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders often say that the first duty is to safeguard health .
This is a bourgeois , secularised Church , not a Church that lives on the Word of Jesus Christ .
Jesus said `` seek the Kingdom of God first . ''
What is life , all the goods of the world including health worth , if you lose your soul ?
This crisis has shown that many of our pastors think like the world , they conceive themselves more as officials of a social religious system than as pastors of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ God and with everyone .
We must always combine faith and reason .
Obviously we are not fideists , we are not like those Christian sects that say that we do not need medicine , that we entrust ourselves only to God .
Instead , entrusting oneself to God does not contradict the valorisation of all that modern medicine offers .
But modern medicine does not replace prayer : they are two dimensions that should not be separated but not superimposed .
It has been said by some , as a way of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that if we infect others then we are responsible for their eventual death .
Doctors also run this risk , there is a risk in every human activity .
It is certain that we must be careful not to endanger the lives and health of others , but this is not the supreme value .
Unfortunately , this situation has shown us that many priests and bishops of good quality lack the theological basis for reflecting on this situation and offering a judgment consistent with the Gospel and the doctrine of the Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason that many bishops snubbed the request of the Italian faithful for an act of Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary .
Which in the Italian case , then became an act of Dedication , and in the end was conducted in a negligent and fraudulent way .
There is an underestimation of the supernatural aspect .
We are immersed in the naturalist conception that comes from the Enlightenment .
The Church , Grace , the sacraments can not be explained according to the natural dimension .
The heart of our Christian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immanence in our life , He is Christ , true man and true God through the Incarnation .
It ’ s almost as if we are resigned to chasing a world that reasons only in natural terms , and we call this realism .
It is the ideology of pragmatism .
Today , for example , the idea prevails in the Church that there is a need for bishops who are only pastors , that is , pragmatic .
But the bishop is minister of the Word , he must reflect on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were not fools , the fathers of the Church were not only pragmatic , they reflected on the Christian faith and its implications .
A good teacher of faith must be able to explain a situation like the present one starting from faith , in its supernatural sense , not with naturalism .
Once again , the two dimensions must be held together : we can not reduce human existence to mere nature , and at the same time not even think - as Marxists claim - that Christianity is only concerned with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have the unity between the afterlife and the immanence of life .
A good Christian should know how to be an excellent doctor and scientist but this does not contradict trust in God .
There is integration between faith and reason , between trust in God and competence in the natural sciences .

Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world: Feed your flock Sign the petition here.
May 6, 2020 (La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana) – “The Church is not dependent on the state, it must defend its freedom and independence”. “Suspending Masses is an abdication of the task it has, which includes reading the sufferings of this period in the light of the faith, the mystery of the Death and Resurrection of Jesus”. “Jesus became flesh, we believe in the resurrection of the flesh: therefore bodily presence is indispensable”. “The Eucharist is the only true form of adoration of God, it is the reason for the existence of any other liturgical form. It is scandalous that there are bishops who say the Eucharist is overrated.” Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller, former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, speaks to the Daily Compass.
“This virus represented a tragedy for many people. This is the precise reason the Church has the duty to propose a vision of human suffering and existence, in the perspective of eternal life, in the light of faith. The suspension of public Masses is an abdication of this task, it is the reduction of the Church to dependency on the state. It is unacceptable.” In a phone call with the Daily Compass, Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller, former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is very clear in his judgement of what is happening in Italy and in many other countries.
Your Eminence, for many faithful the suffering of the disease has meant the additional suffering of the prohibition to attend Mass and the prevention of holding funerals; worse still, they find it is justified by the ecclesiastical hierarchy.
This is very serious, it’s the secularist thought which has made its way in to the Church. It is one thing to take precautionary measures to minimise the risks of contagion, it’s another to ban the liturgy. The Church is not a client of the state, and no bishop has the right to ban the Eucharist in this way. Moreover, we have witnessed priests being punished by their bishops for celebrating mass for only a few persons, this means they conceive themselves as state officials. But our supreme pastor is Jesus Christ, not Giuseppe Conte or any other head of state. The state has its task, but the church has its own.
It seems many find it difficult to reconcile their duty to the state with the need for public worship to God.
We must also pray publicly because we know that everything depends on God. God is the universal cause, then there is the secondary cause that goes through our freedom. We, finite creatures, do not know how much of what happens depends on the causality of God and how much depends on ourselves: this is the point of prayer. We must pray to God to overcome the challenges of our personal and social life, but without forgetting the transcendental dimension, that vision of eternal life and intimate union with God and with Jesus Christ even in our suffering. We are called to load our cross on our shoulders every day, but we must also explain their suffering to the faithful according to Gospel criteria. Banning participation in the liturgy goes in the opposite direction. Taking certain external measures is the task of the state, our task is to defend the freedom and independence of the Church; and the Church’s superiority in the spiritual dimension. We are not an agency subordinated to the state.
There are many, including priests and bishops, that are realising there is a strong risk of misunderstanding the meaning of the liturgy because of the proliferation of masses on TV and streaming.
These forms cannot be considered a replacement of the Mass. Of course, if you are in prison or in a concentration camp or other exceptional circumstances, you can participate spiritually in the Eucharist, but it is not a normal situation. God created us body and soul. God accompanied His people throughout history, He freed them from the slavery in Egypt, He did not perform a virtual liberation. Jesus, Son of God, became flesh, we believe in the resurrection of the flesh. This is why physical presence is absolutely necessary for us. For us, not for God. God does not need the sacraments, we need them. God instituted the sacraments for us. Marriage does not work only spiritually, there is a need for the union of body and soul. We are not Platonic idealists, we cannot follow mass from home, except in particular circumstances. No, we must go to church, meet with others, communicate the Word of God. The whole vocabulary of the Church also indicates this need: Holy communion; communion is to convene; the Church is the people of God summoned together. The psalm says: “How good and beautiful it is that brothers live together”.
There are theologians and bishops according to whom the Eucharist is overrated, that Sunday Mass is not necessary.
There is also a bishop such as Victor Fernandez, who prides himself on being Pope Francis’ ghost writer, who claims that the duty to go to Mass on Sunday is a commandment that was introduced by the Church. It is another example of disastrous theological formation. The third commandment has its foundation in divine law: it obliges the Jews to sanctify the day of the Lord. For us Christians, it is the day of the Resurrection. It is also a commandment Jesus gave us: “Do this in memory of me”. And Saint Paul says: “Every time you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord” (1 Cor 11:26). This is the real and sacramental representation of the saving death of Jesus and of His resurrection. In the mass we participate in the paschal mystery. The Second Vatican Council made this clear in the Sacrosanctum Concilium and Lumen Gentium (Nr. 11). Yet there are bishops who say that some faithful are too attached to the Eucharist. It’s absurd. The Eucharist is the only true adoration of God through Jesus Christ. It is not one of the many forms of the liturgy, instead all the forms of the liturgy have the reason for their existence in the Eucharist. Everything receives strength and consistency from the Eucharist.
Can you also see the manifestation of a clear attack on the Eucharist, the heart of the Church?
Yes. Just think of those who before and during the Synod on the Amazon said forcefully that indigenous peoples absolutely needed the Eucharist and for this it was necessary to ordain married men as priests. Now the same people shamelessly argue the exact opposite, that we don't need the Eucharist. They reason like Protestants, ignoring that the central point of controversy since the beginning of the Protestant Reformation, is the Eucharist. And now there are bishops who call themselves Catholics who do not understand the central value of the Eucharist. It is a real scandal: these are the ones who are rigid, the true clericals, not those who take the word of Jesus and the doctrine of the Church seriously. It is a perverted way of thinking. And this “modern” Catholicism is a self-destructive ideology. There is a need, especially in Italy, for bishops of the stature of San Carlo Borromeo, and whoever is in the Curia should take Cardinal Roberto Bellarmine as an example.
In recent months we have heard episcopate leaders often say that the first duty is to safeguard health.
This is a bourgeois, secularised Church, not a Church that lives on the Word of Jesus Christ. Jesus said “seek the Kingdom of God first.” What is life, all the goods of the world including health worth, if you lose your soul? This crisis has shown that many of our pastors think like the world, they conceive themselves more as officials of a social religious system than as pastors of a Church that is an intimate communion with God and with everyone. We must always combine faith and reason. Obviously we are not fideists, we are not like those Christian sects that say that we do not need medicine, that we entrust ourselves only to God. Instead, entrusting oneself to God does not contradict the valorisation of all that modern medicine offers. But modern medicine does not replace prayer: they are two dimensions that should not be separated but not superimposed.
It has been said by some, as a way of justifying the suspension of public Masses, that if we infect others then we are responsible for their eventual death.
Doctors also run this risk, there is a risk in every human activity. It is certain that we must be careful not to endanger the lives and health of others, but this is not the supreme value. Unfortunately, this situation has shown us that many priests and bishops of good quality lack the theological basis for reflecting on this situation and offering a judgment consistent with the Gospel and the doctrine of the Church.
Perhaps it is also for this reason that many bishops snubbed the request of the Italian faithful for an act of Consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Which in the Italian case, then became an act of Dedication, and in the end was conducted in a negligent and fraudulent way.
There is an underestimation of the supernatural aspect. We are immersed in the naturalist conception that comes from the Enlightenment. The Church, Grace, the sacraments cannot be explained according to the natural dimension. The heart of our Christian religion is the transcendent God who becomes immanence in our life, He is Christ, true man and true God through the Incarnation.
It’s almost as if we are resigned to chasing a world that reasons only in natural terms, and we call this realism.
It is the ideology of pragmatism. Today, for example, the idea prevails in the Church that there is a need for bishops who are only pastors, that is, pragmatic. But the bishop is minister of the Word, he must reflect on the Word. Saint Paul and Saint Peter were not fools, the fathers of the Church were not only pragmatic, they reflected on the Christian faith and its implications. A good teacher of faith must be able to explain a situation like the present one starting from faith, in its supernatural sense, not with naturalism. Once again, the two dimensions must be held together: we cannot reduce human existence to mere nature, and at the same time not even think – as Marxists claim – that Christianity is only concerned with the afterlife. In Jesus Christ we have the unity between the afterlife and the immanence of life. A good Christian should know how to be an excellent doctor and scientist but this does not contradict trust in God. There is integration between faith and reason, between trust in God and competence in the natural sciences.
Reprinted with permission from La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--Canadian archbishop donates to ethical coronavirus vaccine research

PETITION : Pres .
Trump do n't give federal funds to COVID-19 vaccines made from aborted baby cells Sign the petition here .
VANCOUVER , British Columbia , May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Vancouver Archbishop Michael Miller is donating to a University of British Columbia research team working to develop a vaccine for COVID-19 , but only after first ascertaining it will not be derived from aborted fetal cells .
“ May the search for COVID-19 solutions also be a moment of solidarity , of collaboration , and of growing together as a visible sign to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ needed right now , ” Miller said last week , as reported in the B.C .
Catholic .
The archbishop donated to the research of Vancouver immunologist Dr. Wilfred Jefferies and his team at the University of British Columbia ( UBC ) , which has been working for several months to develop a vaccine for the coronavirus , it reported .
Ryan Thomas , a special adviser to the archdiocese , told Catholic News Agency that the archbishop made inquiries to be sure that UBC ’ s vaccine research team does not use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donation because he wanted to demonstrate that the Catholic Church supports science and medicine that contribute to the benefit of humanity , and because he believes it ’ s important that the Church be seen promoting research into a vaccine that Catholics can support in good conscience , Thomas told CNA .
“ The Church — as Pope Francis has said from the beginning of his pontificate — is called to go out , we 're called to engage , not called to retreat , ” said Thomas , who did not reveal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said it was in the thousands of dollars .
“ From a scientific standpoint , that means identifying the research that is worthy of our investment , that meets the high standards that we have to protect life , ” added Thomas .
A group of Evangelical Christians and Catholics in Vancouver who wanted to support an ethical vaccine presented Miller with the idea of donating to UBC ’ s research , CNA reported .
Jefferies , a professor in UBC ’ s Michael Smith Laboratories and a senior research scientist in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is using a component called adjuvants that was discovered by UBC researchers in creating and testing his vaccine candidates , according to BC Catholic .
Adjuvants “ boost the immune response and enhance longer-lasting immunity and have been tested in other experimental vaccines , for viruses such as influenza , ” Jefferies said .
“ We know that we can achieve optimal immune responses at low doses using this class of engineered vaccines .
We are applying those technologies to COVID-19 , ” he added .
“ Overall , this vaccine approach has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in vaccine development for large global populations by reducing the dosage of vaccine required for complete protection , thereby reducing costs and manufacturing time , and ultimately , saving more lives.
” He also hopes the vaccine will protect against different strains of the virus , which originated in Wuhan , China , that may mutate over time .
“ I think the response by the archdiocese is an affirmative and practical way to address the critical need in our society to develop a vaccine , ” Jefferies told CNA .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have received from the archdiocese and from other groups and individuals.
” According to CNA , there are at least 1,000 clinical trials currently taking place around the world to test potential Wuhan virus vaccines .
Last month , U.S. Catholic bishops and pro-life leaders sent an open letter to federal health authorities and the Trump administration asking them to ensure that Americans will have access to coronavirus vaccines that are “ free from any connection to abortion.
” “ No American should be forced to choose between being vaccinated against this potentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conscience , ” said the letter , which was addressed to Stephen Hahn , the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) .
The letter was signed by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City , Kansas , head of pro-life activities of the American bishops ’ conference , as well as Bishop John Doerfler of Marquette , Michigan ; Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley , and pro-life leaders from around the United States .
President Donald Trump , Vice President Mike Pence , and Secretary of Health and Human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also copied on the letter .
The signatories pointed out that federal funding was recently granted to a vaccine development project that is making use of cell lines from an aborted baby .
Last month , Janssen Pharmaceuticals , Inc. ( Johnson & Johnson ) received more than $ 456 million in federal funding for their vaccine project using the PER C6 cell line , which comes from retinal tissue from an aborted baby .
The authors also noted that “ other vaccines such as those being developed by Sanofi Pasteur , Inovio @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Research Institute utilize cell lines not connected to unethical procedures and methods.
” CNA reported that the Pontifical Academy for Life “ has noted that Catholics have an obligation to use ethically-sourced vaccines when available , and have an obligation to speak up and request the development of new cell lines that are not derived from aborted fetuses.
” The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ’ s 2008 document Dignitatis personae condemned aborted fetal tissue research but stated , inexplicably , that for “ grave reasons ” such as “ danger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents could be permitted make use of a vaccine that had been “ developed using cell lines of illicit origin ” while “ keeping in mind that everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.
” Meanwhile , discussions of the role of a vaccine in containing the threat of the Wuhan virus can take on sinister overtones as the pandemic continues , with Massachusetts Institute of Technology ( MIT ) researchers suggesting embedding vaccine records “ directly into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau mulling whether or not to make a COVID-19 vaccine mandatory , and Bill Gates -- whose foundation invests in vaccines -- suggesting life will not get back to normal “ for some time ” -- or at least until the population is “ widely vaccinated.
” Catholic bishops , pro-life leaders : COVID-19 vaccines should be ‘ free from any connection to abortion ’ COVID-19 scare leads to more digital surveillance , talk of mandatory vaccine ‘ tattoos ’ for kids Trudeau mulls making coronavirus vaccine mandatory @ @

Vancouver Archbishop Michael Miller believes it's important to show support for scientific efforts that do not violate Catholic teaching.
PETITION: Pres. Trump don't give federal funds to COVID-19 vaccines made from aborted baby cells Sign the petition here.
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Vancouver Archbishop Michael Miller is donating to a University of British Columbia research team working to develop a vaccine for COVID-19, but only after first ascertaining it will not be derived from aborted fetal cells.
“May the search for COVID-19 solutions also be a moment of solidarity, of collaboration, and of growing together as a visible sign to the world of the healing and reconciliation so needed right now,” Miller said last week, as reported in the B.C. Catholic.
The archbishop donated to the research of Vancouver immunologist Dr. Wilfred Jefferies and his team at the University of British Columbia (UBC), which has been working for several months to develop a vaccine for the coronavirus, it reported.
Ryan Thomas, a special adviser to the archdiocese, told Catholic News Agency that the archbishop made inquiries to be sure that UBC’s vaccine research team does not use aborted fetal cells.
Miller made the donation because he wanted to demonstrate that the Catholic Church supports science and medicine that contribute to the benefit of humanity, and because he believes it’s important that the Church be seen promoting research into a vaccine that Catholics can support in good conscience, Thomas told CNA.
“The Church — as Pope Francis has said from the beginning of his pontificate — is called to go out, we're called to engage, not called to retreat,” said Thomas, who did not reveal the specific amount of the contribution but said it was in the thousands of dollars.
“From a scientific standpoint, that means identifying the research that is worthy of our investment, that meets the high standards that we have to protect life,” added Thomas.
A group of Evangelical Christians and Catholics in Vancouver who wanted to support an ethical vaccine presented Miller with the idea of donating to UBC’s research, CNA reported.
Jefferies, a professor in UBC’s Michael Smith Laboratories and a senior research scientist in the university’s Vancouver Prostate Centre, is using a component called adjuvants that was discovered by UBC researchers in creating and testing his vaccine candidates, according to BC Catholic.
Adjuvants “boost the immune response and enhance longer-lasting immunity and have been tested in other experimental vaccines, for viruses such as influenza,” Jefferies said.
“We know that we can achieve optimal immune responses at low doses using this class of engineered vaccines. We are applying those technologies to COVID-19,” he added.
“Overall, this vaccine approach has the potential to overcome a major obstacle in vaccine development for large global populations by reducing the dosage of vaccine required for complete protection, thereby reducing costs and manufacturing time, and ultimately, saving more lives.”
He also hopes the vaccine will protect against different strains of the virus, which originated in Wuhan, China, that may mutate over time.
“I think the response by the archdiocese is an affirmative and practical way to address the critical need in our society to develop a vaccine,” Jefferies told CNA. “I am sincerely humbled by the support we have received from the archdiocese and from other groups and individuals.”
According to CNA, there are at least 1,000 clinical trials currently taking place around the world to test potential Wuhan virus vaccines.
Last month, U.S. Catholic bishops and pro-life leaders sent an open letter to federal health authorities and the Trump administration asking them to ensure that Americans will have access to coronavirus vaccines that are “free from any connection to abortion.”
“No American should be forced to choose between being vaccinated against this potentially deadly virus and violating his or her conscience,” said the letter, which was addressed to Stephen Hahn, the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The letter was signed by Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, head of pro-life activities of the American bishops’ conference, as well as Bishop John Doerfler of Marquette, Michigan; Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley, and pro-life leaders from around the United States.
President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, and Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Alex Azar were also copied on the letter.
The signatories pointed out that federal funding was recently granted to a vaccine development project that is making use of cell lines from an aborted baby. Last month, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Johnson & Johnson) received more than $456 million in federal funding for their vaccine project using the PER C6 cell line, which comes from retinal tissue from an aborted baby.
The authors also noted that “other vaccines such as those being developed by Sanofi Pasteur, Inovio, and the John Paul II Medical Research Institute utilize cell lines not connected to unethical procedures and methods.”
CNA reported that the Pontifical Academy for Life “has noted that Catholics have an obligation to use ethically-sourced vaccines when available, and have an obligation to speak up and request the development of new cell lines that are not derived from aborted fetuses.”
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s 2008 document Dignitatis personae condemned aborted fetal tissue research but stated, inexplicably, that for “grave reasons” such as “danger to the health of children,” parents could be permitted make use of a vaccine that had been “developed using cell lines of illicit origin” while “keeping in mind that everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.”
Meanwhile, discussions of the role of a vaccine in containing the threat of the Wuhan virus can take on sinister overtones as the pandemic continues, with Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) researchers suggesting embedding vaccine records “directly into the skin” of children, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau mulling whether or not to make a COVID-19 vaccine mandatory, and Bill Gates — whose foundation invests in vaccines — suggesting life will not get back to normal “for some time” — or at least until the population is “widely vaccinated.”
RELATED:
Catholic bishops, pro-life leaders: COVID-19 vaccines should be ‘free from any connection to abortion’
COVID-19 scare leads to more digital surveillance, talk of mandatory vaccine ‘tattoos’ for kids
Trudeau mulls making coronavirus vaccine mandatory for Canadians
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--German bishops condemn predecessors’ failure to oppose Hitler, ignoring their own far worse failures

PETITION : Join faithful German Catholics in resisting bishops ’ plan to ‘ Protestantize ’ Church Sign the petition here .
May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The German Bishops ’ Conference has issued an interesting document criticizing the degree to which their predecessors failed to oppose Hitler ’ s programs of mass murder and his unjust aggression in starting the Second World War .
It is a complex historical issue , and a fairly long document .
But while open to criticism , it makes an important point : that in that situation , the argument of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This was a moment when heroism was a duty .
The bishops declare : Inasmuch as the bishops did not oppose the war with a clear ‘ no ’ , and most of them bolstered the ( German nation ’ s ) will to endure , they made themselves complicit in the war .
The bishops may not have shared the Nazis ’ justification for the war on the grounds of racial ideology , but their words and their images gave succor both to soldiers and the regime prosecuting the war , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of purpose .
It was understandable for the bishops to follow the lead of the Holy See , in the Concordat of 1933 .
It was understandable for them to want to preserve their ability to administer the Sacraments freely .
It was even understandable , if not admirable , for them not to want to fall foul of a ruthless regime untrammeled by the rule of law .
The “ cooperation ” the bishops gave the Nazis was “ material ” : they never intended any wrongful action .
But even this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consequences .
The suggestion that Hitler was a legitimate leader , and that therefore he should be given the benefit of the doubt about the justness of his laws and policies , smoothed the way for his crimes .
In 1933 , Catholics had not come under Hitler ’ s spell , for the most part : they could have made a difference .
The bishops chose not to encourage resistance .
It is easy , however , to repent of other people ’ s sins .
If this acknowledgement of past complicity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must inform action in the present , when they can not claim to fear the kind of reprisals the Gestapo would have visited on their predecessors .
I am reminded of a more recent example of episcopal cooperation with evil in Germany : as LifeSite reported back in 1999 : This policy of the German bishops was doggedly defended against repeated condemnations by the Vatican , and particularly by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith .
Yes , the idea was never to encourage abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involvement in the process , and the giving of a document that opened the door , legally , to an abortion , was wrong because it made the counsellors part of the process .
They were morally involved .
The German bishops seem still to have not learned this lesson , however .
In their application of Pope Francis ’ confusing document Amoris Laetitia , they endorsed a policy of allowing divorced or separated Catholics in “ second unions ” to receive Holy Communion without repenting of their adultery or undertaking to discontinue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to intend the commission of sin , but it is ‘ material ’ involvement with it : encouraging , endorsing , and publicly supporting it .
It is striking that defenders of the German bishops ’ approach often say that the couples first marriage might possibly have been invalid , but the only difference this makes is to change the category of the sin from adultery to fornication , still carried on in a public manner by the couple living as if man and wife .
This , however , seems not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ Conference .
We now hear of their “ Synodal Path.
” Their “ working document ” proposes not just turning a blind eye to sexual sins , but actually encouraging them : Here we finally move from material cooperation to “ formal ” cooperation : were these ideas to be endorsed by the German bishops , they would actually be willing Catholics to commit grave siqs .
Much more clearly than in the case with cooperation with Hitler , the bishops would have these sins on their own consciences .

PETITION: Join faithful German Catholics in resisting bishops’ plan to ‘Protestantize’ Church Sign the petition here.
May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The German Bishops’ Conference has issued an interesting document criticizing the degree to which their predecessors failed to oppose Hitler’s programs of mass murder and his unjust aggression in starting the Second World War.
It is a complex historical issue, and a fairly long document. But while open to criticism, it makes an important point: that in that situation, the argument of prudence led in the wrong direction. This was a moment when heroism was a duty. The bishops declare:
Inasmuch as the bishops did not oppose the war with a clear ‘no’, and most of them bolstered the (German nation’s) will to endure, they made themselves complicit in the war. The bishops may not have shared the Nazis’ justification for the war on the grounds of racial ideology, but their words and their images gave succor both to soldiers and the regime prosecuting the war, as they lent the war an additional sense of purpose.
It was understandable for the bishops to follow the lead of the Holy See, in the Concordat of 1933. It was understandable for them to want to preserve their ability to administer the Sacraments freely. It was even understandable, if not admirable, for them not to want to fall foul of a ruthless regime untrammeled by the rule of law. The “cooperation” the bishops gave the Nazis was “material”: they never intended any wrongful action. But even this material cooperation was serious and had serious consequences. The suggestion that Hitler was a legitimate leader, and that therefore he should be given the benefit of the doubt about the justness of his laws and policies, smoothed the way for his crimes. In 1933, Catholics had not come under Hitler’s spell, for the most part: they could have made a difference. The bishops chose not to encourage resistance.
It is easy, however, to repent of other people’s sins. If this acknowledgement of past complicity is to have any meaning, it must inform action in the present, when they cannot claim to fear the kind of reprisals the Gestapo would have visited on their predecessors. I am reminded of a more recent example of episcopal cooperation with evil in Germany: as LifeSite reported back in 1999:
German law requires that prior to obtaining an abortion women must seek counsel at an approved counselling centre and produce a certificate as proof of having received help. Many dioceses in Germany operated such centres noting that they were encouraging women to carry their children to term and accept the assistance offered them. However, providing the certificate implicated the Church in assisting women to obtain abortions.
This policy of the German bishops was doggedly defended against repeated condemnations by the Vatican, and particularly by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Yes, the idea was never to encourage abortion: quite the opposite. But official involvement in the process, and the giving of a document that opened the door, legally, to an abortion, was wrong because it made the counsellors part of the process. They were morally involved.
The German bishops seem still to have not learned this lesson, however. In their application of Pope Francis’ confusing document Amoris Laetitia, they endorsed a policy of allowing divorced or separated Catholics in “second unions” to receive Holy Communion without repenting of their adultery or undertaking to discontinue it. This is not, again, to intend the commission of sin, but it is ‘material’ involvement with it: encouraging, endorsing, and publicly supporting it. It is striking that defenders of the German bishops’ approach often say that the couples first marriage might possibly have been invalid, but the only difference this makes is to change the category of the sin from adultery to fornication, still carried on in a public manner by the couple living as if man and wife.
This, however, seems not to be enough for the German Bishops’ Conference. We now hear of their “Synodal Path.” Their “working document” proposes not just turning a blind eye to sexual sins, but actually encouraging them:
Family planning, even by means of artificial contraception, is not a hostile act, but supports the right of a couple to make a responsible joint decision on the number of children, the intervals between births and the concrete means of family planning.
Again:
Homosexual acts also realize positive meaningful values, insofar as they are an expression of friendship, reliability, loyalty and support in life.
Here we finally move from material cooperation to “formal” cooperation: were these ideas to be endorsed by the German bishops, they would actually be willing Catholics to commit grave sins. Much more clearly than in the case with cooperation with Hitler, the bishops would have these sins on their own consciences.
Follow Joseph Dr Joseph Shaw has a Doctorate in Philosophy from Oxford University, where he also gained a first degree in Politics and Philosophy and a graduate Diploma in Theology. He has published on Ethics and Philosophy of Religion and is the editor of The Case for Liturgical Restoration: Una Voce Position Papers on the Extraordinary Form (Angelico Press). He is the Chairman of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales and Secretary of Una Voce International. He teaches Philosophy in Oxford University and lives nearby with his wife and nine children.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--Judge calls images of aborted babies ‘deeply disturbing,’ upholds ban on pro-lifer showing them

LONDON , May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A U.K. judge described images of abortion as “ deeply disturbing ” as he upheld a ban prohibiting a pro-life campaigner from showing large images of butchered unborn babies in the constituency of one the U.K. ’ s most stridently pro-abortion politicians .
Christian Hacking , an employee of Centre for Bioethical Reform UK ( CBR UK ) , was appealing a Community Protection Notice ( CPN ) issued to him on October 3 , 2019 by Waltham Forest London Borough Council for showing pictures of babies killed by abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I am deeply disappointed that our appeal to show the reality of abortion to the people of Waltham Forest has not been successful , ” Hacking said in response to today ’ s ruling .
“ The real victim of abortion is not MP Stella Creasy , or the those negatively impacted by its visualisation , but the unborn child , ” he continued .
“ How can we see positive change in the UK if politicians and councils are allowed to dictate how we express peaceable opinions in public ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for freedom of speech we must take this appeal further and hold those authorities to account.
” Creasy was instrumental in introducing abortion legislation into Northern Ireland last year .
Andrea Williams , chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre , which is supporting the case , said that activists must be free to make the public aware of the horrific reality of abortion .
“ The ruling hinges on the idea that this image , showing the tragic reality of abortion , causes significant and lasting emotional harm , ” Williams said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we must be free to make these distressing realities known – or the vastly more horrific truth of abortion becomes immune to criticism.
” ‘ Abortion is by its nature a graphic deed ’ A press release from the Chrisitian Legal Centre says that the judgment found that the CPN issued to Hacking did interfere with his legal right to freedom of expression , but that the interference was justified because some members of the public found the images disturbing .
“ There is a high bar to restricting free speech , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speech must include , and has been ruled in law to include , that which is shocking , provocative and offensive , ” she continued .
“ Graphic images of cancers are used in government advertising to persuade people not to smoke , for example .
Abortion is by its nature a graphic deed .
It is a bloody destruction of a human life .
This is what was being exposed.
” Michael Robinson , director of communications for U.K. pro-life group the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children ( SPUC ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the rights of campaigners .
“ A fundamental value in our society is the freedom of expression , ” Robinson said .
“ It is a sad indictment of how illiberal the establishment has come that it sides with an influential public figure to trample the rights of those she disagrees with , ” he continued .
“ This ruling exposes the double standard where any offense seems to be permitted against traditional values , but those fighting against the wickedness of abortion are measured by a different standard .
The judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] is deeply disturbing .
What is actually disturbing is the destruction of a human life at that stage , which the CBR campaigners are trying to prevent .
”

The judgement found this did interfere with Christian Hacking's legal right to freedom of expression, but that the interference was justified because some members of the public found the images disturbing.
PETITION: Support pro-lifers threatened and arrested for praying outside of abortion facilities Sign the petition here.
LONDON, May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A U.K. judge described images of abortion as “deeply disturbing” as he upheld a ban prohibiting a pro-life campaigner from showing large images of butchered unborn babies in the constituency of one the U.K.’s most stridently pro-abortion politicians.
Christian Hacking, an employee of Centre for Bioethical Reform UK (CBR UK), was appealing a Community Protection Notice (CPN) issued to him on October 3, 2019 by Waltham Forest London Borough Council for showing pictures of babies killed by abortion in MP Stella Creasy’s constituency.
“I am deeply disappointed that our appeal to show the reality of abortion to the people of Waltham Forest has not been successful,” Hacking said in response to today’s ruling.
“The real victim of abortion is not MP Stella Creasy, or the those negatively impacted by its visualisation, but the unborn child,” he continued.
“How can we see positive change in the UK if politicians and councils are allowed to dictate how we express peaceable opinions in public? For the sake of the unborn and for freedom of speech we must take this appeal further and hold those authorities to account.”
Creasy was instrumental in introducing abortion legislation into Northern Ireland last year.
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which is supporting the case, said that activists must be free to make the public aware of the horrific reality of abortion.
“The ruling hinges on the idea that this image, showing the tragic reality of abortion, causes significant and lasting emotional harm,” Williams said.
“But however uncomfortable the truth, we must be free to make these distressing realities known – or the vastly more horrific truth of abortion becomes immune to criticism.”
‘Abortion is by its nature a graphic deed’
A press release from the Chrisitian Legal Centre says that the judgment found that the CPN issued to Hacking did interfere with his legal right to freedom of expression, but that the interference was justified because some members of the public found the images disturbing.
“There is a high bar to restricting free speech,” Williams said.
“Freedom of speech must include, and has been ruled in law to include, that which is shocking, provocative and offensive,” she continued.
“Graphic images of cancers are used in government advertising to persuade people not to smoke, for example. Abortion is by its nature a graphic deed. It is a bloody destruction of a human life. This is what was being exposed.”
Michael Robinson, director of communications for U.K. pro-life group the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), told LifeSiteNews that the ruling trampled on the rights of campaigners.
“A fundamental value in our society is the freedom of expression,” Robinson said.
“It is a sad indictment of how illiberal the establishment has come that it sides with an influential public figure to trample the rights of those she disagrees with,” he continued.
“This ruling exposes the double standard where any offense seems to be permitted against traditional values, but those fighting against the wickedness of abortion are measured by a different standard. The judge claims the image of a [fetus] is deeply disturbing. What is actually disturbing is the destruction of a human life at that stage, which the CBR campaigners are trying to prevent.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--Benedictine monk: Giving everyone ‘universal income’ would result in ‘social apocalypse’

May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In a homily on work and financial compensation on the occasion of the solemn Mass for the feast of Saint Joseph on May 1 , the Father Abbot of the Abbey of Sainte-Madeleine du Barroux condemned the proposition to offer a “ universal income ” ( read full homily below ) .
Such a proposition is increasingly being suggested by some political parties and international organizations because of the COVID-19 crisis in the wake of misery and job loss .
Universal basic income , in the minds of its promoters , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation but a permanent provision in view of a “ new social contract.
” Who better than Dom Louis-Marie , a Benedictine monk whose rule of life establishes a true balance between prayer , work and rest , to say such a proposal is unnatural … and therefore contrary to the organization of society according to God ’ s will .
Dom Louis-Marie called the recourse to universal income the beginning of a “ human and social apocalypse ” -- severe words that deserve a moment of reflection because that is where globalist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a United Nations report on lockdown because of COVID-19 and the ensuing crisis called for a “ basic universal income ” for all , not just those who will be affected by the crisis .
Antonio Guterres , Secretary-General of the UN , has been promoting it for a long time , in particular as a way to mitigate job loss due to increased automation .
The coronavirus offers an even more powerful excuse to implement a socialist plan that would make a large proportion of humanity dependent on the state .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ as an answer to the crisis .
On April 17 , weforum.org published an article by Kanni Wignaraja , Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations , and Balazs Horvath , Chief Economist of UNDP ( UN development program ) Asia-Pacific .
They wrote : The dangers of such a policy are clear .
It would also be contrary to God ’ s provisions for a society that is organically arranged around the family and personal responsibility .
With the kind permission of the Father Abbot of the Barroux , a traditional Benedictine Abbey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ France in the 1970s , LifeSite offers below the transcription of his sermon .
His text denounces in few words and with true vision an apparently generous project , which is , in reality , a poison .
In the name of the Father , and of the Son , and of the Holy Spirit .
The Holy Father recently confirmed the benefits of a “ universal basic salary.
” And some utopians have bounced back on the question , on this subject , raving about a “ universal income , ” which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Wages are the counterpart of work .
An income is an annuity , a pension , an assistance , but without any counterpart .
This project in view of a basic universal income would therefore consist of paying a sum of money to everyone , with no counterpart .
This would be good news for us because I believe that even monks and priests could have this income !
Ideally , it would be a good basic security , and it would allow every individual to receive a certain amount of autonomy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean not to depend on a boss , or a husband , or even on work .
It would be the dawn of greater freedom – that would be much less tiring !
But it would also constitute the first sparks of a human and social apocalypse , because it is almost against nature .
First of all , because work in itself , is not alienation .
It is not work that makes the worker , the employee or the craftsman a slave .
It is the conditions of this work , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it lasts too long , when it is not paid enough .
Work is in itself a vocation to collaborate with the work of the Creator .
One can even say : to be a co-creator .
Through work , man can acquire true independence , true freedom , and even freedom from the State .
Through work , man cultivates himself , he develops , he is elevated through practical knowledge and through many other virtues , such as fortitude and patience .
The worker is elevated : he rises , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always imposes its own conditions .
Through work , a father can provide for his family and , as many lay saints have done , help those in need .
And this is my real point .
By a basic universal income , society would sink terribly into individualism .
Everyone would have his or her own nest egg , a meager one , of course : the father , the mother , why not the children ...
Independence ?
No .
Selfishness , yes .
Today Saint Joseph is celebrated as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I read in the liturgical books .
Saint Joseph worked and earned money .
And so he provided for the needs of the Holy Family .
Mary did not have a gainful occupation , yet she did much more for the salvation of souls and the world than saint Joseph did .
The Holy Family is not defined by the independence of individuals but by an alliance of persons .
Each member has his or her best place .
In a monastic community , we live out a little bit of this mystery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gainful employment : the bakery , the oil mill , the cultivation of vines and olives , the bookstore and especially , at the moment , the online shop , which is a bit overwhelmed with work in this time of confinement .
There is also the hostelry , which brings in a bit of remuneration .
Others work at service jobs that don ’ t pay : the kitchen , the infirmary , the cellarer – you work a little bit !
- the laundry , the linen room ...
Looking after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t it ?
The plumbing , the electricity… Others devote themselves a little more to study and spiritual and theological training , and others still , to art .
So we are a family , and everyone is a member of that family in the sense that he participates in the upkeep of the community .
The Catechism says that no Christian , because he belongs to a community of solidarity and brotherhood , should feel entitled not to work and live at the expense of others .
May Saint Joseph give us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the parasite !
But we will be a true family if we live out this work in a spirit of alliance , like Saint Joseph and the Virgin Mary : without rivalry , but in a spirit of service .
And what we will try to live better in work , we will apply to prayer , which is an exercise , and which is a labor .
Prayer for the Church , and prayer for souls , for all souls … The salvation of souls comes at a price .
We monks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this service , to win this prize .
And we will do it with Saint Joseph , universal patron of the Church , craftsman and worker , we will do it for this wage that is the salvation of souls .
A universal wage , for all souls .
AMEN .

The UN and the World Economic Forum support this 'new social contract' that would make humanity reliant on the state.
May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a homily on work and financial compensation on the occasion of the solemn Mass for the feast of Saint Joseph on May 1, the Father Abbot of the Abbey of Sainte-Madeleine du Barroux condemned the proposition to offer a “universal income” (read full homily below).
Such a proposition is increasingly being suggested by some political parties and international organizations because of the COVID-19 crisis in the wake of misery and job loss. Universal basic income, in the minds of its promoters, is not a temporary answer to a catastrophic situation but a permanent provision in view of a “new social contract.”
Who better than Dom Louis-Marie, a Benedictine monk whose rule of life establishes a true balance between prayer, work and rest, to say such a proposal is unnatural … and therefore contrary to the organization of society according to God’s will.
Dom Louis-Marie called the recourse to universal income the beginning of a “human and social apocalypse” — severe words that deserve a moment of reflection because that is where globalist organizations are heading.
On March 31, a United Nations report on lockdown because of COVID-19 and the ensuing crisis called for a “basic universal income” for all, not just those who will be affected by the crisis. Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the UN, has been promoting it for a long time, in particular as a way to mitigate job loss due to increased automation. The coronavirus offers an even more powerful excuse to implement a socialist plan that would make a large proportion of humanity dependent on the state.
The World Economic Forum also sees it as an answer to the crisis. On April 17, weforum.org published an article by Kanni Wignaraja, Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, and Balazs Horvath, Chief Economist of UNDP (UN development program) Asia-Pacific. They wrote:
Moving to such a system would need to ensure that the incentives to have a job remain intact. That is relatively simple to do: A UBI (universal basic income) should be sufficient to sustain a person at a modest minimum, leaving sufficient incentives to work, save, and invest. Finally, good arguments can be made for having very selective conditions – for instance, some that relate to public goods, like vaccinating all children and ensuring they attend school. Such selective conditions would not undermine the main purpose of eliminating poverty and allow low-income people to take calculated risks, to try to lift themselves out of poverty.
The dangers of such a policy are clear. It would also be contrary to God’s provisions for a society that is organically arranged around the family and personal responsibility.
With the kind permission of the Father Abbot of the Barroux, a traditional Benedictine Abbey founded in Provence in the south of France in the 1970s, LifeSite offers below the transcription of his sermon. His text denounces in few words and with true vision an apparently generous project, which is, in reality, a poison.
***
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
Dear fathers, dear brothers, dear faithful.
The Holy Father recently confirmed the benefits of a “universal basic salary.” And some utopians have bounced back on the question, on this subject, raving about a “universal income,” which is not at all the same thing. Wages are the counterpart of work. An income is an annuity, a pension, an assistance, but without any counterpart. This project in view of a basic universal income would therefore consist of paying a sum of money to everyone, with no counterpart.
This would be good news for us because I believe that even monks and priests could have this income!
Ideally, it would be a good basic security, and it would allow every individual to receive a certain amount of autonomy from the State. And that would mean not to depend on a boss, or a husband, or even on work. It would be the dawn of greater freedom – that would be much less tiring!
But it would also constitute the first sparks of a human and social apocalypse, because it is almost against nature.
First of all, because work in itself, is not alienation. It is not work that makes the worker, the employee or the craftsman a slave. It is the conditions of this work, when they are too harsh: when it lasts too long, when it is not paid enough.
Work is in itself a vocation to collaborate with the work of the Creator. One can even say: to be a co-creator. Through work, man can acquire true independence, true freedom, and even freedom from the State. Through work, man cultivates himself, he develops, he is elevated through practical knowledge and through many other virtues, such as fortitude and patience.
The worker is elevated: he rises, but he remains anchored in reality, which always imposes its own conditions.
Through work, a father can provide for his family and, as many lay saints have done, help those in need.
And this is my real point. By a basic universal income, society would sink terribly into individualism. Everyone would have his or her own nest egg, a meager one, of course: the father, the mother, why not the children… Independence? No. Selfishness, yes.
Today Saint Joseph is celebrated as the bridegroom of the Virgin Mary, as I read in the liturgical books. Saint Joseph worked and earned money. And so he provided for the needs of the Holy Family. Mary did not have a gainful occupation, yet she did much more for the salvation of souls and the world than saint Joseph did. The Holy Family is not defined by the independence of individuals but by an alliance of persons. Each member has his or her best place.
In a monastic community, we live out a little bit of this mystery of the covenant. Some work at gainful employment: the bakery, the oil mill, the cultivation of vines and olives, the bookstore and especially, at the moment, the online shop, which is a bit overwhelmed with work in this time of confinement.
There is also the hostelry, which brings in a bit of remuneration. Others work at service jobs that don’t pay: the kitchen, the infirmary, the cellarer – you work a little bit! – the laundry, the linen room… Looking after the linen is tiring, isn’t it? The plumbing, the electricity… Others devote themselves a little more to study and spiritual and theological training, and others still, to art.
So we are a family, and everyone is a member of that family in the sense that he participates in the upkeep of the community. The Catechism says that no Christian, because he belongs to a community of solidarity and brotherhood, should feel entitled not to work and live at the expense of others.
May Saint Joseph give us the grace to resist the temptation of the parasite!
But we will be a true family if we live out this work in a spirit of alliance, like Saint Joseph and the Virgin Mary: without rivalry, but in a spirit of service.
And what we will try to live better in work, we will apply to prayer, which is an exercise, and which is a labor. Prayer for the Church, and prayer for souls, for all souls …
The salvation of souls comes at a price. We monks pray every day, carrying the weight of this service, to win this prize. And we will do it with Saint Joseph, universal patron of the Church, craftsman and worker, we will do it for this wage that is the salvation of souls. A universal wage, for all souls. AMEN.
Dom Louis-Marie,
Father Abbot of Le Barroux
Follow Jeanne Jeanne Smits has worked as a journalist in France since 1987 after obtaining a Master of Arts in Law. She formerly directed the French daily Présent and was editor-in-chief of an all-internet French-speaking news site called reinformation.tv. She writes regularly for a number of Catholic journals (Monde & vie, L’Homme nouveau, Reconquête…) and runs a personal pro-life blog. In addition, she is often invited to radio and TV shows on alternative media. She is vice-president of the Christian and French defense association “AGRIF.” She is the French translator of The Dictator Pope by Henry Sire and Christus Vincit by Bishop Schneider, and recently contributed to the Bref examen critique de la communion dans la main about Communion in the hand. She is married and has three children, and lives near Paris.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--Left-wing orgs ask court to block Idaho ban on males in girls’ sports

PETITION : Stop 'sex change ' operations during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here .
May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The left-wing law groups American Civil Liberties Union ( ACLU ) and Legal Voice have are seeking a preliminary injunction against an Idaho law keeping gender-confused males from competing in female student athletics .
The Fairness in Women ’ s Sports Act forbids “ transgender females ” – i.e.
, males who “ identify ” as female – from competing against actual females in school athletic events .
If a student ’ s “ gender identity ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the matter with a physical and genetic examination .
Transgenderism in athletics is a contentious issue across the country , with female athletes arguing that biological males ’ innate physical advantages unjustly impair their ability to earn not only competitive recognition but also scholarships for their hard work .
Republican Gov .
Brad Little signed the bill into law last month .
In response , the ACLU and Legal Voice filed a federal lawsuit , and are now seeking to have enforcement of the law temporarily blocked until that suit is litigated , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not preliminarily enjoined before tryouts begin in August , ( the law ) will bar this subset of Idaho women and girls from school sports this fall , ” the request reads .
The Idaho Attorney General ’ s Office has not yet commented .
Supporters of the law argue that science is on their side .
Last June , the Journal of Medical Ethics published a paper concluding that “ healthy young men ( do ) not lose significant muscle mass ( or power ) when their circulating testosterone levels were reduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) for 20 weeks , ” and “ indirect effects of testosterone ” on factors such as bone structure , lung volume , and heart size “ will not be altered by hormone therapy.
” Therefore , “ the advantage to transwomen ( men ) afforded by the ( International Olympic Committee ) guidelines is an intolerable unfairness .
”

The ACLU is one of the groups challenging the state's new law that bars 'transgender females' from competing against biological girls.
PETITION: Stop 'sex change' operations during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here.
May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The left-wing law groups American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Legal Voice have are seeking a preliminary injunction against an Idaho law keeping gender-confused males from competing in female student athletics.
The Fairness in Women’s Sports Act forbids “transgender females” – i.e., males who “identify” as female – from competing against actual females in school athletic events. If a student’s “gender identity” is disputed, the school may settle the matter with a physical and genetic examination.
Transgenderism in athletics is a contentious issue across the country, with female athletes arguing that biological males’ innate physical advantages unjustly impair their ability to earn not only competitive recognition but also scholarships for their hard work.
Republican Gov. Brad Little signed the bill into law last month. In response, the ACLU and Legal Voice filed a federal lawsuit, and are now seeking to have enforcement of the law temporarily blocked until that suit is litigated, the Associated Press reported.
“If not preliminarily enjoined before tryouts begin in August, (the law) will bar this subset of Idaho women and girls from school sports this fall,” the request reads. The Idaho Attorney General’s Office has not yet commented.
Supporters of the law argue that science is on their side. Last June, the Journal of Medical Ethics published a paper concluding that “healthy young men (do) not lose significant muscle mass (or power) when their circulating testosterone levels were reduced to (below International Olympic Committee guidelines) for 20 weeks,” and “indirect effects of testosterone” on factors such as bone structure, lung volume, and heart size “will not be altered by hormone therapy.” Therefore, “the advantage to transwomen (men) afforded by the (International Olympic Committee) guidelines is an intolerable unfairness.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--New York police union: Enforcing social distancing causing city to ‘fall apart before our eyes’

NEW YORK CITY , May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The Police Benevolent Association ( PBA ) , the largest law-enforcement union in the Big Apple , has come out against New York politicians ’ priorities in handling the COVID-19 outbreak , arguing that police need to be let “ out of the social distancing enforcement business.
” “ The cowards who run this city have given us nothing but vague guidelines and mixed messages , leaving the cops on the street corners to fend for ourselves , ” PBA president Patrick Lynch declared , the New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right to interfere with a police action .
But now that the inevitable backlash has arrived , they are once again throwing us under the bus.
” At the same time , he continued , city leaders are “ still watering down our laws , releasing real criminals and discouraging proactive enforcement of fare evasion and quality of life issues.
” “ As a result , our subways are in chaos and we have hero nurses getting mugged on their way to our hospitals , ” Lynch said , “ As the weather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unravel our social fabric , police officers should be allowed to focus on our core public safety mission .
If we don ’ t , the city will fall apart before our eyes.
” “ This situation is untenable : the NYPD needs to get cops out of the social distancing enforcement business altogether , ” he urged .
As of Wednesday morning , the United States is estimated to have seen more than 1.2 million cases of COVID-19 , with 72,695 deaths and 201,879 recoveries .
Roughly a third of those numbers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which has been hit harder than anywhere else in the US .
State and city leaders have come under fire for the extent of their efforts to keep New Yorkers in their homes , such as Democrat Mayor Bill de Blasio ’ s declaration that it was “ absolutely unacceptable ” for Jews to gather for Rabbi Chaim Mertz ’ s funeral , in violation of “ social distancing ” edicts , and that continuing to do so would be grounds for arrest .
At the same time , critics argue that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steps that would have made the biggest difference .
The densely-packed subway system remained open as the crisis grew , with de Blasio and Democrat Gov .
Andrew Cuomo only last week announcing nightly shutdowns for cleaning .
Further , the state health department forced nursing homes to readmit residents diagnosed with COVID-19 , sending contagious people back into the most vulnerable segment of the population .
Readers can click here for LifeSiteNews ’ live updates on the coronavirus and its impact all over the world .

'Police officers should be allowed to focus on our core public safety mission. If we don’t, the city will fall apart before our eyes.'
PETITION: Support pro-lifers threatened and arrested for praying outside of abortion facilities Sign the petition here.
NEW YORK CITY, May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Police Benevolent Association (PBA), the largest law-enforcement union in the Big Apple, has come out against New York politicians’ priorities in handling the COVID-19 outbreak, arguing that police need to be let “out of the social distancing enforcement business.”
“The cowards who run this city have given us nothing but vague guidelines and mixed messages, leaving the cops on the street corners to fend for ourselves,” PBA president Patrick Lynch declared, the New York Post reports. “Nobody has a right to interfere with a police action. But now that the inevitable backlash has arrived, they are once again throwing us under the bus.”
At the same time, he continued, city leaders are “still watering down our laws, releasing real criminals and discouraging proactive enforcement of fare evasion and quality of life issues.”
“As a result, our subways are in chaos and we have hero nurses getting mugged on their way to our hospitals,” Lynch said, “As the weather heats up and the pandemic continues to unravel our social fabric, police officers should be allowed to focus on our core public safety mission. If we don’t, the city will fall apart before our eyes.”
“This situation is untenable: the NYPD needs to get cops out of the social distancing enforcement business altogether,” he urged.
As of Wednesday morning, the United States is estimated to have seen more than 1.2 million cases of COVID-19, with 72,695 deaths and 201,879 recoveries. Roughly a third of those numbers come from the state of New York, which has been hit harder than anywhere else in the US.
State and city leaders have come under fire for the extent of their efforts to keep New Yorkers in their homes, such as Democrat Mayor Bill de Blasio’s declaration that it was “absolutely unacceptable” for Jews to gather for Rabbi Chaim Mertz’s funeral, in violation of “social distancing” edicts, and that continuing to do so would be grounds for arrest.
At the same time, critics argue that New York has failed to take the steps that would have made the biggest difference. The densely-packed subway system remained open as the crisis grew, with de Blasio and Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo only last week announcing nightly shutdowns for cleaning. Further, the state health department forced nursing homes to readmit residents diagnosed with COVID-19, sending contagious people back into the most vulnerable segment of the population.
Readers can click here for LifeSiteNews’ live updates on the coronavirus and its impact all over the world.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-06--Pope Benedict: I resigned, but I kept ‘spiritual dimension’ of papacy

May 6 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In a new biography released on May 4 , Pope Benedict makes some statements that highlight his own understanding of his resignation from the papacy .
He speaks in this book about the “ spiritual dimension ... which is alone still my mandate.
” He shows an understanding of his resignation from the papacy , according to which he gave up any “ concrete legal powers ” and any role of governance , but at the same time maintained a “ spiritual mandate.
” Pope Benedict XVI answered , in the autumn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his biographer Peter Seewald , which then were included in Seewald 's more than 1,000-page-long biography titled Benedict XVI : A Life .
This book has been released in German today and will be published in English on November 17 .
Part of these questions related to the fact that he had resigned on February 11 , 2013 after nearly seven years being the Pope .
Peter Seewald points out to Benedict that there are church historians who criticize the fact that he calls himself “ Pope emeritus , ” since such a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since there are not two popes.
” After first saying that he himself does not see why a church historian should know more about such matters than anybody else – after all they “ are studying the history of the Church ” – , Benedict quotes the fact that “ up to the end of the Second Vatican Council , there also did not exist any resignation on the part of bishops.
” After the introduction of the position of a retired bishop , the retired Pope goes on to say , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only become a bishop with relation to a specific diocese , ” that is to say , each “ consecration is always relative ” and “ connected with an episcopal seat.
” For auxiliary bishops , for example , the Church chose “ fictional seats ” such as those of formerly Catholic countries in North Africa .
Since with the increasing numbers of retiring bishops , these fictional seats were quickly filling up , one German bishop – Simon Landersdorfer of Passau – just decided he would become simply an 'emeritus of Passau @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pope Benedict then draws a comparison with the papacy .
For , such a retired bishop , he adds , “ does not anymore actively have an episcopal seat , but , still finds himself in a special relationship of a former bishop to his seat.
” This retired bishop , however , thereby “ does not become a second bishop of his diocese , ” explains Benedict .
Such a bishop had “ fully given up his office , yet the spiritual connection with his former seat was now being acknowledged , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ new relationship with a seat ” is “ given as a reality , but lies outside of the concrete legal substance of the episcopal office.
” At the same time , adds the retired Pope , the “ spiritual connection ” is being regarded as a “ reality.
” “ Thus , ” he continues , “ there are not two bishops , but one with a spiritual mandate , whose essence it is to serve his former diocese from within , from the Lord , by being present and available in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why such a legal concept should not also be applied to the bishop of Rome , ” Pope Benedict explicitly states , thus making it clear that according to his own ideas , he fully resigned his papal office while maintaining a “ spiritual dimension ” of his office .
Later on in this interview at the end of the new Seewald-biography , Benedict comes back to speak about the fact that he does not wish to comment on the question of the dubia as presented by Cardinal Raymond Burke and his fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ would lead too much into the concrete area of the church governance and thereby would leave the spiritual dimension which alone is still my mandate.
” Pope Benedict then regrets that any of his statements as a retired Pope – such as his famous 2017 remark about the capsizing boat representing the Church – is being used by his critics as means to find “ a confirmation for their slander.
” “ The claim that I constantly intervene in public debates , ” he also states , “ is an evil distortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ words of his , such as the ones about the capsizing of a ship – which stemmed from Saint Gregory the Great – , in order to detect “ a dangerous intervention into the governance of the Church ” are , in Benedict 's eyes , “ participating in a campaign against me which has nothing to do with the truth.
” In another context , the Pope mentions especially the “ German theology , ” which , in a “ stupid and evil way , ” interpreted his words , so that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about it.
” “ I prefer not to analyze the real reasons as to why one wishes to silence my voice , ” Benedict XVI concludes .
Further discussing this matter of a “ retired Pope ” with Peter Seewald , Benedict makes a comparison with the “ change of the generations , ” where the father of a family gives up “ his legal status , ” while maintaining his “ human-spiritual importance , ” which remains “ until death.
” That is to say , the “ functional ” aspect of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ontological ” part .
Here , the former Pope refers to Bavarian farming families , where the father of a family at some point in his life hands over the major farmhouse to his son while staying in a smaller cottage on the same land .
The son then becomes responsible for providing the father with his material needs such as food .
“ Thus , ” Benedict argues , “ his material independence is given , just as the transition of the concrete rights to the son .
That means : the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the situation changes with regard to the concrete rights and duties.
” In May of 2016 , Archbishop Georg Gänswein had given a speech , in which he spoke about Pope Benedict and an “ expanded Petrine Ministry , ” a formulation which caused a debate because it might indicate that Benedict did not resign all of the different parts of the papacy .
He was later to correct that statement and since has insisted that there is only one Pope .
Gänswein told LifeSite in 2019 : “ I have already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times.
” “ It makes no sense at all , no , even more , it is counterproductive to insist on this ‘ misunderstanding ’ and to quote me again and again .
This is absurd and leads to self-harm [ Selbstzerfleischung ] .
I have clearly said that there is only one Pope , one legitimately elected and incumbent Pope , and that is Francis.
” Already in 2013 , when explaining his resignation to the public , Pope Benedict XVI then had stated that “ there can no longer be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this .
I do not return to private life , to a life of travel , meetings , receptions , conferences , and so on .
I am not abandoning the cross , but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord .
I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the Church , but in the service of prayer I remain , so to speak , in the enclosure of Saint Peter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bear as Pope , will be a great example for me in this .
He showed us the way for a life which , whether active or passive , is completely given over to the work of God.
” LifeSite reached out to Monsignor Nicola Bux , a Vatican theologian and former collaborator of Pope Benedict XVI as a consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , because he had made in the past some remarks about the “ juridical validity of Pope Benedict XVI 's resignation.
” After LifeSite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement by Pope Benedict as it can be found in this new papal biography , Monsignor Bux answered , saying : “ In my opinion , one of the most problematic aspects would be the idea , implicit in Pope Ratzinger 's act , that the papacy is not a single and indivisible office , but , on the contrary , a divisible office that can be 'unpacked ' , in the sense that a Pope may choose to give up some functions , keeping for himself others , which would not then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A clearly erroneous idea.
” In further exchanges with Monsignor Bux , this Italian theologian added the following thoughts : “ The comparison of the papal office with the episcopal office in what regards the abdication of the papal office is not correct .
The episcopal office is conferred by episcopal ordination or consecration , imprinting an indelible character on the soul of the bishop .
Thus , while he may be relieved of a particular pastoral responsibility , he remains always a bishop .
The papal office is conferred by the acceptance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Peter , that is , by an act of the will of the person elected , accepting the call to be the Vicar of Christ on earth .
From the moment that the person elected consents he has the full jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff.
” If the person elected is not a Bishop , ” Monsignor Bux continued , “ he must be immediately consecrated a Bishop because the papacy entails the exercise of the episcopal office , but he is Pope from the moment he consents to the election .
If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ point , declares that he can no longer fulfill the call to be the Vicar of Christ on earth , he loses the papal office and returns to the condition in which he was before giving the consent to be the Vicar of Christ on earth.
” Here , the Italian theologian explained the fundamental principle that “ the papacy is not conferred by sacramental grace .
It does not imprint an indelible character upon the soul .
To the one who consents to be Pope and perseveres in the consent , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promised , to be 'the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful ' ( Lumen Gentium , no .
23 ) .
Such a grace , by its very definition , is given to only one person at any given time.
” In conclusion , Monsignor Bux writes : “ Our Lord gave Peter a single mandate - legal and spiritual at the same time - and asked the Apostles to support him through communion , cum et sub @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Saint Paul explains it as : ‘ sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum ’ ( care of all churches ) .
Therefore , there is no Petrine primacy to share , but two indissoluble principles in permanent communion with one another : the Petrine primacy and the episcopal team-work ( collegiality ) .
” As becomes clear here , the scholarly discussion concerning Pope Benedict 's concept of his resignation is not yet closed .

In a new biography, Pope Benedict speaks about the 'spiritual dimension' of the papacy 'which is alone still my mandate'
Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world: Feed your flock Sign the petition here.
May 6, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – In a new biography released on May 4, Pope Benedict makes some statements that highlight his own understanding of his resignation from the papacy. He speaks in this book about the “spiritual dimension…which is alone still my mandate.” He shows an understanding of his resignation from the papacy, according to which he gave up any “concrete legal powers” and any role of governance, but at the same time maintained a “spiritual mandate.”
Pope Benedict XVI answered, in the autumn of 2018, several written questions by his biographer Peter Seewald, which then were included in Seewald's more than 1,000-page-long biography titled Benedict XVI: A Life. This book has been released in German today and will be published in English on November 17.
Part of these questions related to the fact that he had resigned on February 11, 2013 after nearly seven years being the Pope. Peter Seewald points out to Benedict that there are church historians who criticize the fact that he calls himself “Pope emeritus,” since such a title “does not exist, also since there are not two popes.” After first saying that he himself does not see why a church historian should know more about such matters than anybody else – after all they “are studying the history of the Church” – , Benedict quotes the fact that “up to the end of the Second Vatican Council, there also did not exist any resignation on the part of bishops.”
After the introduction of the position of a retired bishop, the retired Pope goes on to say, there arose the problem that “one can only become a bishop with relation to a specific diocese,” that is to say, each “consecration is always relative” and “connected with an episcopal seat.” For auxiliary bishops, for example, the Church chose “fictional seats” such as those of formerly Catholic countries in North Africa. Since with the increasing numbers of retiring bishops, these fictional seats were quickly filling up, one German bishop – Simon Landersdorfer of Passau – just decided he would become simply an 'emeritus of Passau.'”
It is here that Pope Benedict then draws a comparison with the papacy. For, such a retired bishop, he adds, “does not anymore actively have an episcopal seat, but, still finds himself in a special relationship of a former bishop to his seat.” This retired bishop, however, thereby “does not become a second bishop of his diocese,” explains Benedict. Such a bishop had “fully given up his office, yet the spiritual connection with his former seat was now being acknowledged, also as a legal quality.” This “new relationship with a seat” is “given as a reality, but lies outside of the concrete legal substance of the episcopal office.” At the same time, adds the retired Pope, the “spiritual connection” is being regarded as a “reality.”
“Thus,” he continues, “there are not two bishops, but one with a spiritual mandate, whose essence it is to serve his former diocese from within, from the Lord, by being present and available in prayer.”
“It is not conceivable why such a legal concept should not also be applied to the bishop of Rome,” Pope Benedict explicitly states, thus making it clear that according to his own ideas, he fully resigned his papal office while maintaining a “spiritual dimension” of his office.
Later on in this interview at the end of the new Seewald-biography, Benedict comes back to speak about the fact that he does not wish to comment on the question of the dubia as presented by Cardinal Raymond Burke and his fellow cardinals regarding Amoris Laetitia, since this “would lead too much into the concrete area of the church governance and thereby would leave the spiritual dimension which alone is still my mandate.”
Pope Benedict then regrets that any of his statements as a retired Pope – such as his famous 2017 remark about the capsizing boat representing the Church – is being used by his critics as means to find “a confirmation for their slander.”
“The claim that I constantly intervene in public debates,” he also states, “is an evil distortion of reality.” Those who are using words of his, such as the ones about the capsizing of a ship – which stemmed from Saint Gregory the Great – , in order to detect “a dangerous intervention into the governance of the Church” are, in Benedict's eyes, “participating in a campaign against me which has nothing to do with the truth.” In another context, the Pope mentions especially the “German theology,” which, in a “stupid and evil way,” interpreted his words, so that “it is better not to speak about it.”
“I prefer not to analyze the real reasons as to why one wishes to silence my voice,” Benedict XVI concludes.
Further discussing this matter of a “retired Pope” with Peter Seewald, Benedict makes a comparison with the “change of the generations,” where the father of a family gives up “his legal status,” while maintaining his “human-spiritual importance,” which remains “until death.” That is to say, the “functional” aspect of fatherhood can change, not his “ontological” part.
Here, the former Pope refers to Bavarian farming families, where the father of a family at some point in his life hands over the major farmhouse to his son while staying in a smaller cottage on the same land. The son then becomes responsible for providing the father with his material needs such as food. “Thus,” Benedict argues, “his material independence is given, just as the transition of the concrete rights to the son. That means: the spiritual side of the fatherhood remains, while the situation changes with regard to the concrete rights and duties.”
In May of 2016, Archbishop Georg Gänswein had given a speech, in which he spoke about Pope Benedict and an “expanded Petrine Ministry,” a formulation which caused a debate because it might indicate that Benedict did not resign all of the different parts of the papacy. He was later to correct that statement and since has insisted that there is only one Pope. Gänswein told LifeSite in 2019: “I have already cleared up the ‘misunderstanding’ several times.” “It makes no sense at all, no, even more, it is counterproductive to insist on this ‘misunderstanding’ and to quote me again and again. This is absurd and leads to self-harm [Selbstzerfleischung]. I have clearly said that there is only one Pope, one legitimately elected and incumbent Pope, and that is Francis.”
Already in 2013, when explaining his resignation to the public, Pope Benedict XVI then had stated that “there can no longer be a return to the private sphere. My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry does not revoke this. I do not return to private life, to a life of travel, meetings, receptions, conferences, and so on. I am not abandoning the cross, but remaining in a new way at the side of the crucified Lord. I no longer bear the power of office for the governance of the Church, but in the service of prayer I remain, so to speak, in the enclosure of Saint Peter. Saint Benedict, whose name I bear as Pope, will be a great example for me in this. He showed us the way for a life which, whether active or passive, is completely given over to the work of God.”
LifeSite reached out to Monsignor Nicola Bux, a Vatican theologian and former collaborator of Pope Benedict XVI as a consulter to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, because he had made in the past some remarks about the “juridical validity of Pope Benedict XVI's resignation.”
After LifeSite had summed up for him the new statement by Pope Benedict as it can be found in this new papal biography, Monsignor Bux answered, saying:
“In my opinion, one of the most problematic aspects would be the idea, implicit in Pope Ratzinger's act, that the papacy is not a single and indivisible office, but, on the contrary, a divisible office that can be 'unpacked', in the sense that a Pope may choose to give up some functions, keeping for himself others, which would not then be passed on to his successor. A clearly erroneous idea.”
In further exchanges with Monsignor Bux, this Italian theologian added the following thoughts:
“The comparison of the papal office with the episcopal office in what regards the abdication of the papal office is not correct. The episcopal office is conferred by episcopal ordination or consecration, imprinting an indelible character on the soul of the bishop. Thus, while he may be relieved of a particular pastoral responsibility, he remains always a bishop. The papal office is conferred by the acceptance of the election to the See of Peter, that is, by an act of the will of the person elected, accepting the call to be the Vicar of Christ on earth. From the moment that the person elected consents he has the full jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff.”
If the person elected is not a Bishop,” Monsignor Bux continued, “he must be immediately consecrated a Bishop because the papacy entails the exercise of the episcopal office, but he is Pope from the moment he consents to the election. If the same person, at a certain point, declares that he can no longer fulfill the call to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, he loses the papal office and returns to the condition in which he was before giving the consent to be the Vicar of Christ on earth.”
Here, the Italian theologian explained the fundamental principle that “the papacy is not conferred by sacramental grace. It does not imprint an indelible character upon the soul. To the one who consents to be Pope and perseveres in the consent, the grace is given, as Our Lord promised, to be 'the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful' (Lumen Gentium, no. 23). Such a grace, by its very definition, is given to only one person at any given time.”
In conclusion, Monsignor Bux writes: “Our Lord gave Peter a single mandate – legal and spiritual at the same time – and asked the Apostles to support him through communion, cum et sub Petro (with and under Peter). Saint Paul explains it as: ‘sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum’ (care of all churches). Therefore, there is no Petrine primacy to share, but two indissoluble principles in permanent communion with one another: the Petrine primacy and the episcopal team-work (collegiality).”
As becomes clear here, the scholarly discussion concerning Pope Benedict's concept of his resignation is not yet closed.
Follow Maike Dr. Maike Hickson was born and raised in Germany. She holds a PhD from the University of Hannover, Germany, after having written in Switzerland her doctoral dissertation on the history of Swiss intellectuals before and during World War II. She now lives in the U.S. and is married to Dr. Robert Hickson, and they have been blessed with two beautiful children. She is a happy housewife who likes to write articles when time permits. Dr. Hickson published in 2014 a Festschrift, a collection of some thirty essays written by thoughtful authors in honor of her husband upon his 70th birthday, which is entitled A Catholic Witness in Our Time. Hickson has closely followed the papacy of Pope Francis and the developments in the Catholic Church in Germany, and she has been writing articles on religion and politics for U.S. and European publications and websites such as LifeSiteNews, OnePeterFive, The Wanderer, Rorate Caeli, Catholicism.org, Catholic Family News, Christian Order, Notizie Pro-Vita, Corrispondenza Romana, Katholisches.info, Der Dreizehnte, Zeit-Fragen, and Westfalen-Blatt.
Share