lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Was blasphemous Super Bowl halftime show a sign we’re living in the end times?

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Our Lord told us that no man knows the day or the hour when He will return ( Matt .
24:36–44 ) .
But that does not mean we would be without signs that we could not afford to ignore ( 2 Timothy 3:1–5 ) .
For those who are aware of current events in society and the Church , there is an abundance of such signs .
For example , in the just referenced scriptural passage , our Lord also said that when He comes , it will be like at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have observed , that was the only time in the history of the world , other than our own time , when same-sex “ marriage ” was legal .
Moreover , like many Christians who watched the Super Bowl recently , we had to turn off the halftime show , which was a hyper-sexual display resembling a frenzied pagan ritual .
It even went so far as to have a blasphemous mockery of the crucifixion of our Lord .
Yet that did not stop the cultural elites responsible for such content from also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Francisco team , or from Blue Shield showing two men kissing in one of the Super Bowl commercials .
Even the casual observer would have to acknowledge that those running the major networks and the NFL have abandoned Judeo-Christian values and are quickly going the way of Canada and Europe in their hostility toward traditional religious beliefs .
This does not come as a surprise to this author , who warned twelve years ago that the culture would be lost if the United States legalized same-sex “ marriage.
” Indeed , as this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been on the road to secularization for the last half a century .
What I did not anticipate , however , would be that even the current pope would part company with his predecessors in caving to the gay lobby .
What becomes legalized eventually becomes normalized , and then enforced , which is now happening with unprecedented speed .
For example , this author is representing a Christian female baker who is being sued by the State of California for refusing to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christian even though the court already ruled in her case that the making of a wedding cake is a form of expressive speech protected by the First Amendment .
The cultural elites who have ushered in this new morality will not tolerate any dissenters .
But again , this should come as no huge surprise to the well informed Catholic .
Indeed , our Blessed Mother related to a Fatima visionary over 100 years ago that the final battle would be over marriage and the family .
Well before that , Our Lady @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cataclysmic cultural events we are currently witnessing would come to pass in our lifetimes .
Our Lady further predicted the apostasy and conflicts within the Church that we have seen with such events as the scandal associated with the Pachamama pagan idols in the Vatican and most recently with the intended ordination of married men in the Amazon .
One can easily envision that the leftist leaders in the Church will keep pushing next for female deacons and priests , and then openly gay priests and bishops .
We have already seen that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anglicans , which has caused their organization much turmoil and division .
Since the Catholic Church has always served her followers as the repository for the fullness of the Truth , where will we turn if certain leaders in the Church fail to fulfill her mission on earth ?
As always , the answers can still be found in Holy Scripture and the timeless magisterial teachings clearly set forth in the Catechism of the Catholic Church .
Our Lord asked the question : when He returns , will He find faith on Earth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer to this question is that there will be a faithful remnant ( Rom .
11:1–5 ) .
And we can take continued comfort in the fact that our Lord promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church ( Matt .
16:18 ) .
Still , we must heed the signs of the times , even though no man knows the day or the hour of our Lord ’ s return .
The inevitable collapse of society , and the current crisis in the Church , should cause us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never before .
Our merciful and just God simply can not be expected to continue to tolerate indefinitely the wholesale corruption of the Christian civilization that the Church built , including her most vulnerable and innocent children .
Therefore , we must heed the warning : “ Above all , you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come , scoffing , and following their own evil desires ” ( 2 Peter 3:3 ) .
As witnessed during the Super Bowl halftime show , and in countless other ways , those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ force .
Charles LiMandri is the Chief Counsel of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund ( FCDF ) , which specializes in religious liberty cases .
He is double-board certified in pre-trial practice and trial advocacy by the National Board of Trial Advocacy , and he is admitted to practice law in California ; in New York ; in Washington , D.C. ; and before the United States Supreme Court .
The FCDF website is www.FCDFlegal.org .

Our Lord also said that when He comes, it will be like at the time of Noah. Things are beginning to look that way lately.
February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Our Lord told us that no man knows the day or the hour when He will return (Matt. 24:36–44). But that does not mean we would be without signs that we could not afford to ignore (2 Timothy 3:1–5). For those who are aware of current events in society and the Church, there is an abundance of such signs. For example, in the just referenced scriptural passage, our Lord also said that when He comes, it will be like at the time of Noah. As others have observed, that was the only time in the history of the world, other than our own time, when same-sex “marriage” was legal.
Moreover, like many Christians who watched the Super Bowl recently, we had to turn off the halftime show, which was a hyper-sexual display resembling a frenzied pagan ritual. It even went so far as to have a blasphemous mockery of the crucifixion of our Lord. Yet that did not stop the cultural elites responsible for such content from also spotlighting a lesbian coach of the San Francisco team, or from Blue Shield showing two men kissing in one of the Super Bowl commercials. Even the casual observer would have to acknowledge that those running the major networks and the NFL have abandoned Judeo-Christian values and are quickly going the way of Canada and Europe in their hostility toward traditional religious beliefs.
This does not come as a surprise to this author, who warned twelve years ago that the culture would be lost if the United States legalized same-sex “marriage.” Indeed, as this author further explained, the U.S. has been on the road to secularization for the last half a century. What I did not anticipate, however, would be that even the current pope would part company with his predecessors in caving to the gay lobby. What becomes legalized eventually becomes normalized, and then enforced, which is now happening with unprecedented speed.
For example, this author is representing a Christian female baker who is being sued by the State of California for refusing to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. The state is continuing to persecute this good Christian even though the court already ruled in her case that the making of a wedding cake is a form of expressive speech protected by the First Amendment. The cultural elites who have ushered in this new morality will not tolerate any dissenters. But again, this should come as no huge surprise to the well informed Catholic. Indeed, our Blessed Mother related to a Fatima visionary over 100 years ago that the final battle would be over marriage and the family.
Well before that, Our Lady warned in the sixteenth century that the cataclysmic cultural events we are currently witnessing would come to pass in our lifetimes. Our Lady further predicted the apostasy and conflicts within the Church that we have seen with such events as the scandal associated with the Pachamama pagan idols in the Vatican and most recently with the intended ordination of married men in the Amazon.
One can easily envision that the leftist leaders in the Church will keep pushing next for female deacons and priests, and then openly gay priests and bishops. We have already seen that progression of destructive events among the liberal Anglicans, which has caused their organization much turmoil and division. Since the Catholic Church has always served her followers as the repository for the fullness of the Truth, where will we turn if certain leaders in the Church fail to fulfill her mission on earth? As always, the answers can still be found in Holy Scripture and the timeless magisterial teachings clearly set forth in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Our Lord asked the question: when He returns, will He find faith on Earth (Lk. 18:8)? The answer to this question is that there will be a faithful remnant (Rom. 11:1–5). And we can take continued comfort in the fact that our Lord promised that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church (Matt. 16:18). Still, we must heed the signs of the times, even though no man knows the day or the hour of our Lord’s return. The inevitable collapse of society, and the current crisis in the Church, should cause us to ready ourselves for His return like never before.
Our merciful and just God simply cannot be expected to continue to tolerate indefinitely the wholesale corruption of the Christian civilization that the Church built, including her most vulnerable and innocent children. Therefore, we must heed the warning: “Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing, and following their own evil desires” (2 Peter 3:3). As witnessed during the Super Bowl halftime show, and in countless other ways, those brazen scoffers are already here in full force.
Charles LiMandri is the Chief Counsel of the Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund (FCDF), which specializes in religious liberty cases. He is double-board certified in pre-trial practice and trial advocacy by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, and he is admitted to practice law in California; in New York; in Washington, D.C.; and before the United States Supreme Court. The FCDF website is www.FCDFlegal.org.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Switzerland votes to criminalize ‘homophobia’

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The Swiss have voted by a large majority to make “ homophobia ” a criminal offense .
On Sunday , 63.1 percent of the voters who turned out for several popular initiative referendums agreed that “ discrimination , ” “ hate speech ” and other forms of public “ insults ” aimed at homosexuals because of their “ sexual orientation ” will be punishable by a fine and up to three years ’ imprisonment .
During the run-up to Sunday ’ s vote , the Catholic hierarchy in Switzerland was mostly conspicuous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With the new legislation , the aggravating circumstance of a victim 's homosexuality will be added to the original 1994 anti-discrimination and hate speech law in Switzerland 's penal code that already criminalized discrimination on the basis of race or religion .
How it will be applied in practice will be determined by jurisprudence .
To date , sanctions for discrimination and hate speech under the original law are usually limited to fines , only rarely moving up the scale to a suspended prison sentence .
However , the basis for public control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has now been laid and the door has been opened to thought police on the subject .
Moreover , LGBT groups have already made clear that they plan to capitalize on the success of their agenda : they now want hate speech laws to “ protect ” trans people and “ gender identity ” and are already campaigning in that direction .
Sunday 's vote is also expected to reopen the issue of same-sex “ marriage , ” adoption and medically assisted procreation for lesbians in Switzerland , where to date , only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Among public acts and statements that from now on will be punishable by law , it is expected that calling homosexuality an “ illness ” or suggesting treatment for it will be considered as hate speech .
It will also become illegal to refuse to serve clients because they are homosexuals , including in restaurants , swimming pools , guesthouses or hotels .
With a near two-thirds majority for the expansion of the Swiss anti-discrimination law to include homosexuals , lesbians and bisexuals , it could be argued that there is large @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community .
But the turnout for the referendum did not exceed 41 percent of potential voters , which means only about one in four Swiss registered as voters actually approved the new measure .
Fifty-nine percent had no opinion or did n't care .
Voters against were even less numerous , though , indicating that the issue of homosexuality and LGBT rights is no longer seen as a political , societal or moral problem .
The opening of civil unions to same-sex couples was already adopted by a clear majority in 2005 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approving their creation in a popular referendum .
Years of propaganda are evidently bearing fruit .
The expansion of the anti-discrimination law was at first brought to Parliament by Swiss Socialist party member Mathias Reynard seven years ago , with the support of the left and the ecologists .
In fact , both chambers adopted his proposed law in 2018 in Bern .
Two Conservative political formations , the UDC ( Democratic Union of the Center ) which is today Switzerland ’ s largest single party , and the UDF ( Federal Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the law , via a campaign to impose a popular vote .
By April 2019 , they had obtained the necessary 50,000 signatures required for the organization of a popular referendum .
Finally , their efforts were of no avail against the steamroller of political correctness , largely operated by the media , which are no less liberal in Switzerland than anywhere else .
Also , according to Mathias Reynard , this “ evolution of society ” toward more “ tolerance and human rights ” was obtained through “ perseverance ” on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heavily ” in order to obtain their win .
This victory was more visible in the French-speaking parts of Switzerland , which are also the more Catholic ones .
Support for the new law was weaker in the German-speaking , widely Protestant cantons that are more attached to “ freedom of expression , ” according to local commentators .
The cantons of Appenzell-Innerrhoden , Uri and Schwyz , all voted against the penalization of homophobia .
The Catholic Bishops ’ Conference ( CES ) was remarkably cautious about the suggested new scope of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a February 3 article , 24heures.ch noted that the Catholic Church had chosen to remain silent .
“ The doctrine of the Catholic Church expresses itself with out exception against all calls to hate and discrimination against persons or groups , ” was the comment placed on the Swiss Bishops ’ Conference website .
“ It will be up to citizens to judge whether this principle is already sufficiently enshrined in the existing legislation or whether it should be extended , ” it said .
According to Encarnación Berger-Lobato , spokeswoman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack of courage .
“ The Bishops ’ Conference recognizes that homosexual persons need protection .
But as the legal profession is not unanimous as to the fact whether a modification of the penal norm is the most useful and effective way to obtain that , it has decided not to express a position .
This is not linked to a theological argumentation , but to a juridical one.
” Whatever that meant , it clearly indicated that the Church was in favor of “ protecting ” homosexuals from what they call hate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concepts are widely used in many countries not to prevent bodily harm or unjust differences of treatment , a protection to which all citizens are entitled as such , but in order to preclude any kind of criticism or negativity against groups that are presented as “ oppressed minorities.
” The ultimate implementation of such laws is usually “ positive discrimination , ” giving extra rights to the said “ minorities.
” One exception among the Swiss bishops was Auxiliary Bishop Marian Eleganti of Coire .
Before the vote , in an op-ed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Because of anti-discrimination laws , we are going to be reduced to silence and punished by decisions of the courts.
” Alexandre Curchod , the Swiss lawyer specializing in freedom of expression , downplayed the force of Switzerland 's future anti-hate speech law , recalling that its application will be subject to “ strict criteria , ” and that only public speech will be punishable .
But this includes remarks on public social media .
Curchod also confirmed that under the new measures it will become a penal offence to refuse to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hotel room .
Calling homosexuality an “ illness ” would probably also be considered “ hate-speech ” because , he said , “ they amount to attacking the dignity of homosexuals.
” But these issues will be open to interpretation on the part of the courts .
Asked whether religious groups who say that homosexuality is a “ sin ” will be able to continue to do so freely , Curchod responded , “ If they do that within a community , in a limited circle , they can not be punished .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ publicly in order to be heard beyond the community , they could constitute an offence.
” Interestingly , some homosexuals did oppose the adoption of a specific anti-discrimination law in their favor .
Michael Frauchiger , co-president of a committee dubbed “ Special rights NO !
” , said , “ I campaign for the acceptance and normalization of my sexuality .
But for me , normalization also signifies not to demand special rights.
” According to Frauchiger , these ultimately contribute to the “ stigmatizing ” of homosexuals .
Eric Bertinat , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president of Perspectives catholiques , commented on radiolac.ch : “ Firstly , the new law is not justified because a penal law already exists .
Secondly , a penal law is something serious .
The simple fact of being accused makes that you really will be held accountable .
And most importantly , it really gives a thought tribunal to a lobby , a group – and historically , that is not at all what we want in Switzerland .
On the contrary , we always seek an overall vision .
In this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a group in order for it to defend its prerogatives .
We already know in which direction they are heading : ‘ marriage for all , ’ adoption and many other demands which we , of course , shall be opposing.
” This last point was confirmed even before Sunday 's vote when an online survey by Tamedia between February 6 and February 8 revealed that 61 percent of Swiss citizens support “ married for all , ” including the right to adopt .
Fifty-eight percent are even prepared to go further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including access to medically assisted procreation with donor sperm for lesbian couples .
Only sympathizers of the UDC said they were opposed to these “ rights.
” Muriel Waeger , who co-directed the campaign for the anti-homophobia law , interpreted the survey and Sunday 's vote as a clear indication that “ complete marriage for all ” is underway and could be adopted by the parliament in Bern .

February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Swiss have voted by a large majority to make “homophobia” a criminal offense.
On Sunday, 63.1 percent of the voters who turned out for several popular initiative referendums agreed that “discrimination,” “hate speech” and other forms of public “insults” aimed at homosexuals because of their “sexual orientation” will be punishable by a fine and up to three years’ imprisonment.
During the run-up to Sunday’s vote, the Catholic hierarchy in Switzerland was mostly conspicuous by its absence from the debate.
With the new legislation, the aggravating circumstance of a victim's homosexuality will be added to the original 1994 anti-discrimination and hate speech law in Switzerland's penal code that already criminalized discrimination on the basis of race or religion. How it will be applied in practice will be determined by jurisprudence. To date, sanctions for discrimination and hate speech under the original law are usually limited to fines, only rarely moving up the scale to a suspended prison sentence.
However, the basis for public control of opinion on the question of homosexuality has now been laid and the door has been opened to thought police on the subject. Moreover, LGBT groups have already made clear that they plan to capitalize on the success of their agenda: they now want hate speech laws to “protect” trans people and “gender identity” and are already campaigning in that direction.
Sunday's vote is also expected to reopen the issue of same-sex “marriage,” adoption and medically assisted procreation for lesbians in Switzerland, where to date, only civil unions are open to same-sex couples.
Among public acts and statements that from now on will be punishable by law, it is expected that calling homosexuality an “illness” or suggesting treatment for it will be considered as hate speech. It will also become illegal to refuse to serve clients because they are homosexuals, including in restaurants, swimming pools, guesthouses or hotels.
With a near two-thirds majority for the expansion of the Swiss anti-discrimination law to include homosexuals, lesbians and bisexuals, it could be argued that there is large popular support for the “LGB” community. But the turnout for the referendum did not exceed 41 percent of potential voters, which means only about one in four Swiss registered as voters actually approved the new measure. Fifty-nine percent had no opinion or didn't care.
Voters against were even less numerous, though, indicating that the issue of homosexuality and LGBT rights is no longer seen as a political, societal or moral problem. The opening of civil unions to same-sex couples was already adopted by a clear majority in 2005 in Switzerland, with 58 percent of voters approving their creation in a popular referendum. Years of propaganda are evidently bearing fruit.
The expansion of the anti-discrimination law was at first brought to Parliament by Swiss Socialist party member Mathias Reynard seven years ago, with the support of the left and the ecologists. In fact, both chambers adopted his proposed law in 2018 in Bern.
Two Conservative political formations, the UDC (Democratic Union of the Center) which is today Switzerland’s largest single party, and the UDF (Federal Democratic Union) then went into frontal opposition against the law, via a campaign to impose a popular vote. By April 2019, they had obtained the necessary 50,000 signatures required for the organization of a popular referendum.
Finally, their efforts were of no avail against the steamroller of political correctness, largely operated by the media, which are no less liberal in Switzerland than anywhere else.
Also, according to Mathias Reynard, this “evolution of society” toward more “tolerance and human rights” was obtained through “perseverance” on the part of “associations that worked heavily” in order to obtain their win. This victory was more visible in the French-speaking parts of Switzerland, which are also the more Catholic ones. Support for the new law was weaker in the German-speaking, widely Protestant cantons that are more attached to “freedom of expression,” according to local commentators. The cantons of Appenzell-Innerrhoden, Uri and Schwyz, all voted against the penalization of homophobia.
The Catholic Bishops’ Conference (CES) was remarkably cautious about the suggested new scope of Switzerland’s “anti-racist” laws. In a February 3 article, 24heures.ch noted that the Catholic Church had chosen to remain silent.
“The doctrine of the Catholic Church expresses itself with out exception against all calls to hate and discrimination against persons or groups,” was the comment placed on the Swiss Bishops’ Conference website. “It will be up to citizens to judge whether this principle is already sufficiently enshrined in the existing legislation or whether it should be extended,” it said.
According to Encarnación Berger-Lobato, spokeswoman of the CES, this was no lack of courage. “The Bishops’ Conference recognizes that homosexual persons need protection. But as the legal profession is not unanimous as to the fact whether a modification of the penal norm is the most useful and effective way to obtain that, it has decided not to express a position. This is not linked to a theological argumentation, but to a juridical one.”
Whatever that meant, it clearly indicated that the Church was in favor of “protecting” homosexuals from what they call hate speech and discrimination, even though both concepts are widely used in many countries not to prevent bodily harm or unjust differences of treatment, a protection to which all citizens are entitled as such, but in order to preclude any kind of criticism or negativity against groups that are presented as “oppressed minorities.” The ultimate implementation of such laws is usually “positive discrimination,” giving extra rights to the said “minorities.”
One exception among the Swiss bishops was Auxiliary Bishop Marian Eleganti of Coire. Before the vote, in an op-ed published in January, he prophesied: “Because of anti-discrimination laws, we are going to be reduced to silence and punished by decisions of the courts.”
Alexandre Curchod, the Swiss lawyer specializing in freedom of expression, downplayed the force of Switzerland's future anti-hate speech law, recalling that its application will be subject to “strict criteria,” and that only public speech will be punishable. But this includes remarks on public social media.
Curchod also confirmed that under the new measures it will become a penal offence to refuse to accommodate a same-sex couple together in a hotel room. Calling homosexuality an “illness” would probably also be considered “hate-speech” because, he said, “they amount to attacking the dignity of homosexuals.” But these issues will be open to interpretation on the part of the courts.
Asked whether religious groups who say that homosexuality is a “sin” will be able to continue to do so freely, Curchod responded, “If they do that within a community, in a limited circle, they cannot be punished. However, if these comments are made publicly in order to be heard beyond the community, they could constitute an offence.”
Interestingly, some homosexuals did oppose the adoption of a specific anti-discrimination law in their favor.
Michael Frauchiger, co-president of a committee dubbed “Special rights NO!”, said, “I campaign for the acceptance and normalization of my sexuality. But for me, normalization also signifies not to demand special rights.” According to Frauchiger, these ultimately contribute to the “stigmatizing” of homosexuals.
Eric Bertinat, UDC, municipal councillor of Geneva and president of Perspectives catholiques, commented on radiolac.ch:
“Firstly, the new law is not justified because a penal law already exists. Secondly, a penal law is something serious. The simple fact of being accused makes that you really will be held accountable. And most importantly, it really gives a thought tribunal to a lobby, a group – and historically, that is not at all what we want in Switzerland. On the contrary, we always seek an overall vision. In this case, we are really giving arms to a group in order for it to defend its prerogatives. We already know in which direction they are heading: ‘marriage for all,’ adoption and many other demands which we, of course, shall be opposing.”
This last point was confirmed even before Sunday's vote when an online survey by Tamedia between February 6 and February 8 revealed that 61 percent of Swiss citizens support “married for all,” including the right to adopt. Fifty-eight percent are even prepared to go further, favoring “complete” marriage rights, including access to medically assisted procreation with donor sperm for lesbian couples. Only sympathizers of the UDC said they were opposed to these “rights.”
Muriel Waeger, who co-directed the campaign for the anti-homophobia law, interpreted the survey and Sunday's vote as a clear indication that “complete marriage for all” is underway and could be adopted by the parliament in Bern.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Attack on celibacy puts priesthood in ‘mortal danger,’ warns Cdl Sarah

ROME , Italy , February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Cardinal Robert Sarah has declared that the Catholic priesthood is “ in mortal danger ” and “ going through a major crisis ” because of the push from various voices within the Church to abolish priestly celibacy .
The African prelate called out those who want to make celibacy optional .
“ By attacking the celibacy of priests , you are attacking the Church and her mystery , ” he said .
Ahead of the publication of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation “ Querida Amazonia ” on Wednesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to open the doors to married priests , Cardinal Sarah told Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register that faithful Catholics are not asking for priestly celibacy to be overturned .
“ The ordination of married men is a fantasy of Western academics who are in search of violations .
I want to affirm it forcefully : The poor , the simple , rank-and-file Christians do not demand an end to celibacy , ” he said .
Sarah , the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Church who would like to “ relativize the celibacy of priests.
” “ That would be a catastrophe !
For celibacy is the most obvious manifestation that the priest belongs to Christ and that he no longer belongs to himself .
Celibacy is the sign of a life that has meaning only through God and for him , ” he said , “ To want to ordain married men is to imply that priestly life is not full time , that it does not require a complete gift , that it leaves one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profession , that it leaves time free for a private life .
But this is false .
A priest remains a priest at all times .
Priestly ordination is not first of all a generous commitment ; it is a consecration of our whole being , an indelible conformation of our soul to Christ , the priest , who demands from us permanent conversion in order to correspond to him .
Celibacy is the unquestionable sign that being a priest supposes allowing oneself to be entirely possessed by God .
To call it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the priesthood , ” he added .
With a contribution by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI , Cardinal Sarah has recently published a book defending priestly celibacy .
Sarah pointed to Germany , where married priests have been discussed for a long time , and more forcefully since the launch of the “ synodal path.
” “ But I am uneasy .
In Germany , a strange synod clearly envisages the questioning of celibacy .
I wanted to cry out my concern : Do not tear the Church apart !
By attacking the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Church and her mystery , ” he said .
Explaining that those who attack celibacy want to make the Church a purely human institution , “ within our power , within our reach , ” the cardinal continued , “ It means renouncing the mystery of the Church as God ’ s gift.
” If married men in the Amazon region were allowed to become priests , Sarah argued , that “ would prohibit the raising of vocations of unmarried priests .
The exception would become a permanent state.
” Asked about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ married , namely as part of the Anglican Ordinariate and the Eastern churches , Sarah clarified that those exceptions constitute “ a parenthesis in the normal and natural state of things.
” At the same time , he said , “ the lack of a priest is not an exception , ” especially in nascent or dying churches .
Cardinal Sarah also attempted to dispel a number of myths surrounding the question of married priests .
Even though married priests did indeed exist in the first few centuries of the Church , after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to abstain completely from sexual relations with their wives.
” Referring to the Council of Elvira in 305 , Sarah made clear that one of the first concerns of the Church after the age of martyrdom was “ to affirm that priests must abstain from sexual relations with their wives.
” He quoted the council itself , which stated , “ It was unanimously agreed that bishops , priests and deacons , that is to say , all clerics constituted in the ministry , should abstain from their wives and should not bear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had sexual relations ) should be declared to be deprived of the clerical office.
” In January , Cardinal Gerhard Müller said that the Eastern churches , by allowing married priests , had departed “ from the tradition of the early Church.
” Cardinal Sarah echoed this assessment .
“ It was only much later , because of the corruption of the texts , that the East would evolve in its discipline , without ever renouncing the ontological link between priesthood and abstinence.
” Apart from historical considerations , Sarah also sees practical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doubting the holiness of married priests in Eastern churches .
“ If a priest is married , then he has a private life , a conjugal and family life .
He must make time for his wife and children .
He is unable to show , by his whole life , that he is totally and absolutely given to God and the Church.
” Starting with statements by former Pope Benedict XVI , Cardinal Sarah stated that he has shown “ that at the root of the abuses committed by clerics , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ They wanted to make the priest a man like any other .
Some priests were formed without putting God , prayer , the celebration of Mass , the ardent search for holiness at the center of their lives , ” Sarah elaborated .
According to the African cardinal , priests were formed without teaching them about God as their only support , “ without making them experience that their lives only have meaning through God and for him.
” If God is taken out of the equation , the priest is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continued .
“ If a priest doesn ’ t daily experience ( that ) he is only an instrument in God ’ s hands , if he doesn ’ t stand constantly before God to serve him with all his heart , then he risks becoming intoxicated with a sense of power .
If a priest ’ s life is not a consecrated life , then he is in great danger of illusion and diversion , ” Sarah cautioned .
Cardinal Sarah briefly commented on the rollout of the book From the Depths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Emeritus Benedict XVI had contributed .
Sarah accused the opponents of the priesthood of making the former Pope out to be an old man .
He then asked , “ But have you read what he writes ?
Do you think one can write pages of such depth without having all one ’ s faculties ?
” He further accused “ some people ” of trying “ to make us believe that our publishers have manipulated us and have taken advantage of a misunderstanding to mount I don ’ t know what kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ false !
There is no misunderstanding .
Our French publisher has simply implemented what I personally worked out with the Pope emeritus.
” In this context , Sarah praised his French publisher Fayard , with which he had already worked on many other projects , including his trilogy of interview books that were written together with Nicolas Diat .
“ All these polemics are a diversionary tactic to avoid talking about the essential , the content of the book , ” Sarah is convinced .
French newspaper Le Figaro first reported on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the original edition of the book on celibacy portrayed Benedict as a co-author , including a photo of the former Pope the same size as that of Sarah .
Archbishop Georg Gänswein , prefect of the Papal Household and private secretary of the former Pope , said January 14 that he had called Cardinal Sarah “ at Benedict ’ s request , to ask the book ’ s publisher to remove the signature of the Pope emeritus from the introduction and conclusion , because he had not co-authored them.
” Following the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement , “ The polemic which has aimed to tarnish me for several hours by implying that Benedict was not informed of the appearance of the book ‘ From the Depths of Our Hearts ’ is completely despicable.
” While the first edition of the book , for reasons of time , was still printed portraying the Pope emeritus as a co-author , future editions were announced as only referring to him as a contributor .
The publisher of the English version , Ignatius Press , maintains that Benedict is a co-author .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to Benedict XVI ’ s correspondence and Cardinal Sarah ’ s statement , the two men collaborated on this book for several months , that none of the essays have appeared elsewhere , and that a joint work as defined by the Chicago Manual of Style is ‘ a work prepared by two or more authors with the intention that their contribution be merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole , ’ Ignatius Press considers this a co-authored publication.
” Archbishop Gänswein later said the introduction and the conclusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only by the cardinal , even though the French publisher said otherwise .
The German archbishop has not been seen with Pope Francis at his Wednesday audiences for almost a month , which the Vatican claims is “ due to ordinary redistribution of the various commitments and duties .
”

The African cardinal said that by ‘attacking the celibacy of priests, you are attacking the Church and her mystery.’
ROME, Italy, February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Robert Sarah has declared that the Catholic priesthood is “in mortal danger” and “going through a major crisis” because of the push from various voices within the Church to abolish priestly celibacy. The African prelate called out those who want to make celibacy optional.
“By attacking the celibacy of priests, you are attacking the Church and her mystery,” he said.
Ahead of the publication of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation “Querida Amazonia” on Wednesday, February 12, which has been rumored to open the doors to married priests, Cardinal Sarah told Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register that faithful Catholics are not asking for priestly celibacy to be overturned.
“The ordination of married men is a fantasy of Western academics who are in search of violations. I want to affirm it forcefully: The poor, the simple, rank-and-file Christians do not demand an end to celibacy,” he said.
Sarah, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, said there are voices within the Church who would like to “relativize the celibacy of priests.”
“That would be a catastrophe! For celibacy is the most obvious manifestation that the priest belongs to Christ and that he no longer belongs to himself. Celibacy is the sign of a life that has meaning only through God and for him,” he said,
“To want to ordain married men is to imply that priestly life is not full time, that it does not require a complete gift, that it leaves one free for other commitments such as a profession, that it leaves time free for a private life. But this is false. A priest remains a priest at all times. Priestly ordination is not first of all a generous commitment; it is a consecration of our whole being, an indelible conformation of our soul to Christ, the priest, who demands from us permanent conversion in order to correspond to him. Celibacy is the unquestionable sign that being a priest supposes allowing oneself to be entirely possessed by God. To call it into question would seriously aggravate the crisis of the priesthood,” he added.
With a contribution by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, Cardinal Sarah has recently published a book defending priestly celibacy.
Sarah pointed to Germany, where married priests have been discussed for a long time, and more forcefully since the launch of the “synodal path.”
“But I am uneasy. In Germany, a strange synod clearly envisages the questioning of celibacy. I wanted to cry out my concern: Do not tear the Church apart! By attacking the celibacy of priests, you are attacking the Church and her mystery,” he said.
Explaining that those who attack celibacy want to make the Church a purely human institution, “within our power, within our reach,” the cardinal continued, “It means renouncing the mystery of the Church as God’s gift.”
If married men in the Amazon region were allowed to become priests, Sarah argued, that “would prohibit the raising of vocations of unmarried priests. The exception would become a permanent state.”
Asked about priests within the Catholic Church who are married, namely as part of the Anglican Ordinariate and the Eastern churches, Sarah clarified that those exceptions constitute “a parenthesis in the normal and natural state of things.” At the same time, he said, “the lack of a priest is not an exception,” especially in nascent or dying churches.
Cardinal Sarah also attempted to dispel a number of myths surrounding the question of married priests. Even though married priests did indeed exist in the first few centuries of the Church, after their ordination, “they were required to abstain completely from sexual relations with their wives.”
Referring to the Council of Elvira in 305, Sarah made clear that one of the first concerns of the Church after the age of martyrdom was “to affirm that priests must abstain from sexual relations with their wives.”
He quoted the council itself, which stated, “It was unanimously agreed that bishops, priests and deacons, that is to say, all clerics constituted in the ministry, should abstain from their wives and should not bear children; whoever has done so (had sexual relations) should be declared to be deprived of the clerical office.”
In January, Cardinal Gerhard Müller said that the Eastern churches, by allowing married priests, had departed “from the tradition of the early Church.”
Cardinal Sarah echoed this assessment. “It was only much later, because of the corruption of the texts, that the East would evolve in its discipline, without ever renouncing the ontological link between priesthood and abstinence.”
Apart from historical considerations, Sarah also sees practical problems with having married priests, without doubting the holiness of married priests in Eastern churches. “If a priest is married, then he has a private life, a conjugal and family life. He must make time for his wife and children. He is unable to show, by his whole life, that he is totally and absolutely given to God and the Church.”
Starting with statements by former Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Sarah stated that he has shown “that at the root of the abuses committed by clerics, there is a deep flaw in their formation.”
“They wanted to make the priest a man like any other. Some priests were formed without putting God, prayer, the celebration of Mass, the ardent search for holiness at the center of their lives,” Sarah elaborated.
According to the African cardinal, priests were formed without teaching them about God as their only support, “without making them experience that their lives only have meaning through God and for him.” If God is taken out of the equation, the priest is left with nothing but power, Sarah continued.
“If a priest doesn’t daily experience (that) he is only an instrument in God’s hands, if he doesn’t stand constantly before God to serve him with all his heart, then he risks becoming intoxicated with a sense of power. If a priest’s life is not a consecrated life, then he is in great danger of illusion and diversion,” Sarah cautioned.
Cardinal Sarah briefly commented on the rollout of the book From the Depths of Our Hearts, to which Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI had contributed.
Sarah accused the opponents of the priesthood of making the former Pope out to be an old man. He then asked, “But have you read what he writes? Do you think one can write pages of such depth without having all one’s faculties?”
He further accused “some people” of trying “to make us believe that our publishers have manipulated us and have taken advantage of a misunderstanding to mount I don’t know what kind of communication stunt. This is totally false! There is no misunderstanding. Our French publisher has simply implemented what I personally worked out with the Pope emeritus.”
In this context, Sarah praised his French publisher Fayard, with which he had already worked on many other projects, including his trilogy of interview books that were written together with Nicolas Diat. “All these polemics are a diversionary tactic to avoid talking about the essential, the content of the book,” Sarah is convinced.
French newspaper Le Figaro first reported on the book on January 12. The cover of the original edition of the book on celibacy portrayed Benedict as a co-author, including a photo of the former Pope the same size as that of Sarah.
Archbishop Georg Gänswein, prefect of the Papal Household and private secretary of the former Pope, said January 14 that he had called Cardinal Sarah “at Benedict’s request, to ask the book’s publisher to remove the signature of the Pope emeritus from the introduction and conclusion, because he had not co-authored them.”
Following the first backlash, Sarah said in a statement, “The polemic which has aimed to tarnish me for several hours by implying that Benedict was not informed of the appearance of the book ‘From the Depths of Our Hearts’ is completely despicable.”
While the first edition of the book, for reasons of time, was still printed portraying the Pope emeritus as a co-author, future editions were announced as only referring to him as a contributor.
The publisher of the English version, Ignatius Press, maintains that Benedict is a co-author. They argued: “Given that, according to Benedict XVI’s correspondence and Cardinal Sarah’s statement, the two men collaborated on this book for several months, that none of the essays have appeared elsewhere, and that a joint work as defined by the Chicago Manual of Style is ‘a work prepared by two or more authors with the intention that their contribution be merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole,’ Ignatius Press considers this a co-authored publication.”
Archbishop Gänswein later said the introduction and the conclusion were not written by both, but only by the cardinal, even though the French publisher said otherwise.
The German archbishop has not been seen with Pope Francis at his Wednesday audiences for almost a month, which the Vatican claims is “due to ordinary redistribution of the various commitments and duties.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Pope Francis’s post–Amazon Synod exhortation could be worse than everyone thinks

February 10 , 2020 ( The Catholic Thing ) — This week may mark a watershed in modern Catholicism .
On Wednesday , the Amazonia Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation will be released ( more on that later in the week ) .
Ever since that head-spinning event ( Pachamama was only the most conspicuous disorder ) , we have seemed to be headed to major changes on priestly celibacy , deaconesses , and — in several respects — the very nature of the Church .
It ’ s rumored in Rome that Pope Francis may have retreated a bit on those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controversy over the Cardinal Sarah/Benedict XVI book defending priestly celibacy .
The Exhortation may “ only ” recommend establishing a commission on celibacy .
If true , we ’ ll still have yet another case of papal ambiguity .
The faithful will be left trying to determine whether the commission is intended really to “ study , ” or to create an expectation — as happened in the 1960s , with the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control .
Either way , by intention or not , the current papacy has brought back something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election of Karol Wojtyla : the feeling that virtually everything in the Church is up for grabs , not only celibacy and deaconesses , but marriage , sexuality , Hell , the Devil , Communion , teaching authority .
Jorge Bergoglio may be pope in Rome , but it often seems these days that many of the ideas he entertains are manufactured in Germany .
During the German synod in recent days , for instance , a laywoman dismissed Cardinal Woelki ’ s objections that a mixed clerical/lay group convened to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — of the real nature of the Church .
She asserted , on her own authority , that his “ model of authority ” was no longer valid .
Francis has issued some statements opposed to such assumptions , to little effect .
But why not ?
High figures in the Vatican make up their own rules , as well .
The pope met recently with the Argentine president , Alberto Fernandez , who is pro-abortion , divorced , and living with a “ domestic partner ” ( his second since divorcing ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanchez Sorondo , another Argentinean , head of the Pontifical Council for the Social Sciences , from giving them both Communion at Mass .
Sanchez Sorondo called American journalist Diane Montagna and other Americans who raise questions about such laxness “ fanatics.
” Are you a fanatic if you believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church ?
The Argentine president and his girlfriend may have gone to Confession and promised to live chastely .
And repented of intentions to legalize baby killing .
However unlikely , that would be welcome .
But if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear to remove any possibility of scandal or confusion about Church disciplines — far preferable to slandering people who take reception of the Eucharist seriously .
Benedict XVI ’ s personal secretary , Archbishop George Ganswein , it appears ( no one in Rome seems to want to know or say for sure ) , was sidelined from his position as Prefect of the Papal Household last week owing to the flap over that book on celibacy .
Somehow you get the impression that Bishop Sanchez Sorondo ’ s cavalier attitude about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” of the Christian life ( Lumen Gentium 11 ) , will not put him in jeopardy .
The Exhortation that will be released Wednesday , however , will not only have major repercussions within the Church .
Given the centrality of priesthood and celibacy , it will be easy to overlook that the Amazon synod addressed various worldly matters such as environment and economics as well .
The world pays very little attention these days to what the Catholic Church has to say — unless , of course , the Church is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what they already want to do , as with climate change and open borders .
That ’ s a tragedy — for the world — because without Catholic Social Teaching ( CST ) , the world ( as becomes more evident hourly ) has no idea what human life is , or what it ’ s for .
Even the modern notion of human rights , absent God and the idea of man as made in His image and likeness , is a mere abstraction that quickly degenerates into self-destructive willfulness on questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there ’ s another reason that CST attracts so little attention : the often quite poor and partisan way that Catholic principles are misapplied — by popes , bishops , priests — to real-world situations that don ’ t remotely correspond to their assumptions .
And not only in rhapsodic flights about indigenous peoples living in the Amazon .
For example , Bishop Sanchez Sorondo famously opined after a trip to China , “ Right now , those who are best implementing the social doctrine of the Church are the Chinese.
” Can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that : China is a world-class polluter , practices social surveillance and repression like no other nation on earth , and is subjecting religious believers to persecution , re-education , and outright martyrdom ?
Pope Francis himself has said repeatedly that a Third World War is currently being fought , but in piecemeal fashion , so that we don ’ t notice .
If so , we should be able to look and see what he ’ s saying .
But there ’ s nothing to see .
During the Cold War , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Cuba , Nicaragua , El Salvador , Chile , Angola , Vietnam , etc .
But that was decades ago .
Today , militant Islam is engaged in terrorism and re-establishing the caliphate .
All the decent nations in the world seek to stop it .
And despite the dozens of small armed conflicts that always exist at any given moment , it ’ s difficult to see how all that adds up to global war , except in the sense that the fallen world is always at war with itself .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy kills.
” And it does , as all economies do .
But we have a global economic system that , for all its flaws , is something quite close to a miracle .
And in large-scale economic terms is constantly improving .
Just the other day at a special Vatican seminar on economics , he called for global wealth redistribution and pointed out that 5 million children die worldwide every year from preventable causes .
Five million dead is terrible , but it ’ s down from 12 million not long ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ save the children.
” Fifty-three million children , more than ten times the number who die because of poverty , are aborted every year — without anything like special Vatican initiatives .
It ’ s unrealistic , I suppose , to expect the pope or bishops to Google some of these questions and look at what ’ s actually happening in the world .
They prefer old socialist or new radical perspectives — troubled teenager Greta Thunberg , to a sober Scandinavian environmentalist like Bjørn Lomborg ; Pachamama romanticism to the hard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moral pronouncements sound wise and compassionate , but in current circumstances , are very poor contributions to public affairs .
Keep an eye out , of course , for how celibacy , deaconesses , and Church governance are treated in the coming Exhortation .
But don ’ t forget that there ’ s a world of other problems in play as well .
Published with permission from The Catholic Thing .

By intention or not, the current papacy has brought back something that we thought died in 1978.
February 10, 2020 (The Catholic Thing) — This week may mark a watershed in modern Catholicism. On Wednesday, the Amazonia Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation will be released (more on that later in the week). Ever since that head-spinning event (Pachamama was only the most conspicuous disorder), we have seemed to be headed to major changes on priestly celibacy, deaconesses, and — in several respects — the very nature of the Church.
It’s rumored in Rome that Pope Francis may have retreated a bit on those issues now, perhaps owing to the controversy over the Cardinal Sarah/Benedict XVI book defending priestly celibacy. The Exhortation may “only” recommend establishing a commission on celibacy. If true, we’ll still have yet another case of papal ambiguity. The faithful will be left trying to determine whether the commission is intended really to “study,” or to create an expectation — as happened in the 1960s, with the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control.
Either way, by intention or not, the current papacy has brought back something that we thought died in 1978 with the election of Karol Wojtyla: the feeling that virtually everything in the Church is up for grabs, not only celibacy and deaconesses, but marriage, sexuality, Hell, the Devil, Communion, teaching authority. Jorge Bergoglio may be pope in Rome, but it often seems these days that many of the ideas he entertains are manufactured in Germany.
During the German synod in recent days, for instance, a laywoman dismissed Cardinal Woelki’s objections that a mixed clerical/lay group convened to make rules is a denial — a Protestantization — of the real nature of the Church. She asserted, on her own authority, that his “model of authority” was no longer valid. Francis has issued some statements opposed to such assumptions, to little effect.
But why not? High figures in the Vatican make up their own rules, as well. The pope met recently with the Argentine president, Alberto Fernandez, who is pro-abortion, divorced, and living with a “domestic partner” (his second since divorcing). None of that stopped Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, another Argentinean, head of the Pontifical Council for the Social Sciences, from giving them both Communion at Mass. Sanchez Sorondo called American journalist Diane Montagna and other Americans who raise questions about such laxness “fanatics.”
Are you a fanatic if you believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church?
Anyone who desires to receive Christ in Eucharistic communion must be in the state of grace. Anyone aware of having sinned mortally must not receive communion without having received absolution in the sacrament of penance. [CCC1415]
The Argentine president and his girlfriend may have gone to Confession and promised to live chastely. And repented of intentions to legalize baby killing. However unlikely, that would be welcome. But if so, that could have been made clear to remove any possibility of scandal or confusion about Church disciplines — far preferable to slandering people who take reception of the Eucharist seriously.
Benedict XVI’s personal secretary, Archbishop George Ganswein, it appears (no one in Rome seems to want to know or say for sure), was sidelined from his position as Prefect of the Papal Household last week owing to the flap over that book on celibacy. Somehow you get the impression that Bishop Sanchez Sorondo’s cavalier attitude about the Eucharist, “the source and summit” of the Christian life (Lumen Gentium 11), will not put him in jeopardy.
The Exhortation that will be released Wednesday, however, will not only have major repercussions within the Church. Given the centrality of priesthood and celibacy, it will be easy to overlook that the Amazon synod addressed various worldly matters such as environment and economics as well.
The world pays very little attention these days to what the Catholic Church has to say — unless, of course, the Church is encouraging “world leaders” to do what they already want to do, as with climate change and open borders.
That’s a tragedy — for the world — because without Catholic Social Teaching (CST), the world (as becomes more evident hourly) has no idea what human life is, or what it’s for. Even the modern notion of human rights, absent God and the idea of man as made in His image and likeness, is a mere abstraction that quickly degenerates into self-destructive willfulness on questions like abortion and sexual identity.
But there’s another reason that CST attracts so little attention: the often quite poor and partisan way that Catholic principles are misapplied — by popes, bishops, priests — to real-world situations that don’t remotely correspond to their assumptions. And not only in rhapsodic flights about indigenous peoples living in the Amazon.
For example, Bishop Sanchez Sorondo famously opined after a trip to China, “Right now, those who are best implementing the social doctrine of the Church are the Chinese.” Can someone in his position really not know that: China is a world-class polluter, practices social surveillance and repression like no other nation on earth, and is subjecting religious believers to persecution, re-education, and outright martyrdom?
Pope Francis himself has said repeatedly that a Third World War is currently being fought, but in piecemeal fashion, so that we don’t notice. If so, we should be able to look and see what he’s saying. But there’s nothing to see. During the Cold War, America and the USSR fought proxy wars in Cuba, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, Angola, Vietnam, etc. But that was decades ago.
Today, militant Islam is engaged in terrorism and re-establishing the caliphate. All the decent nations in the world seek to stop it. And despite the dozens of small armed conflicts that always exist at any given moment, it’s difficult to see how all that adds up to global war, except in the sense that the fallen world is always at war with itself.
Pope Francis often says, “This economy kills.” And it does, as all economies do. But we have a global economic system that, for all its flaws, is something quite close to a miracle. And in large-scale economic terms is constantly improving.
Just the other day at a special Vatican seminar on economics, he called for global wealth redistribution and pointed out that 5 million children die worldwide every year from preventable causes.
Five million dead is terrible, but it’s down from 12 million not long ago. And there are many ways to “save the children.” Fifty-three million children, more than ten times the number who die because of poverty, are aborted every year — without anything like special Vatican initiatives.
It’s unrealistic, I suppose, to expect the pope or bishops to Google some of these questions and look at what’s actually happening in the world. They prefer old socialist or new radical perspectives — troubled teenager Greta Thunberg, to a sober Scandinavian environmentalist like Bjørn Lomborg; Pachamama romanticism to the hard work of crafting practical compromises. Their moral pronouncements sound wise and compassionate, but in current circumstances, are very poor contributions to public affairs.
Keep an eye out, of course, for how celibacy, deaconesses, and Church governance are treated in the coming Exhortation. But don’t forget that there’s a world of other problems in play as well.
Published with permission from The Catholic Thing.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Our Lady of Lourdes, finding Christ through Mary

Formerly Heart to Heart with Mother Miriam , Mother Miriam Live brings you inspiration and solutions for life ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Miriam is a Catholic nun on a mission to bring hope to a world that @ @ @ @ @ let her share that hope and joy with you !
To tune into Mother Miriam @ @ @ @ @ Facebook page here every Monday to Friday at 10am .

Watch Mother Miriam's Live show from 2.11.2020. Today, Mother speaks about finding Christ through Mary. She also shares the story of Our Lady of Lourdes.
You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page.
Subscribe to receive email updates on Mother Miriam Live:


lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Nurse tells Senate about babies thrown in garbage, left to die after failed abortions

WASHINGTON , D.C. , February 11 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A former nurse testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee today that some babies are born alive during failed abortions and left to die , something that would be remedied if an anti-infanticide bill becomes law .
The Judiciary Committee also heard from an expert neonatologist and Patrina Mosley , Director of Life , Culture and Women ’ s Advocacy at the Family Research Council .
The trio of witnesses made the case for passing the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act .
If passed by both the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the president , the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would require that the same degree of professional skill , care , and diligence be given to babies who survive abortions as to any other newborn .
Additionally , the law would establish criminal consequences for practitioners who fail to act accordingly .
Jill Stanek , now the National Campaign Chair to the Susan B. Anthony List , recounted her own experiences from her time as a nurse at a hospital that committed abortions .
“ I could not bear the thought of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived .
He was 21 to 22 weeks old , weighed about half a pound , and was about the size of my hand , ” Stanek said of an abortion survivor who had been left to die in the Soiled Utility Room .
Referring to a fellow nurse at the same hospital , Stanek told the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee how a live aborted baby had accidentally been thrown in the garbage .
“ When she realized what she had done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to find the baby , and the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor , ” she explained .
In a particularly horrifying episode , one mother “ was not only shocked when her little boy was aborted alive , she was also shocked that he didn ’ t appear to have the external physical deformities she had been told he was going to have .
The mother screamed for someone to help her baby , and my colleague rushed to call a neonatologist over from the unit.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Stanek described in graphic detail the procedure known as labor-induced abortion .
According to her testimony , the goal of that procedure is simply “ to cause a pregnant mother ’ s cervix to open so that she will prematurely deliver a baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward.
” Dr. Robin Pierucci , a physician and neonatologist with decades of experience , said that a newborn ’ s first diagnosis is always that he or she is a baby .
“ All other diagnoses ( prematurity , respiratory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are secondary and never negate the first one .
Because of their preeminent diagnosis ( human baby ) , we are always obligated to care , whether or not we have the ability to heal.
” Pierucci stated that the physicians should apply the medical standard of care to every human being .
“ There is no ethical reason why this medical standard of care should be abandoned for a subgroup of people because they might be less ‘ wanted ’ than others ; wantedness does not determine humanness , ” the doctor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s degree in bioethics , clarified .
She spoke of the example of Mother Teresa , who went out to the poor and abandoned dying in the streets of Calcutta , India , in order to care for them , regardless if there was any hope for them to be cured .
“ We too should never allow a baby , especially a baby , to die anywhere but in the warmth of our arms , nestled securely against our hearts , ” added Pierucci .
The Family Research Council ’ s Mosley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act of 2002 only recognized that all babies born alive are persons .
However , this recognition was not combined with a “ federal criminal statute against taking the lives of born-alive infants.
” For that reason , Mosley explained , between 2003 and 2014 at least 143 babies were born alive and died after failed abortions , according to official data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) .
The CDC ’ s report admits that this number is “ almost certainly an underestimate , ” due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some of the babies died within minutes of birth ; others lived longer than a day .
Mosley concluded her testimony , which was heavy on statistics , by telling the stories of premature babies who went on to live full lives “ by simply receiving adequate care.
” One of the babies Mosley highlighted was recently featured by President Donald Trump at his State of the Union address .
“ Ellie was born at just 21 weeks and six days .
She is one of the youngest babies to survive in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a healthy 2-year-old girl , ” Mosley said .
She also pointed to the world ’ s smallest surviving baby , “ Saybie ” from San Diego .
Saybie only weighed “ the same as a large apple at just 245 g ( 8.6 oz ) , when she was born at 23 weeks and three days in December of 2018.
” Mosley called the senators at the hearing to be “ morally and logically consistent ” by passing the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act .
If the new baby born alive “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , then they are worthy of humane care and protection under federal law , ” argued Mosley .
Some of the witnesses also referred to comments made by Virginia Gov .
Ralph Northam last year , during which he seemingly endorsed infanticide .
Northam had said , “ So in this particular example , if the mother is in labor , I can tell you exactly what would happen : The infant would be delivered ; the infant would be kept comfortable ; the infant would be resuscitated if that ’ s what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.
” “ So , whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for ‘ discussion , ’ while precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table .
At this point , we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman ’ s body .
We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient , ” Mosley responded to that statement in her testimony .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presidential nomination all support taxpayer-funded abortion on demand .
Last week , during an appearance on The View Pete Buttigieg refused to condemn infanticide or say at what point during pregnancy he thought late-term abortion ought to be restricted .
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont , meanwhile , was asked about a litmus test during a recent presidential debate and responded : “ Is there a litmus test for those of us up here ?
For me there is .
I will never nominate any person to the Supreme Court or the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100 percent pro-Roe v. Wade .
Number two , we have got to codify Roe v. Wade into legislation .
Number three , we have to significantly expand funding for Planned Parenthood.
” On Wednesday , the Democrat-controlled U.S. House Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Energy and Commerce will hold a hearing on the pro-abortion “ Women ’ s Health Protection Act ” of 2019 .
Marjorie Dannenfelser , president of the Susan B. Anthony List , referred to the bill as the Abortion on Demand Act .
“ This radical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democratically enacted state and federal protections for unborn children and their mothers nationwide , expanding abortion on demand through birth .
It would sweep away even the most modest pro-life protections , such as popular limits on late-term abortions after five months of pregnancy , health and safety standards for abortion facilities , informed consent , and conscience protections , ” Dannenfelser said ahead of the hearing .

'The mother screamed for someone to help her baby, and my colleague rushed to call a neonatologist over from the unit...'
WASHINGTON, D.C., February 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A former nurse testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee today that some babies are born alive during failed abortions and left to die, something that would be remedied if an anti-infanticide bill becomes law.
The Judiciary Committee also heard from an expert neonatologist and Patrina Mosley, Director of Life, Culture and Women’s Advocacy at the Family Research Council. The trio of witnesses made the case for passing the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
If passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate and signed by the president, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would require that the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence be given to babies who survive abortions as to any other newborn. Additionally, the law would establish criminal consequences for practitioners who fail to act accordingly.
Jill Stanek, now the National Campaign Chair to the Susan B. Anthony List, recounted her own experiences from her time as a nurse at a hospital that committed abortions.
“I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone, so I rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was 21 to 22 weeks old, weighed about half a pound, and was about the size of my hand,” Stanek said of an abortion survivor who had been left to die in the Soiled Utility Room.
Referring to a fellow nurse at the same hospital, Stanek told the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee how a live aborted baby had accidentally been thrown in the garbage.
“When she realized what she had done, she started going through the trash to find the baby, and the baby fell out of the towel and on to the floor,” she explained.
In a particularly horrifying episode, one mother “was not only shocked when her little boy was aborted alive, she was also shocked that he didn’t appear to have the external physical deformities she had been told he was going to have. The mother screamed for someone to help her baby, and my colleague rushed to call a neonatologist over from the unit.”
The baby died within half an hour.
Stanek described in graphic detail the procedure known as labor-induced abortion. According to her testimony, the goal of that procedure is simply “to cause a pregnant mother’s cervix to open so that she will prematurely deliver a baby who dies during the birth process or soon afterward.”
Dr. Robin Pierucci, a physician and neonatologist with decades of experience, said that a newborn’s first diagnosis is always that he or she is a baby. “All other diagnoses (prematurity, respiratory distress, sepsis, etc.) are secondary and never negate the first one. Because of their preeminent diagnosis (human baby), we are always obligated to care, whether or not we have the ability to heal.”
Pierucci stated that the physicians should apply the medical standard of care to every human being. “There is no ethical reason why this medical standard of care should be abandoned for a subgroup of people because they might be less ‘wanted’ than others; wantedness does not determine humanness,” the doctor, who also holds a master’s degree in bioethics, clarified.
She spoke of the example of Mother Teresa, who went out to the poor and abandoned dying in the streets of Calcutta, India, in order to care for them, regardless if there was any hope for them to be cured.
“We too should never allow a baby, especially a baby, to die anywhere but in the warmth of our arms, nestled securely against our hearts,” added Pierucci.
The Family Research Council’s Mosley pointed out that the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 only recognized that all babies born alive are persons. However, this recognition was not combined with a “federal criminal statute against taking the lives of born-alive infants.”
For that reason, Mosley explained, between 2003 and 2014 at least 143 babies were born alive and died after failed abortions, according to official data provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC’s report admits that this number is “almost certainly an underestimate,” due to a gap in state reporting. Some of the babies died within minutes of birth; others lived longer than a day.
Mosley concluded her testimony, which was heavy on statistics, by telling the stories of premature babies who went on to live full lives “by simply receiving adequate care.”
One of the babies Mosley highlighted was recently featured by President Donald Trump at his State of the Union address.
“Ellie was born at just 21 weeks and six days. She is one of the youngest babies to survive in the United States. Today, Ellie is a healthy 2-year-old girl,” Mosley said.
She also pointed to the world’s smallest surviving baby, “Saybie” from San Diego. Saybie only weighed “the same as a large apple at just 245 g (8.6 oz), when she was born at 23 weeks and three days in December of 2018.”
Mosley called the senators at the hearing to be “morally and logically consistent” by passing the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. If the new baby born alive “is a full person under federal law, then they are worthy of humane care and protection under federal law,” argued Mosley.
Some of the witnesses also referred to comments made by Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam last year, during which he seemingly endorsed infanticide. Northam had said, “So in this particular example, if the mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen: The infant would be delivered; the infant would be kept comfortable; the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desire, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
“So, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for ‘discussion,’ while precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table. At this point, we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient,” Mosley responded to that statement in her testimony.
Democrats currently running for their party’s presidential nomination all support taxpayer-funded abortion on demand. Last week, during an appearance on The View Pete Buttigieg refused to condemn infanticide or say at what point during pregnancy he thought late-term abortion ought to be restricted.
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, meanwhile, was asked about a litmus test during a recent presidential debate and responded: “Is there a litmus test for those of us up here? For me there is. I will never nominate any person to the Supreme Court or the federal courts in general who is not 100 percent pro-Roe v. Wade. Number two, we have got to codify Roe v. Wade into legislation. Number three, we have to significantly expand funding for Planned Parenthood.”
Planned Parenthood commits more than 300,000 abortions annually.
On Wednesday, the Democrat-controlled U.S. House Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Energy and Commerce will hold a hearing on the pro-abortion “Women’s Health Protection Act” of 2019.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, referred to the bill as the Abortion on Demand Act.
“This radical and egregiously misnamed bill would strike down democratically enacted state and federal protections for unborn children and their mothers nationwide, expanding abortion on demand through birth. It would sweep away even the most modest pro-life protections, such as popular limits on late-term abortions after five months of pregnancy, health and safety standards for abortion facilities, informed consent, and conscience protections,” Dannenfelser said ahead of the hearing.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Drag Queen who’ll appear on ‘Sesame Street’ fires back after 55k sign LifeSite pet

Drag Queen who’ll appear on ‘Sesame Street’ fires back after 55k sign LifeSite petition against him

February 11 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Billy Porter – the drag queen LGBT activist who won a Tony award in 2013 for his headline role as a drag queen in the Broadway production Kinky Boots – is unhappy that a LifeSite petition is asking Sesame Street to drop the upcoming show where he appears in drag .
Regarding the petition , Billy Porter has been quoted in the New York Post ’ s Page Six supplement as saying : “ Stay out of my bedroom and you will be fine — that is none of your business.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Advocacy at LifeSite , responded to Porter by saying : “ No one wishes to intrude upon Billy Porter ’ s private affairs .
What 55,000 people have asked is to protect children from being exposed to sexualized , gender-confusing attire and notions on Sesame Street.
” “ Exposing children – who just want to see their favorite puppets – to sexual concepts beyond their years and maturity is just wrong .
Allowing a man who is dressed up as a gender-bending man-woman is a sexual act that has no place on Sesame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ LifeSite and a majority of sane people in this country oppose adults trying to impose their sexual proclivities upon children .
These sexualized concepts and ideas are ones which children do not comprehend , and to which they can not consent , ” he concluded .
Porter made big news when it was revealed that he intends to appear on Sesame Street in drag .
LifeSite has contacted AT & T , the parent company of Warner Media and HBO Max – producers of Sesame Street – to discuss how this episode @ @ @ @ @ @ @ press time , has received no response .
Dr. Paul McHugh , former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins University , studied the phenomenon of gender confusion for 40 years .
He has said that the notion of gender fluidity “ is doing much damage to families , adolescents , and children and should be confronted as an opinion without biological foundation wherever it emerges.
” As an actor and as an LGBT activist , Porter is no stranger to gender-confusing ideas , dress , and roles .
Porter has made a name for himself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aforementioned Kinky Boots and in the television production Pose .
Wikipedia offers these short synopses of both productions : Kinky Boots : “ Based on the 2005 British film ‘ Kinky Boots , ’ written by Geoff Deane and Tim Firth and mostly inspired by true events , the musical tells the story of Charlie Price .
Having inherited a shoe factory from his father , Charlie forms an unlikely partnership with cabaret performer and drag queen Lola to produce a line of high-heeled boots and save the business.
” Pose – “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about New York City 's African-American and Latino LGBTQ and gender-nonconforming ballroom culture scene in the 1980s and , in the second season , early 1990s .
Featured characters are dancers and models who compete for trophies and recognition in this underground culture , and who support one another in a network of chosen families known as Houses.
” Porter has starred in this Pose since 2018 .
Wikipedia explains “ ballroom culture ” thusly : “ Transgenderism is not about ‘ Love.
’ It is a disorder – gender dysphoria – which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's program , ” the LifeSite petition says .
“ By contributing to this social contagion , ‘ Sesame Street ’ is forcing children to deal with adult concepts and notions about sexuality which are beyond their level of maturity , and which can leave psychological scars.
” “ Many jurisdictions define this kind of behavior as abuse.
” If you haven ’ t yet had a chance to read this petition , please CLICK HERE .
And then , please consider signing and sharing .
To politely make your feelings known about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who run HBO Max for AT & T ) at : 212-484-8000 .

Porter made big news when it was revealed that he intends to appear on Sesame Street in drag.
February 11, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Billy Porter – the drag queen LGBT activist who won a Tony award in 2013 for his headline role as a drag queen in the Broadway production Kinky Boots – is unhappy that a LifeSite petition is asking Sesame Street to drop the upcoming show where he appears in drag.
Regarding the petition, Billy Porter has been quoted in the New York Post’s Page Six supplement as saying: “Stay out of my bedroom and you will be fine — that is none of your business.”
But Gualberto Garcia Jones, Director of Advocacy at LifeSite, responded to Porter by saying: “No one wishes to intrude upon Billy Porter’s private affairs. What 55,000 people have asked is to protect children from being exposed to sexualized, gender-confusing attire and notions on Sesame Street.”
“Exposing children – who just want to see their favorite puppets – to sexual concepts beyond their years and maturity is just wrong. Allowing a man who is dressed up as a gender-bending man-woman is a sexual act that has no place on Sesame Street,” Garcia Jones continued.
“LifeSite and a majority of sane people in this country oppose adults trying to impose their sexual proclivities upon children. These sexualized concepts and ideas are ones which children do not comprehend, and to which they cannot consent,” he concluded.
Porter made big news when it was revealed that he intends to appear on Sesame Street in drag.
LifeSite has contacted AT&T, the parent company of Warner Media and HBO Max – producers of Sesame Street – to discuss how this episode will harm children, but as of press time, has received no response.
Dr. Paul McHugh, former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins University, studied the phenomenon of gender confusion for 40 years. He has said that the notion of gender fluidity “is doing much damage to families, adolescents, and children and should be confronted as an opinion without biological foundation wherever it emerges.”
As an actor and as an LGBT activist, Porter is no stranger to gender-confusing ideas, dress, and roles.
Porter has made a name for himself, starring in Broadway productions like the aforementioned Kinky Boots and in the television production Pose.
Wikipedia offers these short synopses of both productions:
Kinky Boots: “Based on the 2005 British film ‘Kinky Boots,’ written by Geoff Deane and Tim Firth and mostly inspired by true events, the musical tells the story of Charlie Price. Having inherited a shoe factory from his father, Charlie forms an unlikely partnership with cabaret performer and drag queen Lola to produce a line of high-heeled boots and save the business.” Pose – “Pose is an American drama television series about New York City's African-American and Latino LGBTQ and gender-nonconforming ballroom culture scene in the 1980s and, in the second season, early 1990s. Featured characters are dancers and models who compete for trophies and recognition in this underground culture, and who support one another in a network of chosen families known as Houses.”
Porter has starred in this Pose since 2018. Wikipedia explains “ballroom culture” thusly:
“Ball culture, drag ball culture, the house-ballroom community, and similar terms describe an underground LGBT subculture that originated in 1920s New York City, in which people ‘walk’ (i.e., compete) for trophies, prizes, and glory at events known as balls. Ball participants are mainly young African-American and Latin American members of the LGBTQ community. Attendees dance, vogue, walk, pose, and support one another in one or more of the numerous drag and performance competition categories.”
“Transgenderism is not about ‘Love.’ It is a disorder – gender dysphoria – which has absolutely no place on a children's program,” the LifeSite petition says. “By contributing to this social contagion, ‘Sesame Street’ is forcing children to deal with adult concepts and notions about sexuality which are beyond their level of maturity, and which can leave psychological scars.”
“Many jurisdictions define this kind of behavior as abuse.”
If you haven’t yet had a chance to read this petition, please CLICK HERE. And then, please consider signing and sharing.
To politely make your feelings known about this issue, call Warner Media (who run HBO Max for AT&T) at: 212-484-8000.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Analyzing the de facto schism in the Catholic Church in Germany

Martin Bürger is a German Catholic journalist who has the inside scoop on what 's going on in the Church @ @ @ @ @ John-Henry to discuss the schism forming there , which is thanks in large part to @ @ @ @ @ head of the German Bishops Conference .

Martin Bürger is a German Catholic journalist who has the inside scoop on what's going on in the Church in Germany. He joins John-Henry to discuss the schism forming there, which is thanks in large part to Cardinal Reinhard Marx, the head of the German Bishops Conference.
Share