lifesitenews--2020-09-21--New Fr. Altman video quotes Fulton Sheen, Pius X: Liberal Catholics are wolves in sheep’s clothing

PETITION : Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying `` You ca n't be a Catholic and a Democrat. ''
!
Sign the petition here .
LA CROSSE , Wisconsin , September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― The priest who warned Catholics that they could go to hell for supporting the Democratic Party has doubled down by telling his detractors that they ’ ll face the saints one day .
“ Anyone can , however erroneously , complain about my manner , tone , or ‘ divisiveness ’ in the video , but good luck , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new video released yesterday morning .
“ Good luck when you get to the gates of heaven because Cardinal St. John Henry Newman is going to be there .
Pope St. Pius X is going to be there .
Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen is going to be there .
They ’ ll be standing at the gates.
” The priest had quoted these three saints earlier in his new sermon .
Altman says his detractors will also find Cardinal Robert Sarah and Pope Benedict XVI , whom the priest referenced in his first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Either way , Altman promises his critics will be schooled .
“ You ’ ll get crushed in a sandwich of truth , ” he said .
Entitled “ Liberal Catholics are Wolves in Sheep ’ s Clothing , ” Altman ’ s short video has already been viewed over 65,000 times .
His first video with Minnesota-based Alpha News , “ You Can not Be a Democrat & a Catholic .
Period.
” has been seen more than 825,000 times .
In his new homily , Altman took on left-leaning Catholics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s warning to his priests : Let priests take care not to accept from the liberal any ideas which , under the mask of good , pretend to reconcile justice with iniquity .
Liberal Catholics are wolves in sheep ’ s clothing .
The priest must unveil to the people their perfidious plot , their iniquitous design .
You will be called papist , clerical , retrograde , intolerant , but pay no heed to the derision and mockery of the wicked .
Have courage ; you must never yield , nor is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must go into the attack whole-heartedly , not in secret but in public , not behind barred doors , but in the open , in the view of all .
Altman ’ s first video , which explained why faithful Catholic can not vote for the Democratic Party , attracted thanks and praise from Catholics all over the world , the priest revealed in his follow-up address .
“ It was so beautiful : It was like opening up the proverbial floodgates , ” he said .
“ I even have friends in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Catholics saying his words had confirmed them in their faith or brought them back to the faith .
They were , he said , “ starving for someone to finally speak up and speak the truth.
” The priest called his August 30 homily , which took the Democrats to task for their support for abortion extremism , a “ no brainer ” and merely a “ presentation of faith and morals ” that is “ the purview of Holy Mother Church.
” He read Cardinal St. John Henry Newman ’ s statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Church is the ignorance of the laity ” and remarked that the situation has gotten worse .
Meanwhile , he often hears that the laity are poorly catechized , he said , but then “ if someone even tries ― !
Well , as we ’ ve seen , all hell breaks loose.
” Altman was referring to the controversy that has been raging since his first video appeared , which he connected with the current assault on free speech called “ cancel culture.
” After Altman ’ s first video , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bishop William P. Callahan , had asked him to stop live-streaming Masses .
The priest also revealed that he had received “ vile and despicable ” comments , letters , emails , and phone calls after Fr .
James Martin urged his followers to complain .
Callahan also said Altman may face “ canonical penalties.
” In Altman ’ s view , leftists have proved Archbishop Charles Chaput ’ s avowal that “ evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant .
Then it seeks to silence the good.
” The current rioting , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are attempts to impose an “ oppressive and socialist attitude ” through bullying , Altman believes .
“ We ’ re witnessing it now in the opposition to the video , ” Altman said .
Altman argued that the video is not “ divisive ” and that the division is real .
What his video does , he believes , is mention the “ elephant ” in the middle of the room .
Moreover , he has not only the right , thanks to the American Constitution , but the duty to speak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Trey Trainor , head of the FEC ( Federal Election Commission ) , said recently that pastors have a duty to properly form the conscience of their families , ” Altman said .
“ That ’ s what I was doing .
I hope that ’ s what everybody would do.
” Moreover , the FEC chief said that any church could endorse a specific candidate or a specific political party , the priest noted .
“ So we can and should present moral theology in the context of the public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quoting Archbishop Sheen ’ s famous maxim that “ A religion that does not interfere with the secular order will soon discover that the secular order will not refrain from interfering with it.
” Altman continued to cite Sheen , who used robust language , including “ hatred ” for sin , e.g .
“ Charity is the infusion of the spirit of God which makes us love the beautiful and hate the morally ugly.
” The priest also pointed out that priests should not lead people to presume upon God ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s warning : “ Do not deceive people with the word of mercy because God forgives sins only if we repent of them.
” Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler , Texas first expressed his support for the fiery homilist on September 5 .
“ As the Bishop of Tyler I endorse Fr .
Altman ’ s statement in this video , ” Strickland tweeted regarding the controversial August 30 address .
“ My shame is that it has taken me so long .
Thank you Fr Altman for your COURAGE .
If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation … please HEED THIS MESSAGE.
” Hundreds of other Catholics also made a public show of support for Altman when they gathered for a Rosary rally in La Crosse on September 15 .
One participant called the priest a modern-day St. John the Baptist .

Father James Altman, the priest behind the viral video about how Catholics can’t be Democrats, said he received ‘incomprehensible thanks’ from the laity for his first video.
PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying “You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat.”! Sign the petition here.
LA CROSSE, Wisconsin, September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― The priest who warned Catholics that they could go to hell for supporting the Democratic Party has doubled down by telling his detractors that they’ll face the saints one day.
“Anyone can, however erroneously, complain about my manner, tone, or ‘divisiveness’ in the video, but good luck,” Father James Altman said in a new video released yesterday morning.
“Good luck when you get to the gates of heaven because Cardinal St. John Henry Newman is going to be there. Pope St. Pius X is going to be there. Venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen is going to be there. They’ll be standing at the gates.”
The priest had quoted these three saints earlier in his new sermon. Altman says his detractors will also find Cardinal Robert Sarah and Pope Benedict XVI, whom the priest referenced in his first video, behind them or there first. Either way, Altman promises his critics will be schooled.
“You’ll get crushed in a sandwich of truth,” he said.
Entitled “Liberal Catholics are Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing,” Altman’s short video has already been viewed over 65,000 times. His first video with Minnesota-based Alpha News, “You Cannot Be a Democrat & a Catholic. Period.” has been seen more than 825,000 times.
In his new homily, Altman took on left-leaning Catholics by reading Pope St. Pius X’s warning to his priests:
Let priests take care not to accept from the liberal any ideas which, under the mask of good, pretend to reconcile justice with iniquity. Liberal Catholics are wolves in sheep’s clothing. The priest must unveil to the people their perfidious plot, their iniquitous design. You will be called papist, clerical, retrograde, intolerant, but pay no heed to the derision and mockery of the wicked. Have courage; you must never yield, nor is there any need to yield. You must go into the attack whole-heartedly, not in secret but in public, not behind barred doors, but in the open, in the view of all.
Altman’s first video, which explained why faithful Catholic cannot vote for the Democratic Party, attracted thanks and praise from Catholics all over the world, the priest revealed in his follow-up address.
“It was so beautiful: It was like opening up the proverbial floodgates,” he said.
“I even have friends in Borneo now.”
Altman received testimonies from Catholics saying his words had confirmed them in their faith or brought them back to the faith. They were, he said, “starving for someone to finally speak up and speak the truth.”
The priest called his August 30 homily, which took the Democrats to task for their support for abortion extremism, a “no brainer” and merely a “presentation of faith and morals” that is “the purview of Holy Mother Church.” He read Cardinal St. John Henry Newman’s statement that “the great tragedy of the Church is the ignorance of the laity” and remarked that the situation has gotten worse. Meanwhile, he often hears that the laity are poorly catechized, he said, but then “if someone even tries ― ! Well, as we’ve seen, all hell breaks loose.”
Altman was referring to the controversy that has been raging since his first video appeared, which he connected with the current assault on free speech called “cancel culture.” After Altman’s first video, he revealed that his ordinary, La Crosse Bishop William P. Callahan, had asked him to stop live-streaming Masses. The priest also revealed that he had received “vile and despicable” comments, letters, emails, and phone calls after Fr. James Martin urged his followers to complain.
Callahan also said Altman may face “canonical penalties.”
In Altman’s view, leftists have proved Archbishop Charles Chaput’s avowal that “evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant. Then it seeks to silence the good.” The current rioting, arson, and “cancel culture” are attempts to impose an “oppressive and socialist attitude” through bullying, Altman believes.
“We’re witnessing it now in the opposition to the video,” Altman said.
Altman argued that the video is not “divisive” and that the division is real. What his video does, he believes, is mention the “elephant” in the middle of the room. Moreover, he has not only the right, thanks to the American Constitution, but the duty to speak to moral issues in the public sphere.
“Trey Trainor, head of the FEC (Federal Election Commission), said recently that pastors have a duty to properly form the conscience of their families,” Altman said.
“That’s what I was doing. I hope that’s what everybody would do.”
Moreover, the FEC chief said that any church could endorse a specific candidate or a specific political party, the priest noted.
“So we can and should present moral theology in the context of the public sphere,” he concluded, then quoting Archbishop Sheen’s famous maxim that “A religion that does not interfere with the secular order will soon discover that the secular order will not refrain from interfering with it.”
Altman continued to cite Sheen, who used robust language, including “hatred” for sin, e.g. “Charity is the infusion of the spirit of God which makes us love the beautiful and hate the morally ugly.”
The priest also pointed out that priests should not lead people to presume upon God’s forgiveness by quoting Cardinal Robert Sarah’s warning: “Do not deceive people with the word of mercy because God forgives sins only if we repent of them.”
Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas first expressed his support for the fiery homilist on September 5.
“As the Bishop of Tyler I endorse Fr. Altman’s statement in this video,” Strickland tweeted regarding the controversial August 30 address.
“My shame is that it has taken me so long. Thank you Fr Altman for your COURAGE. If you love Jesus & His Church & this nation … please HEED THIS MESSAGE.”
Hundreds of other Catholics also made a public show of support for Altman when they gathered for a Rosary rally in La Crosse on September 15. One participant called the priest a modern-day St. John the Baptist.
Contact information for respectful communication:
Bishop William P. Callahan
Diocese of La Crosse
3710 East Avenue South
P.O. Box 4004
La Crosse, WI 54602-4004
Tel: (608)788-7700
Debbie Brannon
Assistant to Bishop Callahan
[email protected]
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--Stillbirths spiking across the world due to COVID-19 lockdowns

PETITION : No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus !
Sign the petition here .
September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Suspension and delay of non-coronavirus medical care has caused stillbirths to spike across several nations , according to several studies , including one published recently in The Lancet .
The Lancet study found that stillbirths in Nepal rose from 14 per 1,000 births pre-lockdown to 21 per 1,000 births over the span of two months , Nature reported .
The study ’ s authors further noted that the full extent of the impact remains unknown , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pregnant women choosing to give birth outside of hospitals .
“ Nepal has made significant progress in the last 20 years in health outcomes for women and their babies , but the last few months have deaccelerated that progress , ” said study leader Ashish K.C .
of Sweden ’ s Uppsala University .
She specifically attributed the issue to cancellations of routine appointments that would have identified complications early enough to treat .
Stillbirth spikes have also been reported by hospitals in India and London as well , Nature added .
Doctors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of London report that stillbirths at St. George ’ s Hospital have almost quadrupled compared to last year .
“ What we ’ ve done is cause an unintended spike in stillbirth while trying to protect ( pregnant women ) from COVID-19 , ” midwifery specialist Jane Warland of the University of South Australia in Adelaide told Nature .
For instance , “ women with hypertension aren ’ t being managed as they normally would , and undetected hypertension is a risk factor for stillbirth.
” These are only the latest concerns raised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdowns , which were originally sold on the justification of conserving hospital supplies and capacity for coronavirus patients .
In July , a comparative analysis of ten nations conducted by the conservative Heritage Foundation found that the most restrictive lockdowns were not more effective at saving lives than more targeted policies tailored for those most at risk .
In May , a group of 500 doctors warned President Donald Trump that it was “ impossible to overstate the short , medium , and long-term harm to people ’ s health with a continued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ casualties of a continued shutdown will be hiding in plain sight , but they will be called alcoholism , homelessness , suicide , heart attack , stroke , or kidney failure .
”

Attempts to protect women from the coronavirus has led to women cancelling routine appointments and failure to monitor potential health complications.
PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Suspension and delay of non-coronavirus medical care has caused stillbirths to spike across several nations, according to several studies, including one published recently in The Lancet.
The Lancet study found that stillbirths in Nepal rose from 14 per 1,000 births pre-lockdown to 21 per 1,000 births over the span of two months, Nature reported. The study’s authors further noted that the full extent of the impact remains unknown, as the lockdowns also caused a spike in pregnant women choosing to give birth outside of hospitals.
“Nepal has made significant progress in the last 20 years in health outcomes for women and their babies, but the last few months have deaccelerated that progress,” said study leader Ashish K.C. of Sweden’s Uppsala University. She specifically attributed the issue to cancellations of routine appointments that would have identified complications early enough to treat.
Stillbirth spikes have also been reported by hospitals in India and London as well, Nature added. Doctors at St George’s, University of London report that stillbirths at St. George’s Hospital have almost quadrupled compared to last year.
“What we’ve done is cause an unintended spike in stillbirth while trying to protect (pregnant women) from COVID-19,” midwifery specialist Jane Warland of the University of South Australia in Adelaide told Nature. For instance, “women with hypertension aren’t being managed as they normally would, and undetected hypertension is a risk factor for stillbirth.”
These are only the latest concerns raised over the public health toll of the lockdowns, which were originally sold on the justification of conserving hospital supplies and capacity for coronavirus patients.
In July, a comparative analysis of ten nations conducted by the conservative Heritage Foundation found that the most restrictive lockdowns were not more effective at saving lives than more targeted policies tailored for those most at risk.
In May, a group of 500 doctors warned President Donald Trump that it was “impossible to overstate the short, medium, and long-term harm to people’s health with a continued shutdown (…) The millions of casualties of a continued shutdown will be hiding in plain sight, but they will be called alcoholism, homelessness, suicide, heart attack, stroke, or kidney failure.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--Fauci calls for strengthening WHO, ‘rebuilding infrastructure of human existence’

PETITION : No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus !
Sign the petition here .
September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Combating future infectious diseases such as COVID-19 will require “ rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence , ” including greater submission to international authority , controversial coronavirus advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci wrote recently in a prominent medical journal .
“ Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve : rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence , from cities to homes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to recreational and gatherings venues , ” Fauci and National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases scientific senior adviser David Morens wrote in the September 3 edition of Cell .
“ In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases , ” Fauci and Morens continued .
“ Chief among them are reducing crowding at home , work , and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation , intense urbanization , and intensive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global poverty , improving sanitation and hygiene , and reducing unsafe exposure to animals , so that humans and potential human pathogens have limited opportunities for contact.
” The duo also suggested that “ global biosafety cooperation ” should be improved “ by strengthening the United Nations and its agencies , particularly the World Health Organization ” ( among other measures ) .
“ Fauci and Morens ’ s prescription should give every lover of liberty and national sovereignty great pause , ” responded the Discovery Institute ’ s Wesley Smith .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ task would require unprecedented and intrusive government regulations and the transferring of policy control from the national to international level—nothing less than an international technocratic and authoritarian supra-governing system—with the power to direct how we interact with each other as family , friends , and in community.
” Fauci ’ s critics also find his advice alarming in light of the WHO ’ s various statements legitimizing the false claims coming out of the Chinese government in the early days of the outbreak , which downplayed the gravity of the outbreak and covered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of it .
Fauci ’ s own record on the outbreak is similarly contentious .
In February he said there was “ absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask ” in the United States ; by July he was suggesting that Americans wear not only masks but goggles and face shields .
Critics have also faulted him for floating the idea of requiring Americans to carry “ certificates ” documenting their immunity to COVID-19 and suggesting that handshaking should be abolished but sex with strangers remains alright if “ you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @

A 'global biosafety cooperation' should be improved 'by strengthening the United Nations and its agencies, particularly the World Health Organization,' Fauci and one of his colleagues argued.
PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Combating future infectious diseases such as COVID-19 will require “rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence,” including greater submission to international authority, controversial coronavirus advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci wrote recently in a prominent medical journal.
“Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues,” Fauci and National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases scientific senior adviser David Morens wrote in the September 3 edition of Cell.
“In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases,” Fauci and Morens continued. “Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming. Equally important are ending global poverty, improving sanitation and hygiene, and reducing unsafe exposure to animals, so that humans and potential human pathogens have limited opportunities for contact.”
The duo also suggested that “global biosafety cooperation” should be improved “by strengthening the United Nations and its agencies, particularly the World Health Organization” (among other measures).
“Fauci and Morens’s prescription should give every lover of liberty and national sovereignty great pause,” responded the Discovery Institute’s Wesley Smith. “At the very least, the gargantuan task would require unprecedented and intrusive government regulations and the transferring of policy control from the national to international level—nothing less than an international technocratic and authoritarian supra-governing system—with the power to direct how we interact with each other as family, friends, and in community.”
Fauci’s critics also find his advice alarming in light of the WHO’s various statements legitimizing the false claims coming out of the Chinese government in the early days of the outbreak, which downplayed the gravity of the outbreak and covered up the Communist regime’s mishandling of it.
Fauci’s own record on the outbreak is similarly contentious. In February he said there was “absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask” in the United States; by July he was suggesting that Americans wear not only masks but goggles and face shields. Critics have also faulted him for floating the idea of requiring Americans to carry “certificates” documenting their immunity to COVID-19 and suggesting that handshaking should be abolished but sex with strangers remains alright if “you’re willing to take a risk.”
Contact information for respectful communication:
President Donald Trump
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
WhiteHouse.gov/contact
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--BREAKING: Trump to speak at National Catholic Prayer Breakfast on Wednesday

PETITION : No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus !
Sign the petition here .
WASHINGTON D.C. , September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — President Donald J. Trump will address the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast ( NCPB ) in Washington D.C. , this Wednesday , September 23 .
The NCPB hasn ’ t formally announced Trump as their speaker , but a Politico reporter and the advocacy group CatholicVote shared the news on Twitter today .
“ A fitting recognition of the President ’ s and Catholics ’ shared commitment to the defense of human life , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to practice our faith , ” CatholicVote tweeted in response to the news .
The breakfast , which this year is taking place online , is a fixture in the Washington , D.C. annual event calendar .
“ Each year , over 1,500 people gather in our nation ’ s capital to pray for our country , ” the NCPB website reads .
Vice President Mike Pence , who was raised Catholic but is now evangelical , spoke at the NCPB in 2017 .
Earlier this year Trump became the first U.S. president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Washington , D.C. and is considered by many veteran pro-life activists to be the most pro-life president in history .
In a proclamation issued prior to the march , Trump declared January 22 , the anniversary of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision imposing abortion on demand across the country , to be “ National Sanctity of Human Life Day.
” “ Every person — the born and unborn , the poor , the downcast , the disabled , the infirm , and the elderly — has inherent value , ” Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proudly and strongly reaffirms our commitment to protect the precious gift of life at every stage , from conception to natural death.
” As president , Trump has reinstated and expanded the ban on foreign aid to abortion-involved groups ( including International Planned Parenthood Federation ) , banned groups that commit or refer abortions from Title X family planning funds , overturned Obama-era regulations that barred states from defunding Planned Parenthood , and issued rules protecting Americans from being forced to subsidize abortion in government-mandated health insurance plans .
The president has also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats ’ opposition to anti-infanticide legislation and calling on Congress to send him a ban on late-term abortion to sign .
Most of his judicial nominees have pleased pro-lifers as well .
In addition , the administration has consistently worked to defend life and oppose abortion at the United Nations , from resisting pro-abortion agenda items and resolution language to affirming that abortion isn ’ t a human right and promoting abstinence education .
Also speaking at the the prayer breakfast will be Los Angeles Bishop Robert Barron and U.S. Attorney General William @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Catholic , is due to receive the “ Christifideles Laici ” award at the event .

PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON D.C., September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — President Donald J. Trump will address the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast (NCPB) in Washington D.C., this Wednesday, September 23.
The NCPB hasn’t formally announced Trump as their speaker, but a Politico reporter and the advocacy group CatholicVote shared the news on Twitter today.
NEW: On Wednesday @realDonaldTrump will deliver virtual remarks to the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. It will be his first time speaking at the event, which has welcomed Mulvaney & Pence in past years and will honor AG Barr this week — Gabby Orr (@GabbyOrr_) September 21, 2020
“A fitting recognition of the President’s and Catholics’ shared commitment to the defense of human life, the dignity of workers, and the freedom to practice our faith,” CatholicVote tweeted in response to the news.
BREAKING: President Trump will deliver remarks at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast on Wednesday. A fitting recognition of the President’s and Catholics’ shared commitment to the defense of human life, the dignity of workers, and the freedom to practice our faith. — CatholicVote.org (@CatholicVote) September 21, 2020
The breakfast, which this year is taking place online, is a fixture in the Washington, D.C. annual event calendar.
“Each year, over 1,500 people gather in our nation’s capital to pray for our country,” the NCPB website reads.
Vice President Mike Pence, who was raised Catholic but is now evangelical, spoke at the NCPB in 2017.
Earlier this year Trump became the first U.S. president to attend the annual March for Life in Washington, D.C. and is considered by many veteran pro-life activists to be the most pro-life president in history.
In a proclamation issued prior to the march, Trump declared January 22, the anniversary of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision imposing abortion on demand across the country, to be “National Sanctity of Human Life Day.”
“Every person — the born and unborn, the poor, the downcast, the disabled, the infirm, and the elderly — has inherent value,” Trump stated and said that the U.S. “proudly and strongly reaffirms our commitment to protect the precious gift of life at every stage, from conception to natural death.”
As president, Trump has reinstated and expanded the ban on foreign aid to abortion-involved groups (including International Planned Parenthood Federation), banned groups that commit or refer abortions from Title X family planning funds, overturned Obama-era regulations that barred states from defunding Planned Parenthood, and issued rules protecting Americans from being forced to subsidize abortion in government-mandated health insurance plans.
The president has also forcefully denounced abortion, calling attention to Democrats’ opposition to anti-infanticide legislation and calling on Congress to send him a ban on late-term abortion to sign. Most of his judicial nominees have pleased pro-lifers as well.
In addition, the administration has consistently worked to defend life and oppose abortion at the United Nations, from resisting pro-abortion agenda items and resolution language to affirming that abortion isn’t a human right and promoting abstinence education.
Also speaking at the the prayer breakfast will be Los Angeles Bishop Robert Barron and U.S. Attorney General William Barr. Barr, who is a Catholic, is due to receive the “Christifideles Laici” award at the event.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--Did a doctor perform mass hysterectomies on detained immigrant women?

PETITION : Ask Treasury Secretary Mnuchin to eliminate tax deductions for abortions !
Sign the petition here .
WASHINGTON , D.C. , September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The Department of Homeland Security ( DHS ) at this point has found no evidence supporting allegations of a doctor unnecessarily removing the uteruses of women in custody at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) facility in Georgia .
“ In our initial review of the paper documents available , there is nothing to support the allegations related to hysterectomies in the medical records , ” a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The spokesperson also referred to a report by the Associated Press ( AP ) , according to which “ the lawyer who filed the complaint indicated that the allegation related to hysterectomies is speculative and was submitted to get us to investigate it.
” The article emphasized the AP was unable to find “ evidence of mass hysterectomies as alleged in a widely shared complaint filed by a nurse at the detention center.
” Priyanka Bhatt , one of the lawyers who helped file the nurse ’ s lawsuit , “ said she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hysterectomies.
” She also admitted “ she included the hysterectomy allegations because she wanted to trigger an investigation to determine if they were true.
” Nevertheless , after reviewing medical records for four women and conducting interviews with lawyers , the AP found support for “ growing allegations ” that the doctor in question performed “ surgeries and other procedures on detained immigrants that they never sought or didn ’ t fully understand.
” “ Although some procedures could be justified based on problems documented in the records , ” the AP continued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of consent or knowledge raises serious legal and ethical issues , lawyers and medical experts said.
” Dr. Mahendra Amin , a gynecologist , had treated “ at least eight women detained at Irwin County Detention Center [ ICDC ] since 2017 , including one hysterectomy , said Andrew Free , an immigration and civil rights lawyer working with other attorneys to investigate medical treatment at the jail .
Doctors are helping the lawyers examine new records and more women are coming forward to report their treatment by Amin , Free said.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to LifeSiteNews that its investigation into the allegations is still ongoing .
“ Our document review continues to be absolutely sure of the situation at the facility in question , ” the spokesperson wrote .
Last Tuesday , The Intercept first reported on the complaint filed by human rights group Project South .
“ Several immigrant women have reported to Project South their concerns about how many women have received a hysterectomy while detained at ICDC , ” the complaint stated .
“ One woman told Project South in 2019 that Irwin sends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outside the facility but that some women did not trust him .
She also stated that ‘ a lot of women here go through a hysterectomy ’ at ICDC.
” “ More recently , a detained immigrant told Project South that she talked to five different women detained at ICDC between October and December 2019 who had a hysterectomy done .
When she talked to them about the surgery , the women “ reacted confused when explaining why they had one done.
” “ The woman told Project South that it was as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell themselves it ’ s going to be OK. ’ She further said : ‘ When I met all these women who had had surgeries , I thought this was like an experimental concentration camp .
It was like they ’ re experimenting with our bodies.
’ ” As reported by The Daily Caller on Thursday , Dr. Mahendra Amin was in trouble with the law a number of years ago , settling a lawsuit for $ 520,000 .
“ Amin had been accused of orchestrating a scheme at Irwin County Hospital ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a part-owner of , in which unnecessary procedures were administered on patients to bolster federal Medicare and Medicaid payments to the hospital , according to the indictment , ” the article recounted .
Several top Democrats have commented on the allegations .
“ If true , the appalling conditions described in the whistleblower complaint — including allegations of mass hysterectomies being performed on vulnerable immigrant women — are a staggering abuse of human rights , ” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said .
Congressman Bennie Thompson , the Chairman of the House Committee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration .
“ We can not allow the Trump administration ’ s horrific anti-immigrant policies to continue to threaten the general health and wellness of migrants in government care or of the personnel working at these facilities , ” he said .
In 2014 , the California State Auditor released a report which showed that of the 144 prison inmates “ who underwent tubal ligations from fiscal years 2005-06 to 2012-13 , auditors found nearly one-third were performed without lawful consent.
” “ In some cases , physicians falsified the consent forms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ audit found “ that all women receiving tubal ligations had been incarcerated at least once before , indicating that they were repeat offenders , ” seeming to suggest they were targeted .
Forced sterilization in California prisons was the subject of a Human Rights Watch film released earlier this year .
Beginning in 1932 , what is now known as the infamous Tuskegee Study or Tuskegee Experiment was a “ 40-year experiment run by Public Health Service officials followed 600 rural black men in Alabama with syphilis over the course of their lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , refusing to treat them for the debilitating disease , and actively denying some of them treatment , ” The Atlantic summarized .
According to the National Library of Medicine :

A lawsuit claims numerous women had their uteruses removed, but the Department of Homeland Security says 'there is nothing to support the allegations … in the medical records.'
PETITION: Ask Treasury Secretary Mnuchin to eliminate tax deductions for abortions! Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) at this point has found no evidence supporting allegations of a doctor unnecessarily removing the uteruses of women in custody at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility in Georgia.
“In our initial review of the paper documents available, there is nothing to support the allegations related to hysterectomies in the medical records,” a DHS spokesperson told LifeSiteNews on Sunday.
The spokesperson also referred to a report by the Associated Press (AP), according to which “the lawyer who filed the complaint indicated that the allegation related to hysterectomies is speculative and was submitted to get us to investigate it.”
The article emphasized the AP was unable to find “evidence of mass hysterectomies as alleged in a widely shared complaint filed by a nurse at the detention center.”
Priyanka Bhatt, one of the lawyers who helped file the nurse’s lawsuit, “said she never spoke to any women who had hysterectomies.” She also admitted “she included the hysterectomy allegations because she wanted to trigger an investigation to determine if they were true.”
Nevertheless, after reviewing medical records for four women and conducting interviews with lawyers, the AP found support for “growing allegations” that the doctor in question performed “surgeries and other procedures on detained immigrants that they never sought or didn’t fully understand.”
“Although some procedures could be justified based on problems documented in the records,” the AP continued, “the women’s lack of consent or knowledge raises serious legal and ethical issues, lawyers and medical experts said.”
Dr. Mahendra Amin, a gynecologist, had treated “at least eight women detained at Irwin County Detention Center [ICDC] since 2017, including one hysterectomy, said Andrew Free, an immigration and civil rights lawyer working with other attorneys to investigate medical treatment at the jail. Doctors are helping the lawyers examine new records and more women are coming forward to report their treatment by Amin, Free said.”
The DHS spokesperson emphasized in a statement to LifeSiteNews that its investigation into the allegations is still ongoing. “Our document review continues to be absolutely sure of the situation at the facility in question,” the spokesperson wrote.
Last Tuesday, The Intercept first reported on the complaint filed by human rights group Project South.
“Several immigrant women have reported to Project South their concerns about how many women have received a hysterectomy while detained at ICDC,” the complaint stated. “One woman told Project South in 2019 that Irwin sends many women to see a particular gynecologist outside the facility but that some women did not trust him. She also stated that ‘a lot of women here go through a hysterectomy’ at ICDC.”
“More recently, a detained immigrant told Project South that she talked to five different women detained at ICDC between October and December 2019 who had a hysterectomy done. When she talked to them about the surgery, the women “reacted confused when explaining why they had one done.”
“The woman told Project South that it was as though the women were ‘trying to tell themselves it’s going to be OK.’ She further said: ‘When I met all these women who had had surgeries, I thought this was like an experimental concentration camp. It was like they’re experimenting with our bodies.’”
As reported by The Daily Caller on Thursday, Dr. Mahendra Amin was in trouble with the law a number of years ago, settling a lawsuit for $520,000.
“Amin had been accused of orchestrating a scheme at Irwin County Hospital (ICH) in Georgia, which he was a part-owner of, in which unnecessary procedures were administered on patients to bolster federal Medicare and Medicaid payments to the hospital, according to the indictment,” the article recounted.
Several top Democrats have commented on the allegations.
“If true, the appalling conditions described in the whistleblower complaint — including allegations of mass hysterectomies being performed on vulnerable immigrant women — are a staggering abuse of human rights,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
Congressman Bennie Thompson, the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, directly attacked the Trump administration. “We cannot allow the Trump administration’s horrific anti-immigrant policies to continue to threaten the general health and wellness of migrants in government care or of the personnel working at these facilities,” he said.
In 2014, the California State Auditor released a report which showed that of the 144 prison inmates “who underwent tubal ligations from fiscal years 2005-06 to 2012-13, auditors found nearly one-third were performed without lawful consent.”
“In some cases, physicians falsified the consent forms,” USA Today reported. The audit found “that all women receiving tubal ligations had been incarcerated at least once before, indicating that they were repeat offenders,” seeming to suggest they were targeted.
Forced sterilization in California prisons was the subject of a Human Rights Watch film released earlier this year.
Beginning in 1932, what is now known as the infamous Tuskegee Study or Tuskegee Experiment was a “40-year experiment run by Public Health Service officials followed 600 rural black men in Alabama with syphilis over the course of their lives, refusing to tell patients their diagnosis, refusing to treat them for the debilitating disease, and actively denying some of them treatment,” The Atlantic summarized.
According to the National Library of Medicine:
A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office [found] that 4 of the 12 Indian Health Service regions sterilized 3,406 American Indian women without their permission between 1973 and 1976. The GAO [found] that 36 women under age 21 were sterilized during this period despite a court-ordered moratorium on sterilizations of women younger than 21. Two years earlier, an independent study by Dr. Connie Pinkerton-Uri, Choctaw/Cherokee, found that one in four American Indian women had been sterilized without her consent. PInkerton-Uri’s research indicated that the Indian Health Service had “singled out full-blooded Indian women for sterilization procedures.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--Viganò: How is it that the Bible and all Church documents can be questioned except Vatican II?

September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Peter Kwasniewski ’ s recent commentary , titled “ Why Viganò ’ s critique of the Council must be taken seriously ” , impressed me greatly .
It appeared ( here ) on One Peter Five , on June 29 , and is one of the articles on which I have been meaning to comment : I do so now , with gratitude to the author and publisher for the opportunity they have given me .
First , it seems to me that I can agree with practically all of what Kwasniewski @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facts is extremely clear and polished and reflects my thoughts exactly .
What I am particularly pleased about is that “ ever since Archbishop Viganò ’ s June 9 letter and his subsequent writing on the subject , people have been discussing what it might mean to ‘ annul ’ the Second Vatican Council ” .
I find it interesting that we are beginning to question a taboo that , for almost sixty years , has prevented any theological , sociological and historical criticism of the Council .
This is particularly interesting given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but this does not apply – according to its supporters – to any other magisterial document or to Sacred Scripture .
We have read endless addresses in which the defenders of the Council have defined the Canons of Trent , the Syllabus of Errors of Blessed Pius IX , the encyclical Pascendi of St. Pius X , and Humanae Vitae and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis of Paul VI as “ outdated.
” The change to the Catechism of the Catholic Church , whereby the doctrine on the legitimacy of the death penalty was modified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understanding ” of the Gospel , shows that for the Innovators there is no dogma , no immutable principle that can be immune from revision or cancellation : the only exception is the Vatican II , which by its nature – ex se , theologians would say – enjoys that charism of infallibility and inerrancy that is denied to the entire depositum fidei .
I have already expressed my opinion on the hermeneutic of continuity theorized by Benedict XVI , and constantly taken up by the defenders of Vatican II , who – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offer a reading of the Council that is harmonious with Tradition .
It seems to me that the arguments in favor of the hermeneutical criterion , proposed for the first time in 2005 [ 1 ] , are limited to a merely theoretical analysis of the problem , obstinately leaving aside the reality of what has been happening before our eyes for decades .
This analysis starts from a valid and acceptable postulate , but in this concrete case it presupposes a premise that is not necessarily true .
The postulate is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be read and interpreted in the light of the entire magisterial corpus , because of the analogia fidei [ 2 ] [ analogy of faith ] , which is somehow also expressed in the hermeneutic of continuity .
Yet this postulate assumes that the text we are going to analyze is a specific act of the Magisterium , with its degree of authority clearly expressed in the canonical forms envisaged .
And this is precisely where the deception lies , this is where the trap is set .
For the Innovators maliciously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ecumenical Council ” on their ideological manifesto , just as , at a local level , the Jansenists who maneuvered the Synod of Pistoia had managed to cloak with authority their heretical theses , which were later condemned by Pius VI .
[ 3 ] On the one hand , Catholics look at the form of the Council and consider its acts to be an expression of the Magisterium .
Consequently , they seek to read its substance , which is clearly ambiguous or even erroneous , in keeping with the analogy of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veneration that all Catholics have towards Holy Mother Church .
They can not comprehend that the Pastors have been so naïve as to impose on them an adulteration of the Faith , but at the same time they understand the rupture with Tradition and try to explain this contradiction .
The modernist , on the other hand , looks at the substance of the revolutionary message he means to convey , and in order to endow it with an authoritativeness that it does not and should not have , he “ magisterializes ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by having it published in the form of official acts .
He knows well that he is forcing it , but he uses the authority of the Church – which under normal conditions he despises and rejects – to make it practically impossible to condemn those errors , which have been ratified by no less than the majority of the Synod Fathers .
The instrumental use of authority for purposes opposed to those that legitimize it is a cunning ploy : on the one hand , it guarantees a sort of immunity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctrines that are heterodox or close to heresy ; on the other hand , it allows sanctions to be imposed on those who denounce these deviations , by virtue of a formal respect for canonical norms .
In the civil sphere , this way of proceeding is typical of dictatorships .
If this has also happened within the Church , it is because the accomplices of this coup d ’ état have no supernatural sense , they fear neither God nor eternal damnation , and consider themselves partisans of progress invested with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their wickedness , just as Communism ’ s mass exterminations are carried out by party officials convinced of promoting the cause of the proletariat .
In the first case , the analysis of the Council documents in the light of Tradition clashes with the observation that they have been formulated in such a way as to make clear the subversive intent of their drafters .
This inevitably leads to the impossibility of interpreting them in a Catholic sense , without weakening the whole doctrinal corpus .
In the second case , the awareness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into the acts of the Council made it necessary to formulate them in a deliberately ambiguous manner , precisely because it was only in making people believe that they were consistent with the Church ’ s perennial Magisterium that they could be adopted by the authoritative assembly that had to “ clear ” and circulate them .
It ought to be highlighted that the mere fact of having to look for a hermeneutical criterion to interpret the Council ’ s acts demonstrates the difference between Vatican II and any other Ecumenical Council , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any sort of misunderstanding .
An unclear passage from Sacred Scripture or from the Holy Fathers can be the object of a hermeneutic , but certainly not an act of the Magisterium , whose task is precisely to dispel any lack of clarity .
Yet both conservatives and progressives find themselves unwittingly in agreement in recognizing a kind of dichotomy between what a Council is and what that Council – i.e .
Vatican II – is ; between the doctrine of all Councils and the doctrine set forth or implied in that Council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent commentary in which he quotes Benedict XVI , rightly states that “ a Council is such only if it remains in the furrow of Tradition and it must be read in the light of the whole Tradition.
” [ 4 ] But this statement , which is irreproachable from a theological point of view , does not necessarily lead us to consider Vatican II as Catholic , but rather to ask ourselves whether it , by not remaining in the furrow of Tradition and not being able to be read in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upsetting the mens that wanted it , can actually be defined as such .
This question certainly can not be met with an impartial answer in those who proudly profess to be its supporters , defenders and creators .
And I am obviously not talking about the rightful defense of the Catholic Magisterium , but only of Vatican II as the “ first council ” of a “ new church ” claiming to take the place of the Catholic Church , which is hastily dismissed as a preconciliar .
There is also another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should not be overlooked ; namely , that the hermeneutical criterion – seen in the context of a serious and scientific criticism of a text – can not disregard the concept that the text means to express .
Indeed , it is not possible to impose a Catholic interpretation on a proposition that , in itself , is manifestly heretical or close to heresy , simply because it is included in a text that has been declared magisterial .
Lumen Gentium ’ s proposition : “ But the plan of salvation also includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first place amongst these there are the Muslims , who , professing to hold the faith of Abraham , along with us adore the one and merciful God , who on the last day will judge mankind ” ( LG , 16 ) can not be interpreted in a Catholic way – firstly , because the god of Mohammed is not one and triune , and secondly because Islam condemns as blasphemous the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity in Our Lord Jesus Christ , true God and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator ” and that “ in the first place amongst these there are the Muslims ” blatantly contradicts Catholic doctrine , which professes that the Catholic Church is the one and only ark of salvation .
The salvation eventually attained by heretics , and by pagans even more so , always and only comes from the inexhaustible treasure of Our Lord ’ s Redemption , which is safeguarded by the Church .
While belonging to any other religion is an impediment to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are saved , are saved because of at least an implicit desire to belong to the Church , and despite their adherence to a false religion – never by virtue of it .
For what good it contains does not belong to it , but has been usurped ; while the error it contains is what makes it intrinsically false , since the admixture of errors and truth more easily deceives its followers .
It isn ’ t possible to change reality to make it correspond to an ideal schema .
If the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Council documents ( and similarly , in the acts of Bergoglio ’ s magisterium ) are heterodox , and if doctrine teaches us that the acts of the Magisterium do not contain error , the conclusion is not that those propositions are not erroneous , but that they can not be part of the Magisterium .
Period .
Hermeneutics serve to clarify the meaning of a phrase that is obscure or that appears to contradict doctrine , not to correct it substantially ex post .
This way of proceeding would not provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ texts , but would constitute a corrective intervention , and therefore the admission that , in that specific proposition of that specific Magisterial document , an error has been stated which must be corrected .
And one would need to explain not only why that error was not avoided from the beginning , but also whether the Synod Fathers who approved that error , and the Pope who promulgated it , intended to use their apostolic authority to ratify a heresy , or whether they would rather avail themselves of the implicit authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endorse it , without calling the Paraclete into question .
Archbishop Pozzo admits : “ The reason why the Council has been received with difficulty therefore lies in the fact that there has been a struggle between two hermeneutics or interpretations of the Council , which indeed have coexisted in opposition to one another.
” But with these words , he confirms that the Catholic choice to adopt the hermeneutic of continuity goes hand in hand with the novel choice to resort to the hermeneutic of rupture , in an arbitrariness that demonstrates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even more serious – the imbalance of the forces at play , in favor of one or the other thesis .
“ The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a rupture between the pre-conciliar and post-conciliar Church and presupposes that the texts of the Council as such are not the true expression of the Council , but the result of a compromise ” , Archbishop Pozzo writes .
But this is exactly the reality , and denying it does not resolve the problem in the slightest but rather exacerbates it , by refusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it has very clearly reached its metastasis .
Archbishop Pozzo ’ s affirmation that the concept of religious freedom expressed in Dignitatis humanae does not contradict Pius IX ’ s Syllabus of Error [ 5 ] demonstrates that the Council document is in itself deliberately ambiguous .
If its drafters had wished to avoid such ambiguity , it would have been sufficient to reference the propositions of the Syllabus in a footnote ; but this would never have been accepted by the progressives , who were able to slip in a doctrinal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ absence of references to the earlier Magisterium .
And it doesn ’ t seem that the interventions of the post-conciliar Popes – and their own participation , even in sacris , in non-Catholic or even pagan ceremonies – have ever , or in any way , corrected the error propagated in line with the heterodox interpretation of Dignitatis humanae .
Upon closer examination , the same method was adopted in the drafting of Amoris laetitia , in which the Church ’ s discipline in matters of adultery and concubinage was formulated in such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interpreted in a Catholic sense , while in fact it was accepted in the one and obvious heretical sense they wanted to disseminate .
So much so , that the interpretive key that Bergoglio and his exegetes wanted to use , on the issue of Communion for divorcees , has become the authentic interpretation in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis [ 6 ] .
The aim of Vatican II ’ s public defenders has turned out to be the struggle of Sisyphus : as soon as they succeed , by a thousand efforts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seemingly reasonable solution that doesn ’ t directly touch their little idol , immediately their words are repudiated by opposing statements from a progressive theologian , a German Prelate , or Francis himself .
And so , the conciliar boulder rolls back down the hill again , where gravity attracts to its natural resting place .
It is obvious that , for a Catholic , a Council is ipso facto of such authority and importance that he spontaneously accepts its teachings with filial devotion .
But it is equally obvious that the authority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who approve its decrees , and of the Popes who promulgate them , does not make the acceptance of documents that are in blatant contradiction with the Magisterium , or at least weaken it , any less problematic .
And if this problem continues to persist after sixty years revealing a perfect consistency with the deliberate will of the Innovators who prepared its documents and influenced its proponents we must ask ourselves what is the obex , the insurmountable obstacle , that forces us , against all reasonableness , to forcibly consider Catholic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a criterion that applies only and exclusively to what is certainly Catholic .
One needs to keep clearly in mind that the analogia fidei applies precisely to the truths of Faith , and not to error , since the harmonious unity of the Truth in all its articulations can not seek coherence with what is opposed to it .
If a conciliar text formulates a heretical concept , or one close to heresy , there is no hermeneutical criterion that can make it orthodox simply because that text belongs to the Acts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what deceptions and skillful maneuvers have been put in place by ultra-progressive consultors and theologians , with the complicity of the modernist wing of the Council Fathers .
And we also know with what complicity John XXIII and Paul VI approved these coups de main ( surprise attacks ) in violation of the norms which they themselves approved .
The central vice therefore lies in having fraudulently led the Council Fathers to approve ambiguous texts – which they considered Catholic enough to deserve the placet – and then using that same ambiguity to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Innovators wanted .
Those texts can not today be changed in their substance to make them orthodox or clearer : they must simply be rejected – according to the forms that the supreme Authority of the Church shall judge appropriate in due course – since they are vitiated by a malicious intention .
And it will also have to be determined whether an anomalous and disastrous event such as Vatican II can still merit the title of Ecumenical Council , once its heterogeneity compared to previous councils is universally recognized .
A heterogeneity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a hermeneutic , something that no other Council has ever needed .
It should be noted that this mechanism , inaugurated by Vatican II , has seen a recrudescence , an acceleration , indeed an unprecedented upsurge with Bergoglio , who deliberately resorts to imprecise expressions , cunningly formulated without precise theological language , with the same intention of dismantling , piece by piece , what remains of doctrine , in the name of applying the Council .
It ’ s true that , in Bergoglio , heresy and heterogeneity with respect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shameless ; but it is equally true that the Abu Dhabi Declaration would not have been conceivable without the premise of Lumen gentium .
Rightly , Dr. Peter Kwasniewski states : “ It is the mixture , the jumble , of great , good , indifferent , bad , generic , ambiguous , problematic , erroneous , all of it at enormous length , that makes Vatican II uniquely deserving of repudiation.
” The voice of the Church , which is the voice of Christ , is instead crystal clear and unambiguous , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its authority !
“ This is why the last council is absolutely irrecoverable .
If roject of modernization has resulted in a massive loss of Catholic identity , even of basic doctrinal competence and morals , the way forward is to pay one ’ s last respects to the great symbol of that project and see it buried.
” I wish to conclude by reiterating a fact which , in my view , is very indicative : if the same commitment that Pastors have exerted for decades in defending Vatican II and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used to reaffirm and defend the entirety of Catholic doctrine , or even only to promote knowledge of the Catechism of St Pius X among the faithful , the situation of the ecclesial would be radically different .
But it is also true that faithful formed in fidelity to doctrine would have reacted with pitchforks to the adulterations of the Innovators and their protectors .
Perhaps the ignorance of God ’ s people was intended , precisely so that Catholics would be unaware of the fraud and betrayal perpetrated against them , just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Tridentine Rite serves only to prevent it from being compared with the aberrations of the reformed ceremonies .
The cancellation of the past and of Tradition , the denial of roots , the delegitimization of dissent , the abuse of authority and the apparent respect for rules : are not these the recurring elements of all dictatorships ?
Official translation from the Italian by Diane Montagna

September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Peter Kwasniewski’s recent commentary, titled “Why Viganò’s critique of the Council must be taken seriously”, impressed me greatly. It appeared (here) on One Peter Five, on June 29, and is one of the articles on which I have been meaning to comment: I do so now, with gratitude to the author and publisher for the opportunity they have given me.
First, it seems to me that I can agree with practically all of what Kwasniewski has written: his analysis of the facts is extremely clear and polished and reflects my thoughts exactly. What I am particularly pleased about is that “ever since Archbishop Viganò’s June 9 letter and his subsequent writing on the subject, people have been discussing what it might mean to ‘annul’ the Second Vatican Council”.
I find it interesting that we are beginning to question a taboo that, for almost sixty years, has prevented any theological, sociological and historical criticism of the Council. This is particularly interesting given that Vatican II is regarded as untouchable, but this does not apply – according to its supporters – to any other magisterial document or to Sacred Scripture. We have read endless addresses in which the defenders of the Council have defined the Canons of Trent, the Syllabus of Errors of Blessed Pius IX, the encyclical Pascendi of St. Pius X, and Humanae Vitae and Ordinatio Sacerdotalis of Paul VI as “outdated.” The change to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, whereby the doctrine on the legitimacy of the death penalty was modified in the name of a “changed understanding” of the Gospel, shows that for the Innovators there is no dogma, no immutable principle that can be immune from revision or cancellation: the only exception is the Vatican II, which by its nature – ex se, theologians would say – enjoys that charism of infallibility and inerrancy that is denied to the entire depositum fidei.
I have already expressed my opinion on the hermeneutic of continuity theorized by Benedict XVI, and constantly taken up by the defenders of Vatican II, who – certainly in good faith – seek to offer a reading of the Council that is harmonious with Tradition. It seems to me that the arguments in favor of the hermeneutical criterion, proposed for the first time in 2005[1], are limited to a merely theoretical analysis of the problem, obstinately leaving aside the reality of what has been happening before our eyes for decades. This analysis starts from a valid and acceptable postulate, but in this concrete case it presupposes a premise that is not necessarily true.
The postulate is that all the acts of the Magisterium are to be read and interpreted in the light of the entire magisterial corpus, because of the analogia fidei[2] [analogy of faith], which is somehow also expressed in the hermeneutic of continuity. Yet this postulate assumes that the text we are going to analyze is a specific act of the Magisterium, with its degree of authority clearly expressed in the canonical forms envisaged. And this is precisely where the deception lies, this is where the trap is set. For the Innovators maliciously managed to put the label “Sacrosanct Ecumenical Council” on their ideological manifesto, just as, at a local level, the Jansenists who maneuvered the Synod of Pistoia had managed to cloak with authority their heretical theses, which were later condemned by Pius VI.[3]
On the one hand, Catholics look at the form of the Council and consider its acts to be an expression of the Magisterium. Consequently, they seek to read its substance, which is clearly ambiguous or even erroneous, in keeping with the analogy of faith, out of that love and veneration that all Catholics have towards Holy Mother Church. They cannot comprehend that the Pastors have been so naïve as to impose on them an adulteration of the Faith, but at the same time they understand the rupture with Tradition and try to explain this contradiction.
The modernist, on the other hand, looks at the substance of the revolutionary message he means to convey, and in order to endow it with an authoritativeness that it does not and should not have, he “magisterializes” it through the form of the Council, by having it published in the form of official acts. He knows well that he is forcing it, but he uses the authority of the Church – which under normal conditions he despises and rejects – to make it practically impossible to condemn those errors, which have been ratified by no less than the majority of the Synod Fathers. The instrumental use of authority for purposes opposed to those that legitimize it is a cunning ploy: on the one hand, it guarantees a sort of immunity, a “canonical shield” for doctrines that are heterodox or close to heresy; on the other hand, it allows sanctions to be imposed on those who denounce these deviations, by virtue of a formal respect for canonical norms. In the civil sphere, this way of proceeding is typical of dictatorships. If this has also happened within the Church, it is because the accomplices of this coup d’état have no supernatural sense, they fear neither God nor eternal damnation, and consider themselves partisans of progress invested with a prophetic role that legitimizes them in all their wickedness, just as Communism’s mass exterminations are carried out by party officials convinced of promoting the cause of the proletariat.
In the first case, the analysis of the Council documents in the light of Tradition clashes with the observation that they have been formulated in such a way as to make clear the subversive intent of their drafters. This inevitably leads to the impossibility of interpreting them in a Catholic sense, without weakening the whole doctrinal corpus. In the second case, the awareness that doctrinal novelty that was being slipped into the acts of the Council made it necessary to formulate them in a deliberately ambiguous manner, precisely because it was only in making people believe that they were consistent with the Church’s perennial Magisterium that they could be adopted by the authoritative assembly that had to “clear” and circulate them.
It ought to be highlighted that the mere fact of having to look for a hermeneutical criterion to interpret the Council’s acts demonstrates the difference between Vatican II and any other Ecumenical Council, whose canons do not give rise to any sort of misunderstanding. An unclear passage from Sacred Scripture or from the Holy Fathers can be the object of a hermeneutic, but certainly not an act of the Magisterium, whose task is precisely to dispel any lack of clarity. Yet both conservatives and progressives find themselves unwittingly in agreement in recognizing a kind of dichotomy between what a Council is and what that Council – i.e. Vatican II – is; between the doctrine of all Councils and the doctrine set forth or implied in that Council.
Archbishop Guido Pozzo, in a recent commentary in which he quotes Benedict XVI, rightly states that “a Council is such only if it remains in the furrow of Tradition and it must be read in the light of the whole Tradition.”[4] But this statement, which is irreproachable from a theological point of view, does not necessarily lead us to consider Vatican II as Catholic, but rather to ask ourselves whether it, by not remaining in the furrow of Tradition and not being able to be read in the light of the whole Tradition, without upsetting the mens that wanted it, can actually be defined as such. This question certainly cannot be met with an impartial answer in those who proudly profess to be its supporters, defenders and creators. And I am obviously not talking about the rightful defense of the Catholic Magisterium, but only of Vatican II as the “first council” of a “new church” claiming to take the place of the Catholic Church, which is hastily dismissed as a preconciliar.
There is also another aspect that, in my view, should not be overlooked; namely, that the hermeneutical criterion – seen in the context of a serious and scientific criticism of a text – cannot disregard the concept that the text means to express. Indeed, it is not possible to impose a Catholic interpretation on a proposition that, in itself, is manifestly heretical or close to heresy, simply because it is included in a text that has been declared magisterial. Lumen Gentium’s proposition: “But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind” (LG, 16) cannot be interpreted in a Catholic way – firstly, because the god of Mohammed is not one and triune, and secondly because Islam condemns as blasphemous the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity in Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true Man. To affirm that “the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator” and that “in the first place amongst these there are the Muslims” blatantly contradicts Catholic doctrine, which professes that the Catholic Church is the one and only ark of salvation. The salvation eventually attained by heretics, and by pagans even more so, always and only comes from the inexhaustible treasure of Our Lord’s Redemption, which is safeguarded by the Church. While belonging to any other religion is an impediment to the pursuit of eternal beatitude. Those who are saved, are saved because of at least an implicit desire to belong to the Church, and despite their adherence to a false religion – never by virtue of it. For what good it contains does not belong to it, but has been usurped; while the error it contains is what makes it intrinsically false, since the admixture of errors and truth more easily deceives its followers.
It isn’t possible to change reality to make it correspond to an ideal schema. If the evidence shows that some propositions contained in the Council documents (and similarly, in the acts of Bergoglio’s magisterium) are heterodox, and if doctrine teaches us that the acts of the Magisterium do not contain error, the conclusion is not that those propositions are not erroneous, but that they cannot be part of the Magisterium. Period.
Hermeneutics serve to clarify the meaning of a phrase that is obscure or that appears to contradict doctrine, not to correct it substantially ex post. This way of proceeding would not provide a simple key to reading the Magisterial texts, but would constitute a corrective intervention, and therefore the admission that, in that specific proposition of that specific Magisterial document, an error has been stated which must be corrected. And one would need to explain not only why that error was not avoided from the beginning, but also whether the Synod Fathers who approved that error, and the Pope who promulgated it, intended to use their apostolic authority to ratify a heresy, or whether they would rather avail themselves of the implicit authority deriving from their role as Pastors to endorse it, without calling the Paraclete into question.
Archbishop Pozzo admits: “The reason why the Council has been received with difficulty therefore lies in the fact that there has been a struggle between two hermeneutics or interpretations of the Council, which indeed have coexisted in opposition to one another.” But with these words, he confirms that the Catholic choice to adopt the hermeneutic of continuity goes hand in hand with the novel choice to resort to the hermeneutic of rupture, in an arbitrariness that demonstrates the prevailing confusion and – what is even more serious – the imbalance of the forces at play, in favor of one or the other thesis. “The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a rupture between the pre-conciliar and post-conciliar Church and presupposes that the texts of the Council as such are not the true expression of the Council, but the result of a compromise”, Archbishop Pozzo writes. But this is exactly the reality, and denying it does not resolve the problem in the slightest but rather exacerbates it, by refusing to acknowledge the existence of cancer even when it has very clearly reached its metastasis.
Archbishop Pozzo’s affirmation that the concept of religious freedom expressed in Dignitatis humanae does not contradict Pius IX’s Syllabus of Error[5] demonstrates that the Council document is in itself deliberately ambiguous. If its drafters had wished to avoid such ambiguity, it would have been sufficient to reference the propositions of the Syllabus in a footnote; but this would never have been accepted by the progressives, who were able to slip in a doctrinal change precisely on the basis of the absence of references to the earlier Magisterium. And it doesn’t seem that the interventions of the post-conciliar Popes – and their own participation, even in sacris, in non-Catholic or even pagan ceremonies – have ever, or in any way, corrected the error propagated in line with the heterodox interpretation of Dignitatis humanae. Upon closer examination, the same method was adopted in the drafting of Amoris laetitia, in which the Church’s discipline in matters of adultery and concubinage was formulated in such a way that it could theoretically be interpreted in a Catholic sense, while in fact it was accepted in the one and obvious heretical sense they wanted to disseminate. So much so, that the interpretive key that Bergoglio and his exegetes wanted to use, on the issue of Communion for divorcees, has become the authentic interpretation in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis[6].
The aim of Vatican II’s public defenders has turned out to be the struggle of Sisyphus: as soon as they succeed, by a thousand efforts and a thousand distinctions, in formulating a seemingly reasonable solution that doesn’t directly touch their little idol, immediately their words are repudiated by opposing statements from a progressive theologian, a German Prelate, or Francis himself. And so, the conciliar boulder rolls back down the hill again, where gravity attracts to its natural resting place.
It is obvious that, for a Catholic, a Council is ipso facto of such authority and importance that he spontaneously accepts its teachings with filial devotion. But it is equally obvious that the authority of a Council, of the Fathers who approve its decrees, and of the Popes who promulgate them, does not make the acceptance of documents that are in blatant contradiction with the Magisterium, or at least weaken it, any less problematic. And if this problem continues to persist after sixty years revealing a perfect consistency with the deliberate will of the Innovators who prepared its documents and influenced its proponents we must ask ourselves what is the obex, the insurmountable obstacle, that forces us, against all reasonableness, to forcibly consider Catholic what is not, in the name of a criterion that applies only and exclusively to what is certainly Catholic.
One needs to keep clearly in mind that the analogia fidei applies precisely to the truths of Faith, and not to error, since the harmonious unity of the Truth in all its articulations cannot seek coherence with what is opposed to it. If a conciliar text formulates a heretical concept, or one close to heresy, there is no hermeneutical criterion that can make it orthodox simply because that text belongs to the Acts of a Council. We all know what deceptions and skillful maneuvers have been put in place by ultra-progressive consultors and theologians, with the complicity of the modernist wing of the Council Fathers. And we also know with what complicity John XXIII and Paul VI approved these coups de main (surprise attacks) in violation of the norms which they themselves approved.
The central vice therefore lies in having fraudulently led the Council Fathers to approve ambiguous texts – which they considered Catholic enough to deserve the placet – and then using that same ambiguity to get them to say exactly what the Innovators wanted. Those texts cannot today be changed in their substance to make them orthodox or clearer: they must simply be rejected – according to the forms that the supreme Authority of the Church shall judge appropriate in due course – since they are vitiated by a malicious intention. And it will also have to be determined whether an anomalous and disastrous event such as Vatican II can still merit the title of Ecumenical Council, once its heterogeneity compared to previous councils is universally recognized. A heterogeneity so evident that it requires the use of a hermeneutic, something that no other Council has ever needed.
It should be noted that this mechanism, inaugurated by Vatican II, has seen a recrudescence, an acceleration, indeed an unprecedented upsurge with Bergoglio, who deliberately resorts to imprecise expressions, cunningly formulated without precise theological language, with the same intention of dismantling, piece by piece, what remains of doctrine, in the name of applying the Council. It’s true that, in Bergoglio, heresy and heterogeneity with respect to the Magisterium are blatant and almost shameless; but it is equally true that the Abu Dhabi Declaration would not have been conceivable without the premise of Lumen gentium.
Rightly, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski states: “It is the mixture, the jumble, of great, good, indifferent, bad, generic, ambiguous, problematic, erroneous, all of it at enormous length, that makes Vatican II uniquely deserving of repudiation.” The voice of the Church, which is the voice of Christ, is instead crystal clear and unambiguous, and cannot mislead those who rely on its authority! “This is why the last council is absolutely irrecoverable. If the p roject of modernization has resulted in a massive loss of Catholic identity, even of basic doctrinal competence and morals, the way forward is to pay one’s last respects to the great symbol of that project and see it buried.”
I wish to conclude by reiterating a fact which, in my view, is very indicative: if the same commitment that Pastors have exerted for decades in defending Vatican II and the “conciliar church” had been used to reaffirm and defend the entirety of Catholic doctrine, or even only to promote knowledge of the Catechism of St Pius X among the faithful, the situation of the ecclesial would be radically different. But it is also true that faithful formed in fidelity to doctrine would have reacted with pitchforks to the adulterations of the Innovators and their protectors. Perhaps the ignorance of God’s people was intended, precisely so that Catholics would be unaware of the fraud and betrayal perpetrated against them, just as the ideological prejudice that weighs on the Tridentine Rite serves only to prevent it from being compared with the aberrations of the reformed ceremonies.
The cancellation of the past and of Tradition, the denial of roots, the delegitimization of dissent, the abuse of authority and the apparent respect for rules: are not these the recurring elements of all dictatorships?
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
September 21, 2020
St. Mathew, apostle and evangelist
Official translation from the Italian by Diane Montagna
[1]https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/it/speeches/2005/december/documents/hf_ben_xvi_spe_20051222_roman-curia.html [2] CCC, n. 114: “By ‘analogy of faith’ we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.” [3] It’s interesting to note that, even in that case, of the 85 synodal theses condemned by the Bull Auctorem fidei, only 7 were totally heretical, while the others were defined as “schismatic, erroneous, subversive of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, false, reckless, temerarious, capricious, insulting the Church and its authority, leading to contempt for the Sacraments and the practices of Holy Church, offensive to the piety of the faithful, disturbing the order of the various churches, the ecclesiastical ministry, and the peace of souls; in contrast to the Tridentine decrees, offensive to the veneration due to the Mother of God, the rights of the General Councils.” [4]https://www.aldomariavalli.it/2020/09/10/concilio-vaticano-ii-rinnovamento-e-continuita-un-contributo-di-monsignor-pozzo/ [5] “At the same time, however, Vatican II in Dignitatis humanae reconfirms that the only true religion exists in the Catholic and apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus entrusts the mission of communicating it to all men (DH, n.1), and thereby denies relativism and religious indifferentism, also condemned by the Syllabus of Pius IX.” [6] https://lanuovabq.it/it/lettera-del-papa-ai-vescovi-argentini-pubblicata-sugli-acta
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church , LifeSite is offering Catholics throughout the world a chance to be united daily in prayer , in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade .
Catholics from all over the world—from Israel , Uganda , Italy , France , Germany , Ireland , Pakistan , Singapore , the Philippines , India , Indonesia , Australia , New Zealand , Thailand , the United Kingdom , the U.S. , Canada , Brazil , and other countries—are gathering daily to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anthony Pillari , J.C.L.
, an American priest currently studying in Italy .
Our goal is , by means of this daily rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima , the triumph of Our Lady ’ s Immaculate Heart .
To help obtain that goal , Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide rosary crusade : O Immaculate Heart of Mary , you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother .
Look upon the distress in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church .
In Fatima you warned against these errors , as you spoke about the errors of Russia .
You are the Mediatrix of all graces .
Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope : that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart , so that Russia will be converted , a period of peace will be granted to the world , and your Immaculate Heart will triumph , through an authentic renewal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purity of the Catholic Faith , of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life .
O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother , turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer .
Amen .
+ Athanasius Schneider , Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady ’ s message at Fatima , and about what you can do , please read Cardinal Burke ’ s 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ https : //voiceofthefamily.com/full-text-cardinal-burkes-historic-call-for-consecration-of-russia/ ) .
As St. Padre Pio once said , “ The rosary is the weapon for these times.
” Through prayer , God can shape history , change the world , and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world , through the triumph of Our Lady ’ s Immaculate Heart .
Join us today !
If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this rosary , you can access them via this PDF .
This document also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the daily rosary on LifeSite led by Fr .
Pillari .

(LifeSiteNews) — In response to the crisis unfolding in our world and in the Church, LifeSite is happy to promote Regina Angelorum Press’s Daily Rosary, which is offering Catholics throughout the world the chance to be united daily in prayer, in the Our Lady of Fatima Rosary Crusade.
Catholics from all over the world — from Israel, Uganda, Italy, France, Germany, Ireland, Pakistan, Singapore, the Philippines, India, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, the United Kingdom, the U.S., Canada, Brazil, and other countries — are gathering daily to pray the Rosary, led by Father Pillari, JCL, MCL, STL, an American priest currently studying in Italy.
The Daily Rosary is being offered each day at 12noon EST through Regina Angelorum Press’ YouTube Channel to which you can subscribe HERE.
The goal is, by means of this Daily Rosary and by embracing and living out the message given by the Virgin Mary at Fatima, the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.
To help obtain that goal, Bishop Athanasius Schneider graciously composed the following prayer for this worldwide Rosary crusade:
O Immaculate Heart of Mary, you are the holy Mother of God and our tender Mother. Look upon the distress in which the Church and the whole of humanity are living because of the spread of materialism and the persecution of the Church. In Fatima you warned against these errors, as you spoke about the errors of Russia. You are the Mediatrix of all graces. Implore your Divine Son to grant this special grace for the Pope: that he might consecrate Russia to your Immaculate Heart, so that Russia will be converted, a period of peace will be granted to the world, and your Immaculate Heart will triumph, through an authentic renewal of the Church in the splendor of the purity of the Catholic Faith, of the sacredness of Divine worship and of the holiness of the Christian life. O Queen of the holy Rosary and our sweet Mother, turn your merciful eyes to us and graciously hear this our trusting prayer. Amen. + Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
To learn more about the urgency of responding to Our Lady’s message at Fatima, and about what you can do, please read Cardinal Burke’s 2017 address at the Rome Life Forum.
As St. Padre Pio once said, “The Rosary is the weapon for these times.” Through prayer, God can shape history, change the world, and bring about a great time of renewal and peace for the Church and for the world, through the triumph of Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. Join us today!
If you would like to follow along with the prayers said during this Rosary, you can access them HERE. The document also includes a brief F.A.Q. pertaining to the daily Rosary.
You can send your prayer requests to https://reginangelorumpress.com/prayer-intentions/
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-21--New sci-fi book envisions 21st-century America where abortion is illegal

September 21 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Various commentators have prophesied that future generations will view modern mass acceptance of abortion with the same horror expressed toward other past legalized crimes against humanity like slavery .
Michael Gryboski intriguingly examines such a possible future history in his new book , Memories of Lasting Shadows , a science fiction morality tale with unsettling present implications .
Drawing upon his own journalistic background , the skilled writer Gryboski sets his reporter protagonist , Roberta Sheridan , in a late 21st-century pro-life America .
His interrelated character stories in Washington , D.C. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killing the unborn has become anathema .
The law protects babies even in the most difficult pregnancies , like those resulting from rape or presenting severe fetal abnormalities .
Thankfully , modern medicine ’ s blessings cure the latter .
A national Remembrance Day marks the Supreme Court having overturned , decades before , its January 22 , 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that imposed unlimited abortion upon America .
This memorial signifies the political consensus against abortion that encompasses even the most liberal politicians .
Gryboski ’ s characters experience the history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are agonizing over a conflicted race-relations past of slavery , Civil War secession , and segregation .
Washington , D.C. ’ s Norma McCorvey Memorial Museum , named in honor of the pro-life convert who had been Roe ’ s original plaintiff , documents America ’ s abortion history in its full gruesomeness .
The museum offers two tour options , one modified for sensitive children and another for adults that explicitly details brutal abortion procedures .
Similar to today ’ s American struggles over the Confederacy ’ s legacy in public spaces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with abortion entails name changes .
Clara Grant , a political activist who regrets her past legal abortion following a casual sexual encounter , lobbies to change the name of Barack Obama Elementary School in New Jersey .
For her , this pro-abortion “ baby-killer ” no more deserves as America ’ s first black president public honor than Roger Taney , the first Catholic Supreme Court justice , who wrote the infamously racist , pro-slavery 1857 Dred Scott decision .
Others in Gryboski ’ s sci-fi history want to obliterate any record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For past workers in abortion facilities who want to create new lives without any repercussions from a disgraceful past , the hacker Linda Harrison has been a godsend with her Ultralord virus that wiped out digital records throughout the world .
Imprisoned in a special solitary confinement facility without internet access after Ultralord collapsed the economy , Harrison explains to Sheridan how Harrison often receives letters from former abortionists thanking her for Ultralord .
Ultralord particularly benefited Edgar Hood , a notorious abortionist known as the “ American Mengele , ” after Josef @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Third Reich ’ s Auschwitz death camp .
Following Germany ’ s 1945 defeat in World War II , this war criminal escaped to a new life in Latin America — first Argentina ( where he committed abortions ) , then Brazil .
Similarly , the California abortion facility–operator Hood , a practitioner of grisly late-term abortions , disappeared after abortion became illegal in America .
Yet Michael Chan , the founder of the Drudge Report–like website Chan Worldwide News , thinks he has found Hood .
Chan , promising another scoop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s plot , as the “ citizen journalist ” Chan enlists the legacy media reporter Sheridan to help uncover Hood .
Chan reveals his plan to Sheridan at the McCorvey Museum after the pair watched a documentary about how National Guard deployments had aided in enforcing new pro-life laws amid riots in some cities like Los Angeles .
This reprise of America ’ s 1960s urban upheavals indicates how Gryboski ’ s futuristic tale invokes historical injustices like slavery , segregation , and genocide to awaken consciences in present-day America .
He fast-forwards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ society before the inevitable bar of historical judgment .
Like his fictional medical personnel , who use increasingly sophisticated technology to save , not destroy , fetal life , he calls upon readers to react with horror at abortion ’ s foundation of lies .
Similar to the original Star Trek series , Gryboski finds in science fiction a new perspective to examine the controversies of today .
Freed from present prejudices , characters from another time can separate moral truth from falsehood .
Like Sheridan and others who share Gryboski ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they judge abortion by eternal , objective standards .

September 21, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Various commentators have prophesied that future generations will view modern mass acceptance of abortion with the same horror expressed toward other past legalized crimes against humanity like slavery. Michael Gryboski intriguingly examines such a possible future history in his new book, Memories of Lasting Shadows, a science fiction morality tale with unsettling present implications.
Drawing upon his own journalistic background, the skilled writer Gryboski sets his reporter protagonist, Roberta Sheridan, in a late 21st-century pro-life America. His interrelated character stories in Washington, D.C. give life to an envisioned society where killing the unborn has become anathema. The law protects babies even in the most difficult pregnancies, like those resulting from rape or presenting severe fetal abnormalities. Thankfully, modern medicine’s blessings cure the latter.
A national Remembrance Day marks the Supreme Court having overturned, decades before, its January 22, 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that imposed unlimited abortion upon America. This memorial signifies the political consensus against abortion that encompasses even the most liberal politicians.
Gryboski’s characters experience the history of abortion much as real-life Americans today are agonizing over a conflicted race-relations past of slavery, Civil War secession, and segregation. Washington, D.C.’s Norma McCorvey Memorial Museum, named in honor of the pro-life convert who had been Roe’s original plaintiff, documents America’s abortion history in its full gruesomeness. The museum offers two tour options, one modified for sensitive children and another for adults that explicitly details brutal abortion procedures.
Similar to today’s American struggles over the Confederacy’s legacy in public spaces, Gryboski’s future historical reckoning with abortion entails name changes. Clara Grant, a political activist who regrets her past legal abortion following a casual sexual encounter, lobbies to change the name of Barack Obama Elementary School in New Jersey. For her, this pro-abortion “baby-killer” no more deserves as America’s first black president public honor than Roger Taney, the first Catholic Supreme Court justice, who wrote the infamously racist, pro-slavery 1857 Dred Scott decision.
Others in Gryboski’s sci-fi history want to obliterate any record of their past involvement with abortion. For past workers in abortion facilities who want to create new lives without any repercussions from a disgraceful past, the hacker Linda Harrison has been a godsend with her Ultralord virus that wiped out digital records throughout the world. Imprisoned in a special solitary confinement facility without internet access after Ultralord collapsed the economy, Harrison explains to Sheridan how Harrison often receives letters from former abortionists thanking her for Ultralord.
Ultralord particularly benefited Edgar Hood, a notorious abortionist known as the “American Mengele,” after Josef Mengele, the notorious Nazi doctor at the Third Reich’s Auschwitz death camp. Following Germany’s 1945 defeat in World War II, this war criminal escaped to a new life in Latin America — first Argentina (where he committed abortions), then Brazil. Similarly, the California abortion facility–operator Hood, a practitioner of grisly late-term abortions, disappeared after abortion became illegal in America.
Yet Michael Chan, the founder of the Drudge Report–like website Chan Worldwide News, thinks he has found Hood. Chan, promising another scoop, provides the impetus for Gryboski’s plot, as the “citizen journalist” Chan enlists the legacy media reporter Sheridan to help uncover Hood. Chan reveals his plan to Sheridan at the McCorvey Museum after the pair watched a documentary about how National Guard deployments had aided in enforcing new pro-life laws amid riots in some cities like Los Angeles.
This reprise of America’s 1960s urban upheavals indicates how Gryboski’s futuristic tale invokes historical injustices like slavery, segregation, and genocide to awaken consciences in present-day America. He fast-forwards in order to place today’s society before the inevitable bar of historical judgment. Like his fictional medical personnel, who use increasingly sophisticated technology to save, not destroy, fetal life, he calls upon readers to react with horror at abortion’s foundation of lies.
Similar to the original Star Trek series, Gryboski finds in science fiction a new perspective to examine the controversies of today. Freed from present prejudices, characters from another time can separate moral truth from falsehood. Like Sheridan and others who share Gryboski’s Christian faith in his envisioned unsecular modernity, they judge abortion by eternal, objective standards.
Share