lifesitenews--2020-05-22--Cdl. Burke: Forced vaccines violate ‘integrity of citizens’

PETITION : No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus !
Sign the petition here .
ROME , Italy , May 22 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Cardinal Raymond Burke spoke out strongly on Wednesday against mandatory forced vaccinations that could take place following the development of a coronavirus vaccine .
During his talk at this year ’ s virtual Rome Life Forum , he said “ it must be clear that vaccination itself can not be imposed , in a totalitarian manner , on citizens.
” According to the American cardinal , “ there is a certain movement to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the coronavirus.
” He also mentioned that some groups suggest “ a kind of microchip needs to be placed under the skin of every person , so that at any moment he or she can be controlled by the State regarding health and about other matters which we can only imagine.
” A state mandating vaccinations or even microchips “ violates the integrity of its citizens , ” Burke pointed out .
“ While the State can provide reasonable regulations for the safeguarding of health , it is not the ultimate provider @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the State proposes must respect God and His Law.
” The former Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura did not elaborate further on the relationship between the state and the Church on the question of health .
However , the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that life and health of the body “ are precious gifts entrusted to us by God .
We must take reasonable care of them , taking into account the needs of others and the common good.
” “ If morality requires respect for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not make it an absolute value , ” the Catechism continues .
“ It rejects a neo-pagan notion that tends to promote the cult of the body , to sacrifice everything for its sake , to idolize physical perfection and success at sports .
By its selective preference of the strong over the weak , such a conception can lead to the perversion of human relationships.
” Beyond speaking out against forced vaccinations , Burke said “ it must be clear that it is never morally justified to develop a vaccine through the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fetuses.
” “ The thought of the introduction of such a vaccine into one ’ s body is rightly abhorrent , ” he added , echoing statements by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops ( USCCB ) and other pro-life leaders , as well as Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler , Texas .
The April 17 letter of the USCCB and pro-life leaders called on the Trump administration “ to ensure that Americans will have access to vaccines that are free from any connection to abortion.
” “ We are aware that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in development , some are being produced using old cell lines that were created from the cells of aborted babies , ” the letter pointed out .
“ Thankfully , other vaccines such as those being developed by Sanofi Pasteur , Inovio , and the John Paul II Medical Research Institute utilize cell lines not connected to unethical procedures and methods.
” Given that “ there is no need to use ethically problematic cell lines to produce a COVID vaccine , or any vaccine , as other cell lines or processes that do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and are regularly being used to produce other vaccines , ” the letter asked the government “ to encourage and incentivize pharmaceutical companies to use only ethical cell lines or processes for producing vaccines.
” Bishop Strickland released his own pastoral letter on April 23 .
“ Tragically , people are not aware of or have chosen to turn a blind eye to the advances in medical science which allow vaccines to be developed with the wholesale use of aborted children ’ s bodies , ” he wrote .
Strickland emphasized that just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considered legal in our nation does not mean it is morally permissible to use the dead bodies of these children to cure a global pandemic .
Emphatically , this practice is evil.
” “ As your Shepherd , ” the bishop wrote , “ I urge you to join me , NOW , in passionately but prayerfully speaking out against this practice .
As I said in the beginning of this letter , I will help you navigate this storm as best as I can.
” “ We must insist that legislators create @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nature of any use of the remains of aborted babies for research , ” he added .
“ Further , we must insist that pharmaceutical companies comply with such legislation .
I believe this can be a significant building block in a culture of life which eliminates the taint of economic gain that too easily infects the abortion industry.
” In his talk at the virtual Roman Life Forum , Cardinal Burke also addressed the failure of the Church as a whole to insist on her rights to worship God properly amid the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Yes , it is true that the experience of the coronavirus COVID-19 crisis has marked significantly our lives , but it must not assume the direction of our lives , ” Burke said .

He also added, 'It must be clear that it is never morally justified to develop a vaccine through the use of the cell lines of aborted fetuses.'
PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
ROME, Italy, May 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Raymond Burke spoke out strongly on Wednesday against mandatory forced vaccinations that could take place following the development of a coronavirus vaccine. During his talk at this year’s virtual Rome Life Forum, he said “it must be clear that vaccination itself cannot be imposed, in a totalitarian manner, on citizens.”
According to the American cardinal, “there is a certain movement to insist that now everyone must be vaccinated against the coronavirus.”
He also mentioned that some groups suggest “a kind of microchip needs to be placed under the skin of every person, so that at any moment he or she can be controlled by the State regarding health and about other matters which we can only imagine.”
A state mandating vaccinations or even microchips “violates the integrity of its citizens,” Burke pointed out. “While the State can provide reasonable regulations for the safeguarding of health, it is not the ultimate provider of health. God is. Whatever the State proposes must respect God and His Law.”
The former Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura did not elaborate further on the relationship between the state and the Church on the question of health.
However, the Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that life and health of the body “are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.”
“If morality requires respect for the life of the body, it does not make it an absolute value,” the Catechism continues. “It rejects a neo-pagan notion that tends to promote the cult of the body, to sacrifice everything for its sake, to idolize physical perfection and success at sports. By its selective preference of the strong over the weak, such a conception can lead to the perversion of human relationships.”
Beyond speaking out against forced vaccinations, Burke said “it must be clear that it is never morally justified to develop a vaccine through the use of the cell lines of aborted fetuses.”
“The thought of the introduction of such a vaccine into one’s body is rightly abhorrent,” he added, echoing statements by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and other pro-life leaders, as well as Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas.
The April 17 letter of the USCCB and pro-life leaders called on the Trump administration “to ensure that Americans will have access to vaccines that are free from any connection to abortion.”
“We are aware that, among the dozens of vaccines currently in development, some are being produced using old cell lines that were created from the cells of aborted babies,” the letter pointed out. “Thankfully, other vaccines such as those being developed by Sanofi Pasteur, Inovio, and the John Paul II Medical Research Institute utilize cell lines not connected to unethical procedures and methods.”
Given that “there is no need to use ethically problematic cell lines to produce a COVID vaccine, or any vaccine, as other cell lines or processes that do not involve cells from abortions are available and are regularly being used to produce other vaccines,” the letter asked the government “to encourage and incentivize pharmaceutical companies to use only ethical cell lines or processes for producing vaccines.”
Bishop Strickland released his own pastoral letter on April 23.
“Tragically, people are not aware of or have chosen to turn a blind eye to the advances in medical science which allow vaccines to be developed with the wholesale use of aborted children’s bodies,” he wrote.
Strickland emphasized that just because “the crime of abortion is considered legal in our nation does not mean it is morally permissible to use the dead bodies of these children to cure a global pandemic. Emphatically, this practice is evil.”
“As your Shepherd,” the bishop wrote, “I urge you to join me, NOW, in passionately but prayerfully speaking out against this practice. As I said in the beginning of this letter, I will help you navigate this storm as best as I can.”
“We must insist that legislators create legislation which establishes the illegal and immoral nature of any use of the remains of aborted babies for research,” he added. “Further, we must insist that pharmaceutical companies comply with such legislation. I believe this can be a significant building block in a culture of life which eliminates the taint of economic gain that too easily infects the abortion industry.”
In his talk at the virtual Roman Life Forum, Cardinal Burke also addressed the failure of the Church as a whole to insist on her rights to worship God properly amid the restrictions imposed during the coronavirus pandemic.
“Yes, it is true that the experience of the coronavirus COVID-19 crisis has marked significantly our lives, but it must not assume the direction of our lives,” Burke said.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-22--Francis pontificate proving to be ‘catastrophe’ for Church: Renowned historian

May 22 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The “ religious and moral crisis ” that followed Vatican II was a worse chastisement than the two world wars and led logically to the “ catastrophe ” of Pope Francis ’ pontificate , says Italian historian and author Roberto de Mattei .
`` I hold , with all respect for the office which he holds , that the pontificate of Pope Francis has proven to be a catastrophe for the Church , '' Professor de Mattei said during a question-and-answer session on day two of the virtual Rome Life Forum .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is permitting “ as punishment for our sins , ” and there have been previous such punishments and more will come , said de Mattei , whose talk for the 7th annual forum , which was moved online because of the pandemic , was on “ The Judgment of God in History.
” Although chastisements of this century included communism and two devastating world wars , de Mattei rated fallout from Vatican II as worse than the latter .
“ The religious and moral crisis which followed the Second Vatican Council was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world wars , and the pontificate of Pope Francis seems to be the logical consequence of these religious crises , ” he said .
John-Henry Westen , co-founder and editor in chief of LifeSiteNews also referred to the confusion caused by Pope Francis during the May 21 question-and-answer session , when MC John Smeaton asked him if he wasn ’ t afraid of being condemned by God for speaking out against the current pontiff .
“ I would be afraid of condemnation by God if I did n't speak my concerns about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Canon 212 in the Code of Canon Law says the faithful have the right and even the duty to tell pastors their opinions on matters pertaining to the good of the Church .
“ And I do this with love for the faith , and indeed love for the pope , whom I pray for every single day .
And it ’ s out of concern for the pope ’ s own soul , ” said Westen , who gave a talk on “ The Pontificate of Pope Francis : why should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Westen related how the “ confusing and even erroneous public statements of Pope Francis ” have caused the older of his eight children suffering , citing as an example his daughter calling him from college when the Holy Father ’ s statement that “ cohabitation is real marriage and has the grace of real marriage due to fidelity ” went viral in 2016 .
“ I ’ m duty-bound as a father to correct the pope when he says things that are contrary to the faith publicly , ” said Westen .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my daughter ?
Or was I supposed to distort the truth ?
That ’ s impossible.
” Westen believes the coronavirus is a chastisement that has the loss of public Mass as its “ essence ” and that it will “ get quite a bit worse before it gets better ” so that people , particularly in the Church , “ may recognize the need for repentance.
” “ There is a grave need for the faithful to rediscover reverence at Mass with proper disposition for Holy Communion .
There are today countless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
Our Lady at Fatima warned “ entire nations will be annihilated , ” and “ we have to pray earnestly it doesn ’ t come to that , ” Westen added .
“ We must commit ourselves to fulfilling the requests of Our Lady of Fatima , and for the laity that means the daily rosary , scapular , and the First Saturdays devotion of reparation , and our own personal consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
” The pandemic is an opportunity for conversion and evangelization , Westen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are faced with calamity of all sorts , turn their hearts to God , many for the first time , some after a long time of rejecting God , ” said Westen .
“ So there ’ s never been a better time to evangelize.
” That also holds true within the Church , he said .
“ The truth is that the Catholic Church is in a battle like never before ; it is an internal battle for the soul of the Church .
And we have never needed reinforcements as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ So challenge those who feel called to the Church even slightly to come in now to join the battle.
” De Mattei expressed similar thoughts , noting in response to questions that “ as with all of the punishments of God , ” the pandemic is , “ in my opinion , a great act of mercy.
” “ The thing to fear above all is a situation of even greater confusion within the Church , in which even the best Catholics will risk losing their balance , ” he said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an effort to raise our gaze to God rather than lose ourselves in the labyrinth of the tactics of men.
” It is God “ and not a man who will save the Church , ” but Catholics can “ collaborate ” with Him by forming a “ Catholic army ” that is “ small , humble , but faithful ” and “ distinguishes itself for the integrity of the faith and the purity of virtue , ” de Mattei said .
“ Whatever happens is willed or permitted by God .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ joy without ever renouncing the fight for His honour , ” he added .
“ Our joy is in the fight.
” The Virtual Rome Life Forum is sponsored by LifeSiteNews and Voice of the Family .
To see the schedule or view the talks , go here .

'I hold, with all respect for the office which he holds, that the pontificate of Pope Francis has proven to be a catastrophe for the Church'
Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world: Feed your flock! Sign the petition here.
May 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — The “religious and moral crisis” that followed Vatican II was a worse chastisement than the two world wars and led logically to the “catastrophe” of Pope Francis’ pontificate, says Italian historian and author Roberto de Mattei.
“I hold, with all respect for the office which he holds, that the pontificate of Pope Francis has proven to be a catastrophe for the Church,” Professor de Mattei said during a question-and-answer session on day two of the virtual Rome Life Forum.
The coronavirus pandemic is a chastisement God is permitting “as punishment for our sins,” and there have been previous such punishments and more will come, said de Mattei, whose talk for the 7th annual forum, which was moved online because of the pandemic, was on “The Judgment of God in History.”
Although chastisements of this century included communism and two devastating world wars, de Mattei rated fallout from Vatican II as worse than the latter.
“The religious and moral crisis which followed the Second Vatican Council was a chastisement even worse than that of the world wars, and the pontificate of Pope Francis seems to be the logical consequence of these religious crises,” he said.
John-Henry Westen, co-founder and editor in chief of LifeSiteNews also referred to the confusion caused by Pope Francis during the May 21 question-and-answer session, when MC John Smeaton asked him if he wasn’t afraid of being condemned by God for speaking out against the current pontiff.
“I would be afraid of condemnation by God if I didn't speak my concerns about the pope,” replied Westen, adding that Canon 212 in the Code of Canon Law says the faithful have the right and even the duty to tell pastors their opinions on matters pertaining to the good of the Church.
“And I do this with love for the faith, and indeed love for the pope, whom I pray for every single day. And it’s out of concern for the pope’s own soul,” said Westen, who gave a talk on “The Pontificate of Pope Francis: why should we expect a divine intervention today.”
Westen related how the “confusing and even erroneous public statements of Pope Francis” have caused the older of his eight children suffering, citing as an example his daughter calling him from college when the Holy Father’s statement that “cohabitation is real marriage and has the grace of real marriage due to fidelity” went viral in 2016.
“I’m duty-bound as a father to correct the pope when he says things that are contrary to the faith publicly,” said Westen. “Or was I supposed to lie to my daughter? Or was I supposed to distort the truth? That’s impossible.”
Westen believes the coronavirus is a chastisement that has the loss of public Mass as its “essence” and that it will “get quite a bit worse before it gets better” so that people, particularly in the Church, “may recognize the need for repentance.”
“There is a grave need for the faithful to rediscover reverence at Mass with proper disposition for Holy Communion. There are today countless sacrilegious receptions of Holy Communion,” he said.
Our Lady at Fatima warned “entire nations will be annihilated,” and “we have to pray earnestly it doesn’t come to that,” Westen added.
“We must commit ourselves to fulfilling the requests of Our Lady of Fatima, and for the laity that means the daily rosary, scapular, and the First Saturdays devotion of reparation, and our own personal consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”
The pandemic is an opportunity for conversion and evangelization, Westen said.
“Countless people, when they are faced with calamity of all sorts, turn their hearts to God, many for the first time, some after a long time of rejecting God,” said Westen. “So there’s never been a better time to evangelize.”
That also holds true within the Church, he said.
“The truth is that the Catholic Church is in a battle like never before; it is an internal battle for the soul of the Church. And we have never needed reinforcements as we do now,” Westen said.
“So challenge those who feel called to the Church even slightly to come in now to join the battle.”
De Mattei expressed similar thoughts, noting in response to questions that “as with all of the punishments of God,” the pandemic is, “in my opinion, a great act of mercy.”
“The thing to fear above all is a situation of even greater confusion within the Church, in which even the best Catholics will risk losing their balance,” he said. “I believe we must make an effort to raise our gaze to God rather than lose ourselves in the labyrinth of the tactics of men.”
It is God “and not a man who will save the Church,” but Catholics can “collaborate” with Him by forming a “Catholic army” that is “small, humble, but faithful” and “distinguishes itself for the integrity of the faith and the purity of virtue,” de Mattei said.
“Whatever happens is willed or permitted by God. So we must always welcome His will with joy without ever renouncing the fight for His honour,” he added.
“Our joy is in the fight.”
The Virtual Rome Life Forum is sponsored by LifeSiteNews and Voice of the Family. To see the schedule or view the talks, go here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-22--US pushes back against pro-abortion language in UN health resolution

NEW YORK , May 22 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — Health ministers from around the world adopted a resolution on health policies to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic early this week at the World Health Assembly that includes “ sexual and reproductive health.
” The United States objected to the inclusion of the term and rejected the notion of an international right to abortion .
“ There is no international right to abortion , nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion , ” read a written statement submitted by the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first ever virtual meeting of the World Health Organization ’ s governing body .
U.S. policy supports “ the highest attainable outcomes for health , life , dignity , and well-being throughout their lives ” and “ high-quality health care for women and girls across the lifespan , ” according to the U.S. reservation , just not abortion .
In the statement , the U.S. government rejected two paragraphs in the World Health Assembly ’ s COVID-19 resolution for including the term “ sexual and reproductive health.
” “ We do not accept @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ’ or other language that suggests or explicitly states that access to abortion is included in the provision of population and individual level health services , ” the statement read .
While the paragraphs recognize that health policies and laws are up to states , the inclusion of ambiguous terms like “ sexual and reproductive health ” in UN resolutions still gives UN agencies cover to promote abortion , as the World Health Organization does routinely and has done during the COVID-19 pandemic .
“ The United States believes in legal protections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement reads .
The U.S. reservation also repeated the address by U.S. President Donald Trump to the General Assembly in 2019 , “ Americans will never tire of defending innocent life ” and chided UN bodies for promoting abortion as a human right and pressuring countries to remove legal restrictions on abortion.
” “ All in all , the U.S. did an excellent job in advancing pro-life positions at this year ’ s World Health Assembly , ” Scott Fischbach , the Executive Director of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life , told the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not prevail because “ sexual and reproductive health ” was included in the resolution , Fischbach stressed , “ The U.S. stood strong for life throughout the negotiations on the document.
” The U.S. statement ’ s emphasis against an obligation to fund abortion is new .
It is a reaction to UN entities and European countries pressuring the U.S. government to allow funding for abortion in humanitarian emergencies like natural disasters and wars .
The U.S. is the largest single donor to the World Health Organization , contributing one fifth of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 420 million in 2019 .
Federal law prohibits U.S. foreign aid funds from being used to perform abortion or coerce anyone into performing abortion .
The law , known as the Helms Amendments , first passed in 1973 and applies to all foreign aid , including emergency aid for the COVID-19 pandemic .
Federal law also prohibits lobbying for or against abortion by international organizations , such as the World Health Organization .
President Trump has put in place and expanded the Mexico City Policy to bar foreign nongovernmental organizations that perform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foreign assistance .
A letter released earlier this week by Acting Director of the U.S. Agency for International Development John Barsa , appears to signal a more aggressive posture of the Trump administration in defending U.S. pro-life laws and policies in diplomatic settings .

'There is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion.'
NEW YORK, May 22, 2020 (C-Fam) — Health ministers from around the world adopted a resolution on health policies to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic early this week at the World Health Assembly that includes “sexual and reproductive health.” The United States objected to the inclusion of the term and rejected the notion of an international right to abortion.
“There is no international right to abortion, nor is there any duty on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion,” read a written statement submitted by the United States as a formal reservation during the first ever virtual meeting of the World Health Organization’s governing body.
U.S. policy supports “the highest attainable outcomes for health, life, dignity, and well-being throughout their lives” and “high-quality health care for women and girls across the lifespan,” according to the U.S. reservation, just not abortion.
In the statement, the U.S. government rejected two paragraphs in the World Health Assembly’s COVID-19 resolution for including the term “sexual and reproductive health.”
“We do not accept references to ‘sexual and reproductive health,’ or other language that suggests or explicitly states that access to abortion is included in the provision of population and individual level health services,” the statement read.
While the paragraphs recognize that health policies and laws are up to states, the inclusion of ambiguous terms like “sexual and reproductive health” in UN resolutions still gives UN agencies cover to promote abortion, as the World Health Organization does routinely and has done during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The United States believes in legal protections for the unborn,” the U.S. statement reads.
The U.S. reservation also repeated the address by U.S. President Donald Trump to the General Assembly in 2019, “Americans will never tire of defending innocent life” and chided UN bodies for promoting abortion as a human right and pressuring countries to remove legal restrictions on abortion.”
“All in all, the U.S. did an excellent job in advancing pro-life positions at this year’s World Health Assembly,” Scott Fischbach, the Executive Director of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, told the Friday Fax.
While the U.S. position did not prevail because “sexual and reproductive health” was included in the resolution, Fischbach stressed, “The U.S. stood strong for life throughout the negotiations on the document.”
The U.S. statement’s emphasis against an obligation to fund abortion is new. It is a reaction to UN entities and European countries pressuring the U.S. government to allow funding for abortion in humanitarian emergencies like natural disasters and wars.
The U.S. is the largest single donor to the World Health Organization, contributing one fifth of the organization’s budget with roughly $420 million in 2019.
Federal law prohibits U.S. foreign aid funds from being used to perform abortion or coerce anyone into performing abortion. The law, known as the Helms Amendments, first passed in 1973 and applies to all foreign aid, including emergency aid for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Federal law also prohibits lobbying for or against abortion by international organizations, such as the World Health Organization. President Trump has put in place and expanded the Mexico City Policy to bar foreign nongovernmental organizations that perform and promote abortion from receiving any U.S. foreign assistance.
A letter released earlier this week by Acting Director of the U.S. Agency for International Development John Barsa, appears to signal a more aggressive posture of the Trump administration in defending U.S. pro-life laws and policies in diplomatic settings.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-22--President Trump: ‘I want to get our churches open’

WASHINGTON , D.C. , May 22 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – President Donald Trump once again expressed his desire to get the United States and especially churches back to normal , hinting to reporters that his administration may have action on the subject in the works .
“ I want to get our country back to normal , ” Trump told reporters outside the White House Thursday .
“ One of the other things I want to do is get the churches open .
The churches are not being treated with respect by a lot of the Democrat governors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open , and we ’ re going to take a very strong position on that very soon.
” While Trump did not offer details on what that “ very strong position ” might entail , he could be referring to an expansion of work his Justice Department ( DOJ ) is already doing to restore the right of religious Americans ’ to gather in person for worship services .
US Attorney General William Barr has repeatedly stressed that public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 outbreak do not suspend the protections of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DOJ to monitor states and localities for potential religious-freedom violations .
Most recently , the DOJ ’ s Office for Civil Rights informed California Gov .
Gavin Newsom that his reopening plan was discriminatory for holding religious institutions to a different standard than secular establishments .
As of May 21 , the United States is estimated to have seen more than 1.6 million COVID-19 cases , with more than 95,000 deaths and 373,000 recoveries .
An estimated 40 % of those deaths have come from nursing homes ( with the percentages for specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mounting evidence suggests far more of the public has contracted and recovered from the virus than the official count indicates .
At the same time , state bans on “ non-essential ” activity across the country have caused massive job losses , with more than 33 million Americans filing for unemployment and studies predicting that tens of thousands of small businesses that have closed down will never reopen .
The suppression of religious exercise has been one of the focal points for resistance to the COVID-19 lockdowns across the country , along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when the protestors abide by “ social distancing.
” Advised by Dr. Anthony Fauci , President Trump was previously a supporter of temporarily locking down the country , but over the past several weeks has soured on the lockdowns and come around to favor reopening .
He reportedly rejected a CDC proposal for reopening guidelines on the grounds that they were too restrictive of religious liberty and too harmful to the economy .
Readers can click here for LifeSiteNews ’ live updates on the coronavirus and its impact all over the world .

'I want to get our churches open, and we’re going to take a very strong position on that very soon.'
WASHINGTON, D.C., May 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – President Donald Trump once again expressed his desire to get the United States and especially churches back to normal, hinting to reporters that his administration may have action on the subject in the works.
“I want to get our country back to normal,” Trump told reporters outside the White House Thursday. “One of the other things I want to do is get the churches open. The churches are not being treated with respect by a lot of the Democrat governors. I want to get our churches open, and we’re going to take a very strong position on that very soon.”
While Trump did not offer details on what that “very strong position” might entail, he could be referring to an expansion of work his Justice Department (DOJ) is already doing to restore the right of religious Americans’ to gather in person for worship services.
US Attorney General William Barr has repeatedly stressed that public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 outbreak do not suspend the protections of the Constitution, and last month directed the DOJ to monitor states and localities for potential religious-freedom violations. Most recently, the DOJ’s Office for Civil Rights informed California Gov. Gavin Newsom that his reopening plan was discriminatory for holding religious institutions to a different standard than secular establishments.
As of May 21, the United States is estimated to have seen more than 1.6 million COVID-19 cases, with more than 95,000 deaths and 373,000 recoveries. An estimated 40% of those deaths have come from nursing homes (with the percentages for specific states often much higher), and mounting evidence suggests far more of the public has contracted and recovered from the virus than the official count indicates.
At the same time, state bans on “non-essential” activity across the country have caused massive job losses, with more than 33 million Americans filing for unemployment and studies predicting that tens of thousands of small businesses that have closed down will never reopen.
The suppression of religious exercise has been one of the focal points for resistance to the COVID-19 lockdowns across the country, along with prohibitions on peaceful protesting outdoors, even when the protestors abide by “social distancing.”
Advised by Dr. Anthony Fauci, President Trump was previously a supporter of temporarily locking down the country, but over the past several weeks has soured on the lockdowns and come around to favor reopening. He reportedly rejected a CDC proposal for reopening guidelines on the grounds that they were too restrictive of religious liberty and too harmful to the economy.
Readers can click here for LifeSiteNews’ live updates on the coronavirus and its impact all over the world.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-22--Pro-abortion UN top official, charged with false credentials, leaves post in good standing

NEW YORK , May 22 , 2020 ( C-Fam ) — The UN quietly let go a top human rights official and abortion activist rather than hold her accountable for having fabricated her credentials to justify her top-level position and high salary .
Kate Gilmore was expected to serve another term in her post as UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights , which she held from 2015 to 2019 , but she left to chair the board of trustees at the International Planned Parenthood Federation , the world ’ s largest network of abortion providers .
In November , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public to the story .
Lee accused the UN of not verifying credentials to justify Gilmore ’ s job and high pay , some $ 2 million over the course of her term .
Lee said he informed the UN Secretary General that Gilmore ’ s biography on the UN website falsely stated that “ Ms .
Gilmore holds a bachelor of arts degree from the University of New England and post graduate degrees in Social Work from the University of Melbourne and Community Development from [ Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gilmore ’ s office reported the discrepancies in May , 2019 , after confirming with the universities that she had not earned the qualifications , Peter Gallo , former investigator at the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services , told the Friday Fax .
UN staff regulations state that “ staff members must uphold the highest standards ” of integrity , including “ honesty and truthfulness in all matters affecting their work and status.
” Gallo said that investigations director Ben Swanson and Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Martha Helena Lopez were notified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neither pursued the matter , referring it instead to Secretary-General António Guterres .
Guterres dismissed it as “ an error ” on the website .
“ Junior UN staff have been dismissed for similar fraud , ” Gallo said , “ but the Secretary-General appears to be willfully blind to the same misrepresentations by UN senior officials.
” Six months later , Gilmore ’ s online biography was changed to read , “ Ms .
Gilmore ... has pursued post-graduate studies in social work and community development in Australia.
” There is no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the University of Melbourne , and the reference to Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology was dropped , Lee noted .
Ms. Gilmore ’ s biography at Harvard University gives yet a different version , saying she has a bachelor ’ s degree , and not graduate degrees , from both University of Melbourne and the Royal Melbourne Institute .
Gilmore faced no disciplinary action and left the UN on full benefits .
Before leaving , Gilmore had one of the whistle blowers transferred to a remote , powerless post .
Both whistle blowers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their accusations against Gilmore for bullying them remain unaddressed .
Gilmore has long been a controversial figure at the United Nations .
She held at top spot at the UN Population Fund and was often criticized for heavy-handed tactics with delegates from traditional countries , pressuring them to adopt prostitution and liberalize sexual norms .
As Executive Deputy Secretary General of Amnesty International , Gilmore spearheaded the 2007 inclusion of abortion advocacy in Amnesty ’ s work as part of its response to gender-based violence .
Gilmore was known for creating such a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the organization paid her handsomely to leave .
In her new role at IPPF , this week Gilmore condemned a letter from acting USAID administrator John Barsa to UN Secretary-General Guterres in which he said “ sexual and reproductive health ” is not humanitarian relief and should not be included in the UN ’ s emergency funding for COVID-19 .
Gilmore argued that “ denying access ” to abortion “ contravenes humanitarian principles , ” though the claim lacks legal basis or international consensus .

Kate Gilmore left the U.N. to chair the board of trustees at the International Planned Parenthood Federation.
NEW YORK, May 22, 2020 (C-Fam) — The UN quietly let go a top human rights official and abortion activist rather than hold her accountable for having fabricated her credentials to justify her top-level position and high salary.
Kate Gilmore was expected to serve another term in her post as UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, which she held from 2015 to 2019, but she left to chair the board of trustees at the International Planned Parenthood Federation, the world’s largest network of abortion providers.
In November, Inner City Press reporter Matthew Lee alerted the public to the story. Lee accused the UN of not verifying credentials to justify Gilmore’s job and high pay, some $2 million over the course of her term.
Lee said he informed the UN Secretary General that Gilmore’s biography on the UN website falsely stated that “Ms. Gilmore holds a bachelor of arts degree from the University of New England and post graduate degrees in Social Work from the University of Melbourne and Community Development from [Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology] RMIT.”
Two whistle blowers in Gilmore’s office reported the discrepancies in May, 2019, after confirming with the universities that she had not earned the qualifications, Peter Gallo, former investigator at the UN Office of Internal Oversight Services, told the Friday Fax. UN staff regulations state that “staff members must uphold the highest standards” of integrity, including “honesty and truthfulness in all matters affecting their work and status.”
Gallo said that investigations director Ben Swanson and Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Martha Helena Lopez were notified of Gilmore’s untruthfulness, but neither pursued the matter, referring it instead to Secretary-General António Guterres. Guterres dismissed it as “an error” on the website.
“Junior UN staff have been dismissed for similar fraud,” Gallo said, “but the Secretary-General appears to be willfully blind to the same misrepresentations by UN senior officials.”
Six months later, Gilmore’s online biography was changed to read, “Ms. Gilmore … has pursued post-graduate studies in social work and community development in Australia.” There is no post-graduate degree on the subject offered at the University of Melbourne, and the reference to Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology was dropped, Lee noted. Ms. Gilmore’s biography at Harvard University gives yet a different version, saying she has a bachelor’s degree, and not graduate degrees, from both University of Melbourne and the Royal Melbourne Institute.
Gilmore faced no disciplinary action and left the UN on full benefits. Before leaving, Gilmore had one of the whistle blowers transferred to a remote, powerless post. Both whistle blowers remain blacklisted, Gallo said, and their accusations against Gilmore for bullying them remain unaddressed.
Gilmore has long been a controversial figure at the United Nations. She held at top spot at the UN Population Fund and was often criticized for heavy-handed tactics with delegates from traditional countries, pressuring them to adopt prostitution and liberalize sexual norms. As Executive Deputy Secretary General of Amnesty International, Gilmore spearheaded the 2007 inclusion of abortion advocacy in Amnesty’s work as part of its response to gender-based violence. Gilmore was known for creating such a poor work environment at Amnesty International that the organization paid her handsomely to leave.
In her new role at IPPF, this week Gilmore condemned a letter from acting USAID administrator John Barsa to UN Secretary-General Guterres in which he said “sexual and reproductive health” is not humanitarian relief and should not be included in the UN’s emergency funding for COVID-19.
Gilmore argued that “denying access” to abortion “contravenes humanitarian principles,” though the claim lacks legal basis or international consensus.
Published with permission from C-Fam.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-23--Bishops should defy state rulings that worship is ‘non-essential’

May 22 , 2020 ( CatholicCulture.org ) — My friend and colleague Jeff Mirus cautions us that we should not rush into judgment of our Church leaders ; we should not leap to a premature conclusion that they are bowing to civil authorities by restricting pastoral ministry during the current epidemic .
He is right , of course , and I recognize in myself a strong tendency toward rash judgment : a tendency that I need to control .
Nevertheless I can not escape the conclusion that devout Catholics have good reason to suspect that in this crisis , their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political ramifications of their actions than the pastoral fallout .
I say this for three reasons : • Quite often , the restrictions announced by Church leaders have exactly matched , point by point , the regulations issued by civil authorities .
In Rome , the police closed down access to St. Peter ’ s Square ( which is within their jurisdiction ) , and then a few hours later the Vatican announced the closing of St. Peter ’ s basilica ( which is under Vatican control ) .
Was that a coincidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the world : Church leaders closed churches as soon as public officials imposed emergency rules .
Only rarely did Catholic leaders resist the imposition of civil orders on religious activities .
• As a general rule , the bishops who have been most anxious to restrict access to the sacraments — and the lay Catholics most anxious to defend those restrictions — have come from the Church ’ s liberal wing .
On paper that correlation makes no sense .
One might expect older and sicklier Catholics to favor stronger public-health measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under restrictions .
But if my observations are accurate , it has been mostly orthodox Catholics who have pleaded for greater access to the sacraments , while progressives have argued that reopening churches would be unwise .
• The remarkable deference to civil authority during this epidemic follows a pattern that has become all too common in recent years .
Our Church leaders have carefully avoided public controversy , even at the expense of ecclesiastical discipline .
Take , for instance , the manifest unwillingness of American bishops to bar pro-abortion politicians from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal Catholics have told us that the pro-life cause is not sufficient reason to deny anyone the Eucharist .
Yet for the past forty days we have been told that the pro-life cause is sufficient reason to deny the Eucharist to everyone .
Go figure .
We could not keep the churches open , we were told , because the Catholic Church is a pro-life church , and we must never do anything that would jeopardize the lives of those who come to worship with us .
That logic is sound , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t go far enough .
The Catholic Church is not in the business of saving lives , but the business of saving souls .
So during an epidemic , while civic leaders rightly have the physical health of the people uppermost in their minds , Church leaders should be more mindful of their people ’ s spiritual welfare .
As important as it is to worry about the health of parishioners , pastors should never do anything to jeopardize the souls of those who worship with us .
Only rarely do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conflict with the demands of spiritual welfare .
But such a conflict has arisen in these past several weeks .
Different pastors have resolved that conflict in different ways , and I am not going to question their judgments .
But far too many pastors , rather than making their own decisions , deferred entirely to secular authorities .
And that is a choice that I question .
In an excellent column for Catholic World Report , Douglas Farrow observed that some earnest Catholics are reluctant to reopen churches : While readily conceding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health concerns , Farrow adds that a sense of balance and proportion is necessary , because “ it won ’ t do to protect people from a deadly virus only to hand them over to poverty , famine , tyranny , war , or death by neglect.
” Yet even that is not his primary concern .
The greater danger , Farrow argue , lies in the willingness of Church officials to accept government-imposed restrictions — even extreme restrictions — without demanding that the government understand the Church ’ s priorities .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Le Figaro , Cardinal Robert Sarah makes a similar point , expressing concern that Church leaders , in their desire to be “ good citizens , ” have too often lost sight of their more important mission .
Yes , the Church works for the good of society at large , and offers her guidance on temporal affairs , as befits ( in the words of Pope Paul VI ) an “ expert on humanity.
” “ But little by little Christians have come to forget the reason for that expertise , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can offer advice to civic leaders , in pursuit of the common good , because the Church knows what mankind needs to find true and lasting happiness .
But civic leaders can not return the favor ; they can not offer the same sort of guidance to the Church , because the secular world does not comprehend the Church ’ s mission of salvation .
The Church understands the world ; the world does not understand the Church .
So the Church can not , indeed must not , accept the presumption that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Church .
The state ’ s business is to know what is good for the temporal welfare of citizens in general .
When the state ’ s laws are designed for that purpose and equitably enforced , the Church does well to obey them .
For example , parish churches should comply with local fire-safety regulations .
But when the state arbitrarily rules that church services are not essential activities , the Church can not and must not acquiesce .
Worship is essential .
The Church knows that because she is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she is familiar with the First Commandment .
To accept designation as “ non-essential ” is to deny the proper authority of Christ ’ s Church .
When civil officials issue orders about what is good for public health , Catholic bishops should listen , because civil officials have the proper authority to enforce public-health rules .
Indeed a prudent bishop would ordinarily heed those rules even if he personally believes they are misguided , because the bishop is not an expert in the field of public health .
But if and when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Church — if they compromise the evangelical mission — then the bishop must demur , and protest , and if necessary defy the civil authority .
And so must we .

The Church cannot, indeed must not, accept the presumption that the state knows what is good for the Church.
May 22, 2020 (CatholicCulture.org) — My friend and colleague Jeff Mirus cautions us that we should not rush into judgment of our Church leaders; we should not leap to a premature conclusion that they are bowing to civil authorities by restricting pastoral ministry during the current epidemic. He is right, of course, and I recognize in myself a strong tendency toward rash judgment: a tendency that I need to control.
Nevertheless I cannot escape the conclusion that devout Catholics have good reason to suspect that in this crisis, their pastors have been more worried about the political ramifications of their actions than the pastoral fallout. I say this for three reasons:
Quite often, the restrictions announced by Church leaders have exactly matched, point by point, the regulations issued by civil authorities. In Rome, the police closed down access to St. Peter’s Square (which is within their jurisdiction), and then a few hours later the Vatican announced the closing of St. Peter’s basilica (which is under Vatican control). Was that a coincidence? The same pattern was evident all around the world: Church leaders closed churches as soon as public officials imposed emergency rules. Only rarely did Catholic leaders resist the imposition of civil orders on religious activities. As a general rule, the bishops who have been most anxious to restrict access to the sacraments — and the lay Catholics most anxious to defend those restrictions — have come from the Church’s liberal wing. On paper that correlation makes no sense. One might expect older and sicklier Catholics to favor stronger public-health measures, while the young and reckless chafed under restrictions. But if my observations are accurate, it has been mostly orthodox Catholics who have pleaded for greater access to the sacraments, while progressives have argued that reopening churches would be unwise. The remarkable deference to civil authority during this epidemic follows a pattern that has become all too common in recent years. Our Church leaders have carefully avoided public controversy, even at the expense of ecclesiastical discipline. Take, for instance, the manifest unwillingness of American bishops to bar pro-abortion politicians from Communion.
For the past forty years liberal Catholics have told us that the pro-life cause is not sufficient reason to deny anyone the Eucharist. Yet for the past forty days we have been told that the pro-life cause is sufficient reason to deny the Eucharist to everyone. Go figure.
We could not keep the churches open, we were told, because the Catholic Church is a pro-life church, and we must never do anything that would jeopardize the lives of those who come to worship with us. That logic is sound, as far as it goes. But it doesn’t go far enough.
The Catholic Church is not in the business of saving lives, but the business of saving souls. So during an epidemic, while civic leaders rightly have the physical health of the people uppermost in their minds, Church leaders should be more mindful of their people’s spiritual welfare. As important as it is to worry about the health of parishioners, pastors should never do anything to jeopardize the souls of those who worship with us.
Only rarely do the demands of physical health come into conflict with the demands of spiritual welfare. But such a conflict has arisen in these past several weeks. Different pastors have resolved that conflict in different ways, and I am not going to question their judgments. But far too many pastors, rather than making their own decisions, deferred entirely to secular authorities. And that is a choice that I question.
In an excellent column for Catholic World Report, Douglas Farrow observed that some earnest Catholics are reluctant to reopen churches:
They make their appeal to the fifth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” And to what Jesus identified as the second Great Commandment, “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” These they have merged into a justification for the new COVID commandment: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor by staying well away from him, lest thou pass on a virus that might kill him.” And the COVID commandment, they point out, also remains in force.
While readily conceding the need for prudence in attending to health concerns, Farrow adds that a sense of balance and proportion is necessary, because “it won’t do to protect people from a deadly virus only to hand them over to poverty, famine, tyranny, war, or death by neglect.” Yet even that is not his primary concern. The greater danger, Farrow argue, lies in the willingness of Church officials to accept government-imposed restrictions — even extreme restrictions — without demanding that the government understand the Church’s priorities.
My worry is that by their compliance they are endorsing, or will be seen to be endorsing, not the gospel of the kingdom but the gospel of the state; that they are making the priorities of the state their own, rather than the priorities of Jesus.
In an article posted the same day by Le Figaro, Cardinal Robert Sarah makes a similar point, expressing concern that Church leaders, in their desire to be “good citizens,” have too often lost sight of their more important mission. Yes, the Church works for the good of society at large, and offers her guidance on temporal affairs, as befits (in the words of Pope Paul VI) an “expert on humanity.” “But little by little Christians have come to forget the reason for that expertise,” the cardinal remarks.
The Catholic Church can offer advice to civic leaders, in pursuit of the common good, because the Church knows what mankind needs to find true and lasting happiness. But civic leaders cannot return the favor; they cannot offer the same sort of guidance to the Church, because the secular world does not comprehend the Church’s mission of salvation. The Church understands the world; the world does not understand the Church.
So the Church cannot, indeed must not, accept the presumption that the state knows what is good for the Church. The state’s business is to know what is good for the temporal welfare of citizens in general. When the state’s laws are designed for that purpose and equitably enforced, the Church does well to obey them. For example, parish churches should comply with local fire-safety regulations. But when the state arbitrarily rules that church services are not essential activities, the Church cannot and must not acquiesce. Worship is essential. The Church knows that because she is an “expert on humanity” and because she is familiar with the First Commandment. To accept designation as “non-essential” is to deny the proper authority of Christ’s Church.
When civil officials issue orders about what is good for public health, Catholic bishops should listen, because civil officials have the proper authority to enforce public-health rules. Indeed a prudent bishop would ordinarily heed those rules even if he personally believes they are misguided, because the bishop is not an expert in the field of public health. But if and when the rules infringe on the prerogatives of the Church — if they compromise the evangelical mission — then the bishop must demur, and protest, and if necessary defy the civil authority. And so must we.
Published with permission from CatholicCulture.org.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-23--Bishops, doctors, bioethics demand ethical COVID-19 vaccine from Trudeau

ONTARIO , May 22 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A group of Canadian Catholic bishops , doctors , and scholars have sent a joint letter to the Canadian prime minister calling for his government to fund an ethical coronavirus vaccine not derived from fetal cells harvested from aborted babies decades ago The letter , dated May 21 , was sent to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and copied to the Canadian health minister , Patty Hajdu .
It includes the signatures of Winnipeg archbishop Richard Gagnon ( president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops ) ; Moira McQueen , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Institute ; Helen McGee , president-elect of the National Association of Catholic Nurses of Canada ; and Archbishop Sotirios , chairman of the Canadian Conference of Orthodox Bishops .
The letter urges the Trudeau government to fund “ alternative ” vaccines that are not made using fetal cells harvested from aborted babies years ago and to make ethically sourced vaccines available to Canadians .
The letter does not explicitly say one should not use the first coronavirus vaccine that is made available .
However , it does recommend that an ethically sourced vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a vaccine with a fetal cell line lineage .
PETITION : No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus !
Sign the petition here .
“ We endorse the earliest possible development of safe , effective anti-viral vaccines and the broadest uptake of vaccination .
We urge your government to fund the development of vaccines that do not create an ethical dilemma for many Canadians , ” says the letter .
“ On one hand , the wide uptake of vaccines is essential to protect citizens from the transmission of disease .
On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortion- derived cell lines raises conscience concerns for anyone who might be offered that vaccine and is aware of its lineage .
This dilemma will emerge if there are no alternatives to vaccines developed with the use of human fetal cell lines obtained from elective abortions.
” The letter includes signatures from various other Canadian Catholic bioethics groups , such as the Catholic Civil Rights League , Priests for Life Canada , and St. Michael ’ s University .
McQueen told LifeSiteNews that the letter came about because of conversations between her and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said another factor in penning the correspondence was the April letter from the U.S. Catholic bishops and pro-life leaders .
This letter asked the Trump administration to ensure that Americans will have access to coronavirus vaccines that are “ free from any connection to abortion.
” “ We decided to compose a letter for the PM , and contacted different people and organizations , most of whom signed on to our final version , ” said McQueen to LifeSiteNews .
McQueen said the intent of the letter is to ask the Trudeau government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ethical vaccine made available for those who want it .
“ The main point is to ensure that those of us who object to unethical vaccines , no matter which company or group is the manufacturer , will be able to receive morally acceptable ones .
The research for those is also underway and has a good chance of success , ” said McQueen to LifeSiteNews .
Last week , Canada ’ s National Research Council ( NRC ) announced a collaboration with the Chinese firm CanSino Biologics Inc. ( CanSinoBIO ) to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Ad5-nCoV , in Canada .
LifeSiteNews reported that the vaccine candidate Ad5-nCoV uses the HEK293 cell line , which is made from fetal cells harvested from an aborted baby decades ago and is the property of the NRC .
Trudeau announced last Saturday that Health Canada approved the coronavirus vaccine Ad5-nCoV to be used in human clinical trials .
Earlier this week , Dr. Kulvinder Gill , the president and co-founder of Concerned Ontario Doctors , warned that the Canadian government ’ s new deal with China to produce a coronavirus vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Canada should instead fund vaccine trials with allied nations .
The letter says the use of coronavirus vaccine candidates “ derived from elective abortions ” such as “ PER.C6 and HEK 293 ” are ethically unacceptable .
“ Our ethical objections relate to the use of this abortion-derived lineage , both the destruction and the exploitation of unique human lives , ” says the letter .
“ The subsequent manufacture of vaccines using such ethically-tainted human cell lines demonstrates profound disrespect for the dignity of the human person.
” The 2008 document @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Doctrine of the Faith condemned the use of aborted fetal tissue research .
The document says that for “ grave reasons ” such as “ danger to the health of children , ” parents are allowed to use a vaccine “ developed using cell lines of illicit origin.
” The document also says one must keep in mind that “ everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.
” The letter lists examples of vaccines under development that do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the signatories say are acceptable , such as one being developed by Dr. Wilfred Jefferies , a Vancouver immunologist at the University of British Columbia .
Recently , LifeSiteNews reported that Vancouver archbishop Michael Miller donated to Jefferies ’ s project after being assured that his vaccine research is free from the use of aborted fetal cells .
In closing , the letter refers to Dr. David Prentice of the Charlotte Lozier Institute , who lists coronavirus vaccines undergoing tests that are ethical and unethical .
McQueen said to LifeSiteNews that Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates .
“ Dr .
Prentice was very helpful in indicating which vaccines are ethical ( some do n't even use cell lines ) and which are not .
He also listed some that , at the minute , may or may not be ethical , but that will become clearer .
”

The letter urges the Trudeau government to fund 'alternative' vaccines that are not made using fetal cells harvested from aborted babies years ago.
ONTARIO, May 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A group of Canadian Catholic bishops, doctors, and scholars have sent a joint letter to the Canadian prime minister calling for his government to fund an ethical coronavirus vaccine not derived from fetal cells harvested from aborted babies decades ago
The letter, dated May 21, was sent to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and copied to the Canadian health minister, Patty Hajdu.
It includes the signatures of Winnipeg archbishop Richard Gagnon (president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops); Moira McQueen, executive director of the Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute; Helen McGee, president-elect of the National Association of Catholic Nurses of Canada; and Archbishop Sotirios, chairman of the Canadian Conference of Orthodox Bishops.
The letter urges the Trudeau government to fund “alternative” vaccines that are not made using fetal cells harvested from aborted babies years ago and to make ethically sourced vaccines available to Canadians.
The letter does not explicitly say one should not use the first coronavirus vaccine that is made available. However, it does recommend that an ethically sourced vaccine be offered to those who consciously object to a vaccine with a fetal cell line lineage.
PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
“We endorse the earliest possible development of safe, effective anti-viral vaccines and the broadest uptake of vaccination. We urge your government to fund the development of vaccines that do not create an ethical dilemma for many Canadians,” says the letter.
“On one hand, the wide uptake of vaccines is essential to protect citizens from the transmission of disease. On the other, a vaccine produced using abortion- derived cell lines raises conscience concerns for anyone who might be offered that vaccine and is aware of its lineage. This dilemma will emerge if there are no alternatives to vaccines developed with the use of human fetal cell lines obtained from elective abortions.”
The letter includes signatures from various other Canadian Catholic bioethics groups, such as the Catholic Civil Rights League, Priests for Life Canada, and St. Michael’s University.
McQueen told LifeSiteNews that the letter came about because of conversations between her and Helen McGee regarding ethical vaccines.
McQueen said another factor in penning the correspondence was the April letter from the U.S. Catholic bishops and pro-life leaders. This letter asked the Trump administration to ensure that Americans will have access to coronavirus vaccines that are “free from any connection to abortion.”
“We decided to compose a letter for the PM, and contacted different people and organizations, most of whom signed on to our final version,” said McQueen to LifeSiteNews.
McQueen said the intent of the letter is to ask the Trudeau government to ensure that there is an alternative ethical vaccine made available for those who want it.
“The main point is to ensure that those of us who object to unethical vaccines, no matter which company or group is the manufacturer, will be able to receive morally acceptable ones. The research for those is also underway and has a good chance of success,” said McQueen to LifeSiteNews.
Last week, Canada’s National Research Council (NRC) announced a collaboration with the Chinese firm CanSino Biologics Inc. (CanSinoBIO) to test its trial coronavirus vaccine, known as Ad5-nCoV, in Canada.
LifeSiteNews reported that the vaccine candidate Ad5-nCoV uses the HEK293 cell line, which is made from fetal cells harvested from an aborted baby decades ago and is the property of the NRC.
Trudeau announced last Saturday that Health Canada approved the coronavirus vaccine Ad5-nCoV to be used in human clinical trials.
Earlier this week, Dr. Kulvinder Gill, the president and co-founder of Concerned Ontario Doctors, warned that the Canadian government’s new deal with China to produce a coronavirus vaccine is a “dangerous endeavour” and that Canada should instead fund vaccine trials with allied nations.
The letter says the use of coronavirus vaccine candidates “derived from elective abortions” such as “PER.C6 and HEK 293” are ethically unacceptable.
“Our ethical objections relate to the use of this abortion-derived lineage, both the destruction and the exploitation of unique human lives,” says the letter.
“The subsequent manufacture of vaccines using such ethically-tainted human cell lines demonstrates profound disrespect for the dignity of the human person.”
The 2008 document Dignitatis Personae from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith condemned the use of aborted fetal tissue research. The document says that for “grave reasons” such as “danger to the health of children,” parents are allowed to use a vaccine “developed using cell lines of illicit origin.” The document also says one must keep in mind that “everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.”
The letter lists examples of vaccines under development that do not use aborted fetal cell lines, which the signatories say are acceptable, such as one being developed by Dr. Wilfred Jefferies, a Vancouver immunologist at the University of British Columbia.
Recently, LifeSiteNews reported that Vancouver archbishop Michael Miller donated to Jefferies’s project after being assured that his vaccine research is free from the use of aborted fetal cells.
In closing, the letter refers to Dr. David Prentice of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, who lists coronavirus vaccines undergoing tests that are ethical and unethical.
McQueen said to LifeSiteNews that Dr. Prentice was helpful in highlighting ethical vaccine candidates.
“Dr. Prentice was very helpful in indicating which vaccines are ethical (some don't even use cell lines) and which are not. He also listed some that, at the minute, may or may not be ethical, but that will become clearer.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-23--Vatican’s former doctrine head: ‘Global players’ are using pandemic to ‘suppress’ Catholic Church

ROME , May 22 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — German cardinal Gerhard Müller has warned against “ global players who are against the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church is pro-life , pro-family , and for religious freedom.
” Talking to EWTN ’ s Raymond Arroyo on Thursday , the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said certain powers “ want to instrumentalize this situation ” of the coronavirus pandemic “ to suppress the Catholic Church.
” “ The security for your life is not the only value , ” he said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can not isolate totally all the population .
We have other illnesses and other dangers in our life , and we can not absolutely remain in our home.
” “ We can not restrict the human existence , also in a materialistic interpretation , as if we are able to construct a paradise on Earth , ” Müller cautioned .
“ The state as such can not say , ‘ We forbid worshiping , ’ ” he said .
“ We have the fundamental religious rights , human rights , and the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The former bishop of Regensburg in Germany pointed out the contradiction between , on the one hand , saying that churches need to be closed but , on the other hand , grocery stores being allowed to remain open for business .
He asked , “ Why is the danger in the church bigger than in the supermarket ?
” Beyond prohibiting public Masses , “ nobody has the right to forbid the priests , the shepherds , to visit the people who are dying or very ill. ” As Müller explained , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pastoral care in these cases.
” Müller talked to Arroyo about the appeal “ for the Church and the world , ” which Müller had signed , together with two other cardinals and many other Catholics , in early May .
PETITION : No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus !
Sign the petition here .
The text , which had been drafted by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò , had come under severe criticism , especially in Germany , for allegedly peddling conspiracy theories regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the response to it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the German Bishops ’ Conference , Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg , had said his organization “ does in principle not comment on appeals by individual bishops outside Germany.
” Nevertheless , he commented that “ the assessment of the coronavirus pandemic by the German Bishops ’ Conference is fundamentally different from the appeal published yesterday.
” Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer , who succeeded Müller as bishop of Regensburg , said only that he was “ adopting as his own ” the statement by Bätzing .
Bishop Gebhard Fürst tweeted , “ As bishop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I strongly dissociate myself from the dangerous theories of the group around Archbishop Viganò .
Whoever reinterprets the efforts of politics to protect human life from the [ coronavirus ] into a dubious world conspiracy is playing with fire !
” Cardinal Müller explained that Viganò had asked him to sign the letter during a phone conversation .
“ I said I will support him to overcome the isolation , all the tensions between the Vatican and him , ” he pointed out .
The bishops who signed the Viganò appeal , Müller @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the medical issues of COVID-19 , “ but we have to speak against the instrumentalization of this virus , of this big world crisis , global crisis , by some dictatorial states or by other ideological groups which want to take the opportunity to suppress the Church and make a breakdown of the sacramental life of the Church.
” The main task after this breakdown , according to Müller , will be evangelization and “ to give people the hope that also in cases of our diseases and of our death , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are in this world , we have a wider horizon.
” Asked about the main mission of the Church , Müller responded , “ We are cooperating with secular institutions for social justice and peace and ecology , but our main mission is to preach the kingdom of God .
”

The former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith joined with exiled archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to denounce world governments' treatment of the coronavirus pandemic.
ROME, May 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — German cardinal Gerhard Müller has warned against “global players who are against the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church is pro-life, pro-family, and for religious freedom.”
Talking to EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo on Thursday, the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said certain powers “want to instrumentalize this situation” of the coronavirus pandemic “to suppress the Catholic Church.”
“The security for your life is not the only value,” he said. “We have also spiritual values. We cannot isolate totally all the population. We have other illnesses and other dangers in our life, and we cannot absolutely remain in our home.”
“We cannot restrict the human existence, also in a materialistic interpretation, as if we are able to construct a paradise on Earth,” Müller cautioned.
“The state as such cannot say, ‘We forbid worshiping,’” he said. “We have the fundamental religious rights, human rights, and the state must respect these rights of everybody.”
The former bishop of Regensburg in Germany pointed out the contradiction between, on the one hand, saying that churches need to be closed but, on the other hand, grocery stores being allowed to remain open for business.
He asked, “Why is the danger in the church bigger than in the supermarket?”
Beyond prohibiting public Masses, “nobody has the right to forbid the priests, the shepherds, to visit the people who are dying or very ill.” As Müller explained, faithful Catholics have the right to “pastoral care in these cases.”
Müller talked to Arroyo about the appeal “for the Church and the world,” which Müller had signed, together with two other cardinals and many other Catholics, in early May.
PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus! Sign the petition here.
The text, which had been drafted by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, had come under severe criticism, especially in Germany, for allegedly peddling conspiracy theories regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and the response to it by public authorities.
The president of the German Bishops’ Conference, Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg, had said his organization “does in principle not comment on appeals by individual bishops outside Germany.”
Nevertheless, he commented that “the assessment of the coronavirus pandemic by the German Bishops’ Conference is fundamentally different from the appeal published yesterday.”
Bishop Rudolf Voderholzer, who succeeded Müller as bishop of Regensburg, said only that he was “adopting as his own” the statement by Bätzing.
Bishop Gebhard Fürst tweeted, “As bishop of the [Diocese of Rottenburg-Stuttgart] I strongly dissociate myself from the dangerous theories of the group around Archbishop Viganò. Whoever reinterprets the efforts of politics to protect human life from the [coronavirus] into a dubious world conspiracy is playing with fire!”
Cardinal Müller explained that Viganò had asked him to sign the letter during a phone conversation. “I said I will support him to overcome the isolation, all the tensions between the Vatican and him,” he pointed out.
The bishops who signed the Viganò appeal, Müller continued, cannot say anything about the medical issues of COVID-19, “but we have to speak against the instrumentalization of this virus, of this big world crisis, global crisis, by some dictatorial states or by other ideological groups which want to take the opportunity to suppress the Church and make a breakdown of the sacramental life of the Church.”
The main task after this breakdown, according to Müller, will be evangelization and “to give people the hope that also in cases of our diseases and of our death, of our short life and all the accidents that are in this world, we have a wider horizon.”
Asked about the main mission of the Church, Müller responded, “We are cooperating with secular institutions for social justice and peace and ecology, but our main mission is to preach the kingdom of God.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-05-23--Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE - 1 pm today

May 23 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – In response to the coronavirus crisis , LifeSite is offering Catholics throughout the world a chance to be united in praying the rosary together , at the same time , every day at 12:00 noon EST .
The rosary is led by Father Anthony Pillari , an American priest currently in Italy .
To date , Catholics from Israel , Uganda , Italy , France , Germany , Ireland , the United Kingdom , the U.S. , Canada , Mexico , Chile , Brazil , Australia , New Zealand , the Philippines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as well as other countries , have been joining in .
The whole world – including the Church – has been thrown into chaos because of the coronavirus ( COVID-19 ) .
Thousands of people have passed away as a result of the viral outbreak , while thousands more have been sickened .
And , across the world , business has come to a grinding halt , resulting in sudden job loss and threatening economic recession .
If there ever was a time for prayer , this is it .
Catholics around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Sacraments , but in many places are unable to access them because of bishops ’ orders or government restrictions .
We know that community with other believers is vital all the time , but especially during this time of global calls for “ sheltering-in-place ” and quarantine .
“ The rosary is the weapon for these times , ” St. Padre Pio said .
Through prayer , we can shape history , change the world , and bring this painful crisis to an end .
Join us today !
Send photos or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the rosary with Father Pillari to [ email protected ]

(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