lifesitenews--2020-11-17--Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

Join our daily worldwide rosary HERE

November 17 , 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--2020-11-17--Have church lockdowns uncrowned Christ the King?

November 17 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – This Sunday , many Catholics will be celebrating the feast of Christ the King .
For Catholics in England , France and elsewhere , this will be very subdued .
Once again , Mass is banned at the order of the state , and people are left to livestream , read their Missals , or find other solutions .
But what few realize is that the meaning and even the date of this feast was changed after Vatican II – and that along with this went significant change in what Church leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contributed to this subjection of the Church to the civil authority .
The feast was established by Pope Pius XI in 1925 to commemorate Christ ’ s Kingship not just over the hearts of his Faithful , but rather over all men – and specifically over every state , nation , and society .
But in and since Vatican II , Christ has been progressively uncrowned and relieved of his “ Social Kingship , ” which is all but forgotten today .
Silently accepting restrictions on the Church has uncrowned Christ One consequence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , “ the Church , founded by Christ as a perfect society , has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the state ” ( Pius XI , Quas Primas , 31 ) .
But the silence around this teaching has been deafening .
This silence – in the face of the enormous state interference in closing churches and suppressing the sacraments – is a betrayal of Christ the King by nearly all of those who claim to lead us as pastors and bishops .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ unjust law .
It is another thing to consent to it .
We are not yet living in a communist state , where expressing dissent can lead to death or punishment .
It is one thing for the Church to suspend public worship .
It is another thing for the state to do so .
It is yet another thing for the Church to meet this interference with silence , or with protests that are so inadequate as to be , in fact , concessions .
Take , for example , the various @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , President and Vice-President of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales .
Their requests are worse than silence , as they accept principles that contradict the Kingship of Christ .
For example , they argue that “ Faith communities have played a vital role ” in this period [ 1 ] – and thus the Church of Christ is “ placed ignominiously on the same level ” with false religions ( Pius XI – Encyclical Quas Primas 24 ) .
[ 2 ] Nichols and McMahon ask the Government to provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acts of public worship ” : but in asking for this evidence without protest , they are implicitly accepting that the Church is subject to the state .
In another letter , written with the leaders of other religions , they again ask ( rather than require ) that the public worship ( of all religions ) is essential and should be allowed to continue , on the basis that it is : • “ Important for the mental health of our nation ; and • “ An essential sign of hope [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minority Ethnic people.
” [ 3 ] Perhaps some of this is true .
And one can understand that the state may not be particularly convinced ( at this stage ) by a declaration of the sovereignty of Christ and the immunity of his Church .
But it is as if people think that as God is so far above us , we do not need to be concerned with honouring and protecting his rights .
But as Leo XIII said in his encyclical Tametsi : “ The world has heard enough of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let it hear something of the rights of God ( 13 ) ” [ 4 ] .
It is the silence about the rights of God that represents a betrayal of Christ the King .
Let at least the Faithful be told of the rights of God .
In another statement , [ 5 ] Nichols and McMahon say that it is important that we “ observe these Regulations [ sic ] , which have the force of law ” – as if a civil authority has the power to suppress the worship @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end .
They say that “ these Regulations [ sic ] are not an attack on religious belief ” – on the contrary , they attack the religious belief of the Catholic Church , namely that Christ is King and that the Church is immune to state interference .
They say that the regulations do , however , “ demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the essential contribution [ to society ’ s mental health ] made by faith communities ” – as if the Church of Christ can be grouped together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and as if the purpose of the Church and the Holy Sacrifice are our wellbeing .
But what about the rights of God ?
Bishop Philip Egan ( Portsmouth Diocese , UK ) , seen as a conservative and sympathetic to traditional Catholicism , also wrote a letter to the Prime Minister .
[ 6 ] While his letter includes some Catholic elements , it is ultimately also a request , based on Man ’ s need for spiritual things and to be nourished by God .
But what about the rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Diocese UK ) , seen as even more conservative , gave a statement to his own flock talking of “ the vital role which public worship has for the well-being of hundreds of thousands of people in this Shrewsbury Diocese.
” [ 7 ] He emphasises how public worship is the source of “ support for the most vulnerable and countless charitable activities in the service of the common good.
” He does not neglect to group the Holy Sacrifice of Christ the King “ together with faith communities across the nation ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ God ?
This is a statement to his own flock , not to the Government : there is no need to be coy about Christ ’ s rights as King .
While these restrictions do constitute a persecution of the Church , again , it is not yet like that of the Communists .
Bishops can still speak out strongly and affirm the rights of God , at least to their own subjects .
Why do they not do so ?
Each bishop that has been silent on the rights of Christ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s pretended right to close Churches , suppress the Mass , forbid Baptism and the sacraments , and impose restrictions such as registers , masks , distancing , choir sizes , and so on .
Again : one can understand pastors using naturalistic arguments to convince the secular state – but not with Catholics , who need to be taught the truth about Christ ’ s reign .
Even if he uses such arguments , a Bishop must nonetheless publicly affirm – and the Faithful need to hear – these three royal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immune from state interference ; and • That such restrictions on public worship are illegitimate in principle , even if accepted under duress .
Even the return of the Mass and the lifting of all restrictions will not remedy these omissions on the part of pastors .
These omissions require of each bishop a public profession of the Social Kingship of Christ and a promise that such restrictions , which are illegitimate in principle , can only be accepted under duress .
There are details about what you can do to help achieve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The subjection of the Church to the state has uncrowned Him Accepting these restrictions without protesting the rights of Christ represents a subjection of Christ and his Church to the civil authority .
But as seen above , Pius XI teaches that the Church “ has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the state , ” and that the she “ can not be subject to any external power ” in teaching , ruling and sanctifying .
( 31 ) .
He teaches that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rulers and princes are bound to give public honour and obedience to Christ , ” which is manifested most perfectly , of course , in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass .
The pope teaches that , at the Last Judgment , “ Christ , who has been cast out of public life , despised , neglected and ignored , will most severely avenge these insults ” ( QP 32 ) .
Looking through history , we see that St. Thomas Becket was martyred for his defense of the liberty of the Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Pope Pius IX condemned the idea that “ the civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion , morality and spiritual government ” ( 44 , Syllabus of Errors ) .
[ 8 ] We see that English law recognized the liberty of the Church , making it the first principle in Magna Carta .
[ 9 ] When the teaching of Christ ’ s Kingship over Societies is abandoned , it should not be surprising that the State encroaches into the power vacuum .
If bishops do not defend the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can not be surprised to find that the state subjects her to its power , interferes with her life and even suppresses her altogether .
Quite simply , Christ is not allowed to reign if his Church is subject to the state .
Recently , English parliamentarian Jacob Rees-Mogg declared that the spiritual sword is of higher authority than the temporal sword : but his actions in voting for the suppression of the Mass and the imposition of fines for those attending it subjects the Church to the State .
How can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true principle , when he had voted against it just a few days before ?
Why was the feast established in 1925 ?
When Quas Primas was promulgated 95 years ago , the world still remembered the First World War , and formerly Catholic countries were continuing their decline into secularism .
The Mexican revolutionary government was consolidating its control and persecuting the Church .
The Weimar Republic was allowing all sorts of immorality and decadence .
And only a few years before , the Masonic government in Portugal had been persecuting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him , the Pope taught that these evils were due to men having “ thrust Jesus Christ and his holy law out of their lives , ” both in private affairs and in politics .
He instituted the feast “ to minister to the need of the present day , and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society ” ( QP 24 ) .
What was this plague ?
“ Anti-clericalism , its errors and impious activities , ” manifested in the following progression , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : • The rejection of Christ ’ s Kingship itself – “ the empire of Christ over all nations ” ; • The rejection of the liberty of the Church – “ the right which the Church has from Christ himself , to teach mankind , to make laws , to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation ” ; • The imposition of religious liberty and indifferentism – namely , the process by which “ the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them ” ; • The subjection of the Church to “ the power of the state [ leaving her ] tolerated more or less at the whim of princes and rulers ” ; • The promotion of naturalism - “ a natural religion consisting in some instinctive affection of the heart ” ; leading ultimately to • The atheistic states , which hold that they “ could dispense with God , and that their religion should consist in impiety and the neglect of God ” .
( QP 24 ) Through this feast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the only hope for lasting peace was that both individuals and states “ submit to the rule of our Saviour ” ( QP 1 ) .
This teaching has been neglected and forgotten : and as Pius XI predicted , the Church has progressively found herself stripped of her immunity , placed on the level as false creeds by claiming religious liberty , and has ultimately arrived where we are now : her mission , life , and liturgy are subjected to the state , and tolerated at the whim of our rulers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reversal : the recognition of Christ as King .
This will not happen without the leadership of the Church .
But he must reign .
In what does the Kingship of Christ consist ?
Christ is King both by his divine nature , and by the price of his precious blood .
By these two “ titles , ” he has the right to be recognized as King .
He is King of each individual , and therefore of each gathering of individuals , because what applies to each part will also apply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ King over our families , organizations , and most especially our nations .
Nations , which are nothing more than a gathering of individuals , have a duty to recognise his sovereignty , and he has a right to their homage .
This – and not his reign over our hearts , which is obvious to all – is the true point of this feast and teaching .
As King over the nation , Christ ’ s “ kingly dignity demands that the State should take account of the commandments of God and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws , and in administering justice , and also in [ … ] education ” ( QP 32 ) .
As another perfect society , the state is sovereign in its proper sphere – but is obliged by its own nature to operate within the bounds of Christ ’ s Kingship .
This is not a medieval teaching fitted for a Catholic confessional state .
Although the teaching dates from the beginning of the Church , the feast and its teaching were made for a world rebelling against Christ the King .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ observation of this feast would draw attention to and remedy the evils of rebellion against Christ : The change of the feast has uncrowned Him To this end , he decreed that the feast be celebrated on the last Sunday of October .
But Pius XI ’ s feast and the post-Vatican II feast bear a very different emphasis .
The original readings speak of Christ ruling now as the “ head of the body , the Church , ” and “ that in all things he may have the first place ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things to God , “ whether on the earth or in the heavens.
” The Gospel sees our Lord , crowned with thorns , affirming his Kingship to Pontius Pilate , and declaring that he was born for this Kingship .
He is King , now .
By contrast , the new readings refer to our Lord seeking out his sheep in the future , the Resurrection on the last day , and the General Judgment .
The feast ’ s new date on the last Sunday of the year ( for centuries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world ) confirms this : our Lord has gone from being King , now , in all of his saints and the elect , to being a King at the end of time .
The original and the new readings in Matins both deal with the reign of Christ over our hearts .
But the original readings , based on Quas Primas , teach that this rule means that he therefore has authority also over civil affairs .
This is gone from the reformed breviary , leaving our Lord only to reign privately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gun appears in the verses cut out of the hymns in the Divine Office , which affirm the rights of Christ the King in the social order .
The verses that speak most clearly of this social kingship have all been removed : The implication is clear : we are abdicating Christ ’ s claims over civil society .
But we can not call Christ our King if we interfere with the extent of his rights over us .
This would make him a figurehead King and place the true sovereignty elsewhere .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ been subjected to the secular state .
They truly have uncrowned Him So however you sanctify the day this Sunday , spare a thought for those who are prevented from being present at the Holy Sacrifice by the intervention of the state .
It is the consistent failure to profess Christ ’ s Kingship over society that has led us to a civil suppression of the Mass and to bishops that simply accept this subjection .
As said above , not even the lifting of all restrictions will remedy this injustice done to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to each bishop ’ s silence is a public profession of those three royal truths : • That his Church is immune from state interference ; and • That such restrictions on public worship are illegitimate in principle , even if accepted under duress .
The only way that this will be achieved – humanly speaking – is if hundreds of Catholics write to their bishops requesting such a declaration .
Do so – briefly and politely .
We can not accept an uncrowning of our King .
And neither will our King @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modest request of a bishop – it is a request for a declaration , not even for public disobedience .
But the responses will speak volumes .
Because Christ must – and will – reign .

One consequence of Christ’s Social Kingship is that, 'the Church, founded by Christ as a perfect society, has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the state' (Pius XI, Quas Primas, 31). But the silence around this teaching has been deafening.
November 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – This Sunday, many Catholics will be celebrating the feast of Christ the King. For Catholics in England, France and elsewhere, this will be very subdued. Once again, Mass is banned at the order of the state, and people are left to livestream, read their Missals, or find other solutions.
But what few realize is that the meaning and even the date of this feast was changed after Vatican II – and that along with this went significant change in what Church leaders teach about the faith, which has contributed to this subjection of the Church to the civil authority.
The feast was established by Pope Pius XI in 1925 to commemorate Christ’s Kingship not just over the hearts of his Faithful, but rather over all men – and specifically over every state, nation, and society.
But in and since Vatican II, Christ has been progressively uncrowned and relieved of his “Social Kingship,” which is all but forgotten today.
Silently accepting restrictions on the Church has uncrowned Christ
One consequence of Christ’s Social Kingship is that, “the Church, founded by Christ as a perfect society, has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the state” (Pius XI, Quas Primas, 31). But the silence around this teaching has been deafening.
This silence – in the face of the enormous state interference in closing churches and suppressing the sacraments – is a betrayal of Christ the King by nearly all of those who claim to lead us as pastors and bishops.
It is one thing to obey an unjust law. It is another thing to consent to it. We are not yet living in a communist state, where expressing dissent can lead to death or punishment.
It is one thing for the Church to suspend public worship. It is another thing for the state to do so. It is yet another thing for the Church to meet this interference with silence, or with protests that are so inadequate as to be, in fact, concessions.
Take, for example, the various statements of Cardinal Nichols and Archbishop McMahon, President and Vice-President of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales. Their requests are worse than silence, as they accept principles that contradict the Kingship of Christ.
For example, they argue that “Faith communities have played a vital role” in this period[1] – and thus the Church of Christ is “placed ignominiously on the same level” with false religions (Pius XI – Encyclical Quas Primas 24).[2]
Nichols and McMahon ask the Government to provide “evidence that justifies the cessation of acts of public worship”: but in asking for this evidence without protest, they are implicitly accepting that the Church is subject to the state.
In another letter, written with the leaders of other religions, they again ask (rather than require) that the public worship (of all religions) is essential and should be allowed to continue, on the basis that it is:
“Covid-19 secure;
“Essential to sustain our [charitable] service;
“Necessary for social cohesion and connectedness;
“Important for the mental health of our nation; and
“An essential sign of hope […] especially for Black Asian and Minority Ethnic people.”[3]
Perhaps some of this is true. And one can understand that the state may not be particularly convinced (at this stage) by a declaration of the sovereignty of Christ and the immunity of his Church. But it is as if people think that as God is so far above us, we do not need to be concerned with honouring and protecting his rights.
But as Leo XIII said in his encyclical Tametsi: “The world has heard enough of the so-called ‘rights of man.’ Let it hear something of the rights of God (13)”[4]. It is the silence about the rights of God that represents a betrayal of Christ the King. Let at least the Faithful be told of the rights of God.
In another statement,[5] Nichols and McMahon say that it is important that we “observe these Regulations [sic], which have the force of law” – as if a civil authority has the power to suppress the worship of the Catholic Church for weeks on end.
They say that “these Regulations [sic] are not an attack on religious belief” – on the contrary, they attack the religious belief of the Catholic Church, namely that Christ is King and that the Church is immune to state interference.
They say that the regulations do, however, “demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the essential contribution [to society’s mental health] made by faith communities” – as if the Church of Christ can be grouped together with other “faith communities,” and as if the purpose of the Church and the Holy Sacrifice are our wellbeing.
But what about the rights of God?
Bishop Philip Egan (Portsmouth Diocese, UK), seen as a conservative and sympathetic to traditional Catholicism, also wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, asking that services be allowed to continue.[6] While his letter includes some Catholic elements, it is ultimately also a request, based on Man’s need for spiritual things and to be nourished by God.
But what about the rights of God?
Bishop Mark Davies (Shrewsbury Diocese UK), seen as even more conservative, gave a statement to his own flock talking of “the vital role which public worship has for the well-being of hundreds of thousands of people in this Shrewsbury Diocese.”[7] He emphasises how public worship is the source of “support for the most vulnerable and countless charitable activities in the service of the common good.” He does not neglect to group the Holy Sacrifice of Christ the King “together with faith communities across the nation”.
But what about the rights of God? This is a statement to his own flock, not to the Government: there is no need to be coy about Christ’s rights as King. While these restrictions do constitute a persecution of the Church, again, it is not yet like that of the Communists. Bishops can still speak out strongly and affirm the rights of God, at least to their own subjects. Why do they not do so?
Silence, implying consent, has uncrowned Him
Each bishop that has been silent on the rights of Christ the King has implicitly consented to their government’s pretended right to close Churches, suppress the Mass, forbid Baptism and the sacraments, and impose restrictions such as registers, masks, distancing, choir sizes, and so on.
Again: one can understand pastors using naturalistic arguments to convince the secular state – but not with Catholics, who need to be taught the truth about Christ’s reign. Even if he uses such arguments, a Bishop must nonetheless publicly affirm – and the Faithful need to hear – these three royal truths:
That Christ is King; That his Church is immune from state interference; and That such restrictions on public worship are illegitimate in principle, even if accepted under duress.
Even the return of the Mass and the lifting of all restrictions will not remedy these omissions on the part of pastors. These omissions require of each bishop a public profession of the Social Kingship of Christ and a promise that such restrictions, which are illegitimate in principle, can only be accepted under duress.
There are details about what you can do to help achieve this at the end of this article.
The subjection of the Church to the state has uncrowned Him
Accepting these restrictions without protesting the rights of Christ represents a subjection of Christ and his Church to the civil authority. But as seen above, Pius XI teaches that the Church “has a natural and inalienable right to perfect freedom and immunity from the power of the state,” and that the she “cannot be subject to any external power” in teaching, ruling and sanctifying. (31).
He teaches that “not only private individuals but also rulers and princes are bound to give public honour and obedience to Christ,” which is manifested most perfectly, of course, in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The pope teaches that, at the Last Judgment, “Christ, who has been cast out of public life, despised, neglected and ignored, will most severely avenge these insults” (QP 32).
Looking through history, we see that St. Thomas Becket was martyred for his defense of the liberty of the Church against the civil power. We see that Pope Pius IX condemned the idea that “the civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government” (44, Syllabus of Errors).[8] We see that English law recognized the liberty of the Church, making it the first principle in Magna Carta.[9]
When the teaching of Christ’s Kingship over Societies is abandoned, it should not be surprising that the State encroaches into the power vacuum. If bishops do not defend the immunity and liberty of the Church, we cannot be surprised to find that the state subjects her to its power, interferes with her life and even suppresses her altogether.
Quite simply, Christ is not allowed to reign if his Church is subject to the state. Recently, English parliamentarian Jacob Rees-Mogg declared that the spiritual sword is of higher authority than the temporal sword: but his actions in voting for the suppression of the Mass and the imposition of fines for those attending it subjects the Church to the State. How can he think to convince anyone of the true principle, when he had voted against it just a few days before?
Why was the feast established in 1925?
When Quas Primas was promulgated 95 years ago, the world still remembered the First World War, and formerly Catholic countries were continuing their decline into secularism. The Mexican revolutionary government was consolidating its control and persecuting the Church. The Weimar Republic was allowing all sorts of immorality and decadence. And only a few years before, the Masonic government in Portugal had been persecuting the three children of Fatima.
Looking around him, the Pope taught that these evils were due to men having “thrust Jesus Christ and his holy law out of their lives,” both in private affairs and in politics. He instituted the feast “to minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society” (QP 24). What was this plague? “Anti-clericalism, its errors and impious activities,” manifested in the following progression, in different ways and at different rates:
The rejection of Christ’s Kingship itself – “the empire of Christ over all nations”;
– “the empire of Christ over all nations”; The rejection of the liberty of the Church – “the right which the Church has from Christ himself, to teach mankind, to make laws, to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation”;
– “the right which the Church has from Christ himself, to teach mankind, to make laws, to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation”; The imposition of religious liberty and indifferentism – namely, the process by which “the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be placed ignominiously on the same level with them”;
– namely, the process by which “the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be placed ignominiously on the same level with them”; The subjection of the Church to “the power of the state [leaving her] tolerated more or less at the whim of princes and rulers”;
to “the power of the state [leaving her] tolerated more or less at the whim of princes and rulers”; The promotion of naturalism – “a natural religion consisting in some instinctive affection of the heart”; leading ultimately to
– “a natural religion consisting in some instinctive affection of the heart”; leading ultimately to The atheistic states, which hold that they “could dispense with God, and that their religion should consist in impiety and the neglect of God”. (QP 24)
Through this feast and encyclical, Pius XI taught that the only hope for lasting peace was that both individuals and states “submit to the rule of our Saviour” (QP 1). This teaching has been neglected and forgotten: and as Pius XI predicted, the Church has progressively found herself stripped of her immunity, placed on the level as false creeds by claiming religious liberty, and has ultimately arrived where we are now: her mission, life, and liturgy are subjected to the state, and tolerated at the whim of our rulers.
The only hope is a full reversal: the recognition of Christ as King. This will not happen without the leadership of the Church. But he must reign.
In what does the Kingship of Christ consist?
Christ is King both by his divine nature, and by the price of his precious blood. By these two “titles,” he has the right to be recognized as King. He is King of each individual, and therefore of each gathering of individuals, because what applies to each part will also apply to the whole. So Christ is King over our families, organizations, and most especially our nations. Nations, which are nothing more than a gathering of individuals, have a duty to recognise his sovereignty, and he has a right to their homage. This – and not his reign over our hearts, which is obvious to all – is the true point of this feast and teaching.
As King over the nation, Christ’s “kingly dignity demands that the State should take account of the commandments of God and of Christian principles, both in making laws, and in administering justice, and also in […] education” (QP 32). As another perfect society, the state is sovereign in its proper sphere – but is obliged by its own nature to operate within the bounds of Christ’s Kingship.
This is not a medieval teaching fitted for a Catholic confessional state. Although the teaching dates from the beginning of the Church, the feast and its teaching were made for a world rebelling against Christ the King. The pope taught that the annual and universal observation of this feast would draw attention to and remedy the evils of rebellion against Christ:
While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights. (QP 25.)
The change of the feast has uncrowned Him
To this end, he decreed that the feast be celebrated on the last Sunday of October. But Pius XI’s feast and the post-Vatican II feast bear a very different emphasis.
The original readings speak of Christ ruling now as the “head of the body, the Church,” and “that in all things he may have the first place” – and that he should reconcile all things to God, “whether on the earth or in the heavens.” The Gospel sees our Lord, crowned with thorns, affirming his Kingship to Pontius Pilate, and declaring that he was born for this Kingship. He is King, now.
By contrast, the new readings refer to our Lord seeking out his sheep in the future, the Resurrection on the last day, and the General Judgment. The feast’s new date on the last Sunday of the year (for centuries, associated with the end of the world) confirms this: our Lord has gone from being King, now, in all of his saints and the elect, to being a King at the end of time.
The original and the new readings in Matins both deal with the reign of Christ over our hearts. But the original readings, based on Quas Primas, teach that this rule means that he therefore has authority also over civil affairs. This is gone from the reformed breviary, leaving our Lord only to reign privately over our hearts.
The real smoking gun appears in the verses cut out of the hymns in the Divine Office, which affirm the rights of Christ the King in the social order. The verses that speak most clearly of this social kingship have all been removed:
2. The wicked mob screams out,
“We don’t want Christ as King,”
While we, with shouts of joy, hail
Thee as the world’s supreme king. 6. May the rulers of the world publicly
Honour and extol thee;
May teachers and judges reverence thee;
May the laws express thine order and the arts reflect thy beauty. 7. May kings find renown in their submission
And dedication to thee.
Bring under thy gentle rule our
Country and our homes.
The implication is clear: we are abdicating Christ’s claims over civil society.
But we cannot call Christ our King if we interfere with the extent of his rights over us. This would make him a figurehead King and place the true sovereignty elsewhere. In our case today, He has been subjected to the secular state.
They truly have uncrowned Him
So however you sanctify the day this Sunday, spare a thought for those who are prevented from being present at the Holy Sacrifice by the intervention of the state. It is the consistent failure to profess Christ’s Kingship over society that has led us to a civil suppression of the Mass and to bishops that simply accept this subjection.
As said above, not even the lifting of all restrictions will remedy this injustice done to our Lord. The only fitting reparation to each bishop’s silence is a public profession of those three royal truths:
That Christ is King; That his Church is immune from state interference; and That such restrictions on public worship are illegitimate in principle, even if accepted under duress.
The only way that this will be achieved – humanly speaking – is if hundreds of Catholics write to their bishops requesting such a declaration. Do so – briefly and politely. We cannot accept an uncrowning of our King. And neither will our King himself accept it.
This is a modest request of a bishop – it is a request for a declaration, not even for public disobedience. But the responses will speak volumes.
Because Christ must – and will – reign.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-17--Join LifeSiteNews on Parler

Join LifeSiteNews on Parler

November 16,2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – LifeSiteNews has been fighting BigTech censorship for years .
In the last few months we have seen a clear decrease in our traffic from social media and Google as we increased our election coverage and Big Tech companies cracked down on election related news .
Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news .
Subscribe now .
Facebook has recently labeled our website as ‘ fake news ’ due to the content we post .
Our reporters and editors work diligently to ensure we are bringing you nothing but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ publishing any ‘ fake news , ’ we ’ re publishing the truth that social media doesn ’ t want you to see .
Many of our faithful followers have noted they ’ re not seeing our posts in their social media feeds , or they ’ re not allowed to share or send our posts .
A few months ago , we moved over to Parler to begin building our presence on this uncensored platform .
With the recent increase in Parler users , we want to make sure that you ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually see our news .
Parler is dedicated to being a censorship free platform .
If you want to actually see our news while using social media , then sign-up for a Parler account and be sure to follow @ lifesitenews .
We are also on Gab , another social network “ that champions free speech , individual liberty and the free flow of information online.
” You can follow us on Gab here .
We have to band together to fight back as BigTech tries to manipulate our thoughts and actions to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help us fight censorship and fund our expansion into these censorship free platforms .
It takes real time and resources for us to be active on these new platforms and build our user base .
Please donate through our secure link to help us continue to spread the truth : https : //give.lifesitenews.com .
LifeSite has been warning people of BigTech ’ s censorship of news for months .
We have done countless articles on the censorship and even completed a mini documentary about it .
View the mini documentary here .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difficult to get out the truth , but we will not be silenced .

November 16, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – LifeSiteNews has been fighting Big Tech censorship for years. In the last few months we have seen a clear decrease in our traffic from social media and Google as we increased our election coverage and Big Tech companies cracked down on election related news.
Subscribe to our email list and bookmark LifeSiteNews.com to continue getting our news. Subscribe now.
Facebook has recently labeled our website as “fake news” due to the content we post. Our reporters and editors work diligently to ensure we are bringing you nothing but the facts. We’re not publishing any “fake news” – we’re publishing the truth that social media doesn’t want you to see.
Many of our faithful followers have noted they’re not seeing our posts in their social media feeds, or they’re not allowed to share or send our posts.
A few months ago, we moved over to Parler to begin building our presence on this uncensored platform. With the recent increase in Parler users, we want to make sure that you’re following us there so you can actually see our news.
Parler is dedicated to being a censorship free platform. If you want to actually see our news while using social media, then sign-up for a Parler account and be sure to follow @lifesitenews.
We are also on Gab, another social network “that champions free speech, individual liberty and the free flow of information online.” You can follow us on Gab here.
We have to band together to fight back as Big Tech tries to manipulate our thoughts and actions to align with their globalist plan. Please help us fight censorship and fund our expansion into these censorship free platforms. It takes real time and resources for us to be active on these new platforms and build our user base. Please donate through our secure link to help us continue to spread the truth: https://give.lifesitenews.com.
LifeSite has been warning people of Big Tech’s censorship of news for months. We have done countless articles on the censorship and even completed a mini documentary about it. View the mini documentary here. These increases in censorship may make it more difficult to get out the truth, but we will not be silenced.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-18--Bishop Strickland: We have to pray for the suffering souls in purgatory

His Excellency delivered his remarks during the latest episode of The Bishop Strickland Show , which airs on LifeSite ’ s YouTube channel every Tuesday night at 9 P.M. EST .
On October 28 , His Excellency tweeted about the 40 Days Devotion of Prayer and Fasting in the Diocese of Tyler .
“ There are a lot of idols in our culture that take us away from God , ” he said today .
“ But if we believe in God , and we believe John 3:16 : ‘ God so loved the world , that He sent His @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s just logical that He ’ s the only Savior we have ; there ’ s only one Son of God.
” The bishop touched on the significance of praying for the departed souls in purgatory as well , because “ in many ways , it gets to the heart of what we believe ” as Catholics — namely , that “ this life is over in a fleeting moment.
” His Excellency outlined how the concept of purgatory is about the purification of souls , as a preparation for heaven , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we are destined for eternal life with God.
” Moreover , he taught that purgatory gives both hope and the means for perfection .
“ You know that you have been saved by the grace of Jesus Christ and you have the opportunity to enter into that Beatific Vision , but you still have some work to do , ” he said .
Bishop Strickland also said that “ many of the saints speak of that kind of devotion , and again , it makes sense .
If you really believe in what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Son of God is the One we are called to grow closer to , and to follow Him as disciples .
”

In purgatory, you know that you have been saved by the grace of Jesus Christ, but you still have some work to do, he said.
November 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas gave an inspiring defense of the fundamental principles of the Catholic faith, including devotion to the Blessed Sacrament, salvation, purgatory, and more.
His Excellency delivered his remarks during the latest episode of The Bishop Strickland Show, which airs on LifeSite’s YouTube channel every Tuesday night at 9 P.M. EST. On October 28, His Excellency tweeted about the 40 Days Devotion of Prayer and Fasting in the Diocese of Tyler.
Day 13 of our 40 Days Devotion…from Acts 4:12 “There is no salvation through anyone else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human race by which we are to be saved.” This verse expresses the firm foundation of the Church from the very beginning. JESUS IS LORD — Bishop J. Strickland (@Bishopoftyler) October 25, 2020
“There are a lot of idols in our culture that take us away from God,” he said today. “But if we believe in God, and we believe John 3:16: ‘God so loved the world, that He sent His only begotten Son’… then it’s just logical that He’s the only Savior we have; there’s only one Son of God.”
The bishop touched on the significance of praying for the departed souls in purgatory as well, because “in many ways, it gets to the heart of what we believe” as Catholics — namely, that “this life is over in a fleeting moment.”
His Excellency outlined how the concept of purgatory is about the purification of souls, as a preparation for heaven, and for us “to remember that we are destined for eternal life with God.” Moreover, he taught that purgatory gives both hope and the means for perfection. “You know that you have been saved by the grace of Jesus Christ and you have the opportunity to enter into that Beatific Vision, but you still have some work to do,” he said.
Bishop Strickland also said that “many of the saints speak of that kind of devotion, and again, it makes sense. If you really believe in what the Church teaches, then absolutely the Son of God is the One we are called to grow closer to, and to follow Him as disciples.”
The Bishop Strickland Show, co-hosted by Terry Barber of Virgin Most Powerful Radio, airs every Tuesday at 9 P.M. EST on LifeSite’s YouTube channel. Click here to watch all past episodes.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-17--Bill Gates’s falsehood: ‘I’ve never been involved in any sort of microchip-type thing’

November 17 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – What if I told you that there was proof Bill Gates is involved in implantable micro-chips even though he himself says he has never been involved in any sort of “ microchip-type ” thing ?
Although Bill Gates did say just that in June , a poll has found that 25 % of Americans believe he ’ s not only involved in microchips , but that he ’ s working on a scheme to implant microchips into COVID vaccines .
Now , that is so far-fetched it reminds me of the suggestion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to implant microchips into women that would last nearly their whole reproductive lifetime and those microchips could be remotely accessed and thus have the potential to effectively sterilize women even against their will .
Oh , but wait , that second one is actual reality !
Over the last several months , Bill Gates has become a major target of so-called “ conspiracy theories ” regarding COVID .
Gates sparked lasting controversy with a March 18 online question and answer session , when he said , “ Eventually we will have some digital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.
” His remarks quickly drew scrutiny , including from Attorney General Barr .
When he was asked about Gates ’ s digital certificate proposal , Barr said he was “ very concerned about the slippery slope in terms of continuing encroachments on personal liberty.
” By April , Gates became the main subject of COVID-related speculation online , which has centered around a theory that he will somehow implant microchips into COVID vaccines .
This claim was first popularized by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heavily on social media .
Over 25 % of Americans believed it as of May , according to a poll by YouGov .
Responding to these concerns , Gates said on June 5 , “ I 've never been involved any sort of microchip-type thing.
” However , Gates actually has been substantially involved in a majorly invasive microchip program .
In fact , he directly commissioned such a program from a company called Microchips Biotech that specializes in implantable microchips .
Contrary to his June statement , Bill Gates personally ordered a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a company called Microchips Biotech .
The grants for the project are readily accessible on the Gates Foundation website .
Microchips Biotech , formerly known as MicroCHIPS , Inc. , has been working on implantable drug-delivery chips since 1999 .
It was founded by MIT scientists who invented the chip technology in the 1990s , in partnership with hedge fund Polaris Ventures .
The company drew the interest of the Gates Foundation after reporting positive results from a clinical trial in February 2012 .
Gates ’ s contraception project came about following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert Langer , co-founder of MicroCHIPS and an inventor on all of the company ’ s patents .
Langer is a frequent Gates collaborator , who also oversaw a controversial “ quantum dot ” vaccine record project – another “ direct request ” from Gates himself .
According to MIT Technology Review , Bill Gates and some of his associates came to Langer sometime in 2012 , asking about long-term , remote contraception implants .
By December 2012 , the Gates Foundation awarded an initial $ 1.5 million for Microchips Biotech to develop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an additional $ 20.5 million in 2014 .
The contraception microchips deliver levonorgestrel , the morning-after pill drug , to users for up to sixteen years and can be wirelessly controlled by doctors .
The Gates Foundation is still financially engaged in the project , having disbursed another $ 1 million in September .
They were involved when Microchips Biotech was acquired by the pharmaceutical company Daré Bioscience in 2019 .
In fact , on June 15 , ten days after Gates totally denied any microchip connections , Daré announced another $ 1.5 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does the microchip program have links to Gates , it also has ties to coronavirus vaccines .
Besides starting MicroCHIPS , Robert Langer co-founded Moderna , a major COVID vaccine maker .
IT the big one that the US government pre-ordered 100 million doses from in August .
Langer currently sits on Moderna ’ s board of directors and scientific advisory board .
Bill Gates also has funded Moderna , disbursing $ 20 million to date , with the possibility of a future $ 80 million .
While this doesn ’ t verify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus vaccines it does make his assertions like , “ There is no connection between these vaccines and any tracking type thing , at all , ” a little disingenuous .
The John-Henry Westen Show is available by video on the show ’ s YouTube channel and right here on my LifeSite blog .
It is also available in audio format on platforms such as Spotify , Soundcloud , and ACast .
We are awaiting approval for iTunes and Google Play as well .
To subscribe to the audio version on various channels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ ve created a special email list for the show so that we can notify you every week when we post a new episode .
Please sign up now by clicking here .
You can also subscribe to the YouTube channel , and you ’ ll be notified by YouTube when there is new content .
You can send me feedback , or ideas for show topics by emailing [ email protected ] .

November 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – What if I told you that there was proof Bill Gates is involved in implantable micro-chips even though he himself says he has never been involved in any sort of “microchip-type” thing?
Although Bill Gates did say just that in June, a poll has found that 25% of Americans believe he’s not only involved in microchips, but that he’s working on a scheme to implant microchips into COVID vaccines.
Now, that is so far-fetched it reminds me of the suggestion that Gates was involved with a plan to implant microchips into women that would last nearly their whole reproductive lifetime and those microchips could be remotely accessed and thus have the potential to effectively sterilize women even against their will.
Oh, but wait, that second one is actual reality!
Over the last several months, Bill Gates has become a major target of so-called “conspiracy theories” regarding COVID. Gates sparked lasting controversy with a March 18 online question and answer session, when he said, “Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it.”
His remarks quickly drew scrutiny, including from Attorney General Barr. When he was asked about Gates’s digital certificate proposal, Barr said he was “very concerned about the slippery slope in terms of continuing encroachments on personal liberty.”
By April, Gates became the main subject of COVID-related speculation online, which has centered around a theory that he will somehow implant microchips into COVID vaccines. This claim was first popularized by a pro-Gates website and has been promoted heavily on social media. Over 25% of Americans believed it as of May, according to a poll by YouGov.
Responding to these concerns, Gates said on June 5, “I've never been involved any sort of microchip-type thing.”
However, Gates actually has been substantially involved in a majorly invasive microchip program. In fact, he directly commissioned such a program from a company called Microchips Biotech that specializes in implantable microchips.
Contrary to his June statement, Bill Gates personally ordered a contraceptive microchip program in 2012, led by a company called Microchips Biotech. The grants for the project are readily accessible on the Gates Foundation website.
Microchips Biotech, formerly known as MicroCHIPS, Inc., has been working on implantable drug-delivery chips since 1999. It was founded by MIT scientists who invented the chip technology in the 1990s, in partnership with hedge fund Polaris Ventures. The company drew the interest of the Gates Foundation after reporting positive results from a clinical trial in February 2012.
Gates’s contraception project came about following a meeting between Gates and MIT professor Robert Langer, co-founder of MicroCHIPS and an inventor on all of the company’s patents. Langer is a frequent Gates collaborator, who also oversaw a controversial “quantum dot” vaccine record project – another “direct request” from Gates himself.
According to MIT Technology Review, Bill Gates and some of his associates came to Langer sometime in 2012, asking about long-term, remote contraception implants.
By December 2012, the Gates Foundation awarded an initial $1.5 million for Microchips Biotech to develop birth control chips. The foundation committed an additional $20.5 million in 2014.
The contraception microchips deliver levonorgestrel, the morning-after pill drug, to users for up to sixteen years and can be wirelessly controlled by doctors.
The Gates Foundation is still financially engaged in the project, having disbursed another $1 million in September. They were involved when Microchips Biotech was acquired by the pharmaceutical company Daré Bioscience in 2019. In fact, on June 15, ten days after Gates totally denied any microchip connections, Daré announced another $1.5 million Gates Foundation grant.
Not only does the microchip program have links to Gates, it also has ties to coronavirus vaccines. Besides starting MicroCHIPS, Robert Langer co-founded Moderna, a major COVID vaccine maker. IT the big one that the US government pre-ordered 100 million doses from in August. Langer currently sits on Moderna’s board of directors and scientific advisory board.
Bill Gates also has funded Moderna, disbursing $20 million to date, with the possibility of a future $80 million.
While this doesn’t verify theories that Gates will put microchips into coronavirus vaccines it does make his assertions like, “There is no connection between these vaccines and any tracking type thing, at all,” a little disingenuous.
The John-Henry Westen Show is available by video on the show’s YouTube channel and right here on my LifeSite blog.
It is also available in audio format on platforms such as Spotify, Soundcloud, and ACast. We are awaiting approval for iTunes and Google Play as well. To subscribe to the audio version on various channels, visit the ACast webpage here.
We’ve created a special email list for the show so that we can notify you every week when we post a new episode. Please sign up now by clicking here. You can also subscribe to the YouTube channel, and you’ll be notified by YouTube when there is new content.
You can send me feedback, or ideas for show topics by emailing [email protected].


lifesitenews--2020-11-17--Report shows Cdl. Nichols prioritized reputation of Pope Francis over allegations of child sex abuse

LONDON , U.K , November 17 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – An independent inquiry into the Catholic Church ’ s response to child sex abuse in England and Wales has given a damning report on Cardinal Vincent Nichols as well as the role played by the Holy See and the papal nuncio .
It also sheds further light on the cover-up of the investigation of Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O ’ Connor ’ s alleged sexual abuse .
Just hours before the McCarrick report was released , the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse ( IICSA ) released its 150-page report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to child sex abuse in England and Wales .
It gave explicit details of the nature of such abuse , particularly outlining the failings of Nichols .
Nichols currently serves as the Archbishop of Westminster , a post he has held since 2009 .
He was previously auxiliary bishop of Birmingham between 1991-2000 and then Archbishop of Birmingham from 2000-2009 .
In 2018 he was accused of covering up allegations of sexual abuse during his time as Archbishop of Birmingham .
The new IICSA report states that between 1975 and 2015 , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ received more than 900 complaints involving over 3,000 instances of child sexual abuse against more than 900 individuals connected to the Church , including priests , monks and volunteers .
In the same period , there were 177 prosecutions resulting in 133 convictions.
” Between April 2014 and July 2019 there were a further 203 allegations of child sexual abuse reported .
The report notes that , historically , abuse “ was swept under the carpet ” and that more recently , “ weaknesses in leadership were significant in the failures to address @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inquiry , Professor Alexis Jay , stated that “ [ i ] t is clear that the Church ’ s reputation was valued above the welfare of victims , with allegations ignored and perpetrators protected.
” However , the IICSA singles out Nichols , giving extensive evidence that he had a “ misplaced desire to give priority to the protection of the reputation of the Church , the Pope and Cardinal Murphy-O ’ Connor , ” instead of properly dealing with victims of abuse .
It further mentions “ nor did he demonstrate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which we examined.
” Richard Scorer , a solicitor for Slater and Gordon , who represented 32 victims , said : “ This is an absolutely damning report .
It highlights the shocking scale of abuse , the disgraceful slowness of the church ’ s response , the abject failures of leadership by Cardinal Nichols , and the Vatican ’ s appalling refusal to cooperate properly with the inquiry .
Cardinal Nichols needs to resign right away – in any other walk of life he would be gone immediately.
” The report records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , of which one details a woman , dubbed RC-A710 , who claimed to have been abused in the 1960 ’ s by Father Michael Hill .
In 2008 , she then also stated that Cardinal Cormac Murphy O ’ Connor had been involved in the abuse .
Murphy-O ’ Connor was named Bishop of Arundel and Brighton in 1977 , and then made Archbishop of Westminster from 2000 until 2009 , when he was succeeded by Nichols .
Murphy-O ’ Connor was an old friend of Cardinal Bergoglio and also a member @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to him being tasked with prepping Bergoglio for the group ’ s plan to elect him , as well as lobbying cardinals to support Bergoglio .
In a book detailing the election of Pope Francis , Murphy-O ’ Connor was described as a “ kingmaker.
” He later died in 2017 .
When questioned by police , Murphy O ’ Connor denied the abuse allegations levelled against him , although in a 2018 article , LifeSiteNews ’ s Maike Hickson and John-Henry Western , noted that “ the police took the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ Connor himself ‘ under caution , ’ which means that they made it clear to him that his answers could be used against him in court.
” The police left the case open , awaiting further evidence .
In 2011 , the case then went to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ( CDF ) , but when asked by the CDF about the case , Nichols said that it “ should now be regarded as completed and closed.
” The CDF agreed with Nichols .
Despite this declaration from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ source close to the case previously told LifeSiteNews that Portsmouth and Northampton Dioceses “ complained to Rome ” in 2013 , to re-open the investigation .
Both bishops knew the woman personally , as confirmed by the IICSA hearings .
Maike Hickson reported for LifeSiteNews that in 2013 Pope Francis directly told Cardinal Müller , then head of the CDF , to cease the newly opened investigations regarding the allegations RC-A710 made against O ’ Connor .
When questioned about the incident , Cardinal Müller affirmed the investigation had been stopped , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pope ’ s approval .
This event was corroborated by Archbishop Viganò in his September 27 , 2018 letter .
The IICSA reports that in September 2018 RC-A710 ’ s confidential details were then leaked to media , resulting in the story being widely reported in Europe and the U.S. Bishop Egan of Portsmouth Diocese wished to apologise to the woman , but was told by Nichols to do nothing , and that Westminster would handle the case .
Furthermore , the communications director of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any statement .
Nichols then pressured Bishop Egan and Bishop Doyle of Northampton , to say nothing .
The two bishops again wrote to Nichols in May 2019 , requesting that the case be re-opened , to which Nichols did not reply .
Egan stated that he believed Nichols refused to take action , due to his concerns that such a statement could be linked to the testimonies of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò , and be used to attack Pope Francis .
Despite Cardinal Nichols ’ denial that such was his chief motive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Egan , Bishop Doyle , the Portsmouth safeguarding commissioner , and by the IICSA report itself , which states : “ the primary focus of Cardinal Nichols ’ concern was the impact of Bishop Doyle ’ s statement on the reputation of the Church and the Pope.
” Doyle wrote to the victim , saying that there would be no public statement of apology issued to her , as Nichols believed it “ would be used by sections of the media internationally to get at Pope Francis.
” LifeSiteNews was specifically mentioned as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Doyle ’ s letter , and in Nichols ’ s hearing .
The IICSA noted that when questioned , Nichols still refused to “ accept that he had let her down or left her without support.
” He is quoted as saying , “ I think she ’ s had substantial , fundamental , unfailing support given in the name of the Church.
” The report summarizes : “ he was particularly concerned about the impact the leak would have on the reputation of Cardinal Murphy-O ’ Connor , rather than the impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal information had on her .
In the 13 months between the leak and the final public hearing , RC-A710 had not received an apology from Cardinal Nichols .
It appears that he did not do so as a result of his misplaced desire to give priority to the protection of the reputation of the Church , the Pope and Cardinal Murphy-O ’ Connor.
” Criticism of the Holy See The IICSA report also commented on the response to the inquiry from the Papal Nuncio to the U.K as well as the Holy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ [ d ] espite efforts by the Inquiry , very limited information was forthcoming.
” The IICSA desired the Holy See to give a witness statement , as well as other information relevant to the investigation .
After much contact , even through official government channels , “ the Holy See belatedly confirmed it would not provide a witness statement.
” As for the information which the Holy See did send the inquiry , the report described it as doing “ little more than confirm the bishops ’ authority within their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public domain.
” The report also criticised the Holy See heavily , stating that the actions of the Holy See in relation to the inquiry , were in contrast to the Pope ’ s 2019 words promising more action to resolve child sexual abuse : “ the Holy See ’ s stance was contrary to the spirit of its public statements.
” In sum , the report concluded that : “ The Holy See ’ s limited response on this matter manifestly did not demonstrate a commitment to taking action .
Their lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the IICSA 2019 investigation into Ealing Abbey , Nuncio Adams had been approached for a statement , but , after much attempted contact with the Vatican “ no information was provided ” from either party prior to the hearing .
Just the day before the IICSA report was released , Nichols released a letter saying that his resignation as Archbishop of Westminster had been accepted by Pope Francis due to his age , although he was to remain in office until “ other provision is made.
” However , the next day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message when responding to calls for his resignation in the wake of the IICSA report : “ I sent my resignation into Pope Francis and I have received a very unequivocal reply , and that is that he tells me to stay in office here…I do what I ’ m told .
The Holy Father put me here and he tells me to stay here - that ’ s enough for me.
” U.K. media outlets even reported that Nichols had suggested that Francis had turned down the cardinal ’ s resignation .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Nichols spoke to victims of abuse , claiming “ I understand something , something of what you live with , of what you ’ ve gone through.
” The BBC noted that one victim of sexual abuse who testified in the inquiry , said that “ thousands of pounds have been spent by the Diocese of Westminster in employing lawyers to keep me at arm ’ s length.
” U.K. newspaper The Guardian reported that “ [ o ] ne survivor represented by Slater and Gordon who gave evidence before the inquiry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retire with a full pension – meanwhile , the victims that he denied justice to have to live on , still suffering .
“ The fact is Nichols is a serial protector of paedophiles and he is the person that you should least expect it from , ” they continued .
“ The head of a church should have the greatest morals of all but instead they were sending paedophiles to other areas of the country – and America – in an attempt to cover the abuse up.
” A lawyer for Slater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ some of the most severe criticisms of a public figure ever made by a public inquiry , ” and that it “ comes close to concluding that Cardinal Nichols misled the inquiry.
” Noting that Nichols was described as lacking moral leadership , Deacon Nick Donnelly , a prominent commentator on Catholic news , described the report as a “ [ d ] amning conclusion about someone who claims to be a successor of the apostles & follower of Christ.
” Deacon Donnelly added , it “ exposes the sham of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sex abuse of children seriously .
Lying comes easily in the Empire of Dirt.
” Cardinal pressured bishops to stay quiet on abuse case so as not to harm Pope ’ s image

A solicitor for Slater and Gordon, who represented 32 victims, said: 'Cardinal Nichols needs to resign right away – in any other walk of life he would be gone immediately.'
LONDON, U.K, November 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – An independent inquiry into the Catholic Church’s response to child sex abuse in England and Wales has given a damning report on Cardinal Vincent Nichols as well as the role played by the Holy See and the papal nuncio. It also sheds further light on the cover-up of the investigation of Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor’s alleged sexual abuse.
Just hours before the McCarrick report was released, the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) released its 150-page report, detailing the Church’s response to child sex abuse in England and Wales. It gave explicit details of the nature of such abuse, particularly outlining the failings of Nichols.
Nichols currently serves as the Archbishop of Westminster, a post he has held since 2009. He was previously auxiliary bishop of Birmingham between 1991-2000 and then Archbishop of Birmingham from 2000-2009. In 2018 he was accused of covering up allegations of sexual abuse during his time as Archbishop of Birmingham.
The new IICSA report states that between 1975 and 2015, the Catholic Church in England and Wales “received more than 900 complaints involving over 3,000 instances of child sexual abuse against more than 900 individuals connected to the Church, including priests, monks and volunteers. In the same period, there were 177 prosecutions resulting in 133 convictions.”
Between April 2014 and July 2019 there were a further 203 allegations of child sexual abuse reported.
The report notes that, historically, abuse “was swept under the carpet” and that more recently, “weaknesses in leadership were significant in the failures to address child sexual abuse.”
Chair of the inquiry, Professor Alexis Jay, stated that “[i]t is clear that the Church’s reputation was valued above the welfare of victims, with allegations ignored and perpetrators protected.”
However, the IICSA singles out Nichols, giving extensive evidence that he had a “misplaced desire to give priority to the protection of the reputation of the Church, the Pope and Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor,” instead of properly dealing with victims of abuse. It further mentions “nor did he demonstrate compassion towards victims in the recent cases which we examined.”
Richard Scorer, a solicitor for Slater and Gordon, who represented 32 victims, said: “This is an absolutely damning report. It highlights the shocking scale of abuse, the disgraceful slowness of the church’s response, the abject failures of leadership by Cardinal Nichols, and the Vatican’s appalling refusal to cooperate properly with the inquiry. Cardinal Nichols needs to resign right away – in any other walk of life he would be gone immediately.”
Cardinal Nichols, Cardinal Murphy O’Connor, and Pope Francis
The report records two specific cases of neglect by Nichols, of which one details a woman, dubbed RC-A710, who claimed to have been abused in the 1960’s by Father Michael Hill. In 2008, she then also stated that Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor had been involved in the abuse.
Murphy-O’Connor was named Bishop of Arundel and Brighton in 1977, and then made Archbishop of Westminster from 2000 until 2009, when he was succeeded by Nichols.
Murphy-O’Connor was an old friend of Cardinal Bergoglio and also a member of the Saint Gallen Mafia, which led to him being tasked with prepping Bergoglio for the group’s plan to elect him, as well as lobbying cardinals to support Bergoglio. In a book detailing the election of Pope Francis, Murphy-O’Connor was described as a “kingmaker.” He later died in 2017.
When questioned by police, Murphy O’Connor denied the abuse allegations levelled against him, although in a 2018 article, LifeSiteNews’s Maike Hickson and John-Henry Western, noted that “the police took the case so seriously that they interviewed Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor himself ‘under caution,’ which means that they made it clear to him that his answers could be used against him in court.” The police left the case open, awaiting further evidence.
In 2011, the case then went to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), but when asked by the CDF about the case, Nichols said that it “should now be regarded as completed and closed.” The CDF agreed with Nichols.
Despite this declaration from the CDF in 2011, an English source close to the case previously told LifeSiteNews that Portsmouth and Northampton Dioceses “complained to Rome” in 2013, to re-open the investigation. Both bishops knew the woman personally, as confirmed by the IICSA hearings.
Maike Hickson reported for LifeSiteNews that in 2013 Pope Francis directly told Cardinal Müller, then head of the CDF, to cease the newly opened investigations regarding the allegations RC-A710 made against O’Connor. When questioned about the incident, Cardinal Müller affirmed the investigation had been stopped, and added that it did not have the Pope’s approval. This event was corroborated by Archbishop Viganò in his September 27, 2018 letter.
The IICSA reports that in September 2018 RC-A710’s confidential details were then leaked to media, resulting in the story being widely reported in Europe and the U.S.
Bishop Egan of Portsmouth Diocese wished to apologise to the woman, but was told by Nichols to do nothing, and that Westminster would handle the case. Furthermore, the communications director of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales also told the bishops not to issue any statement. Nichols then pressured Bishop Egan and Bishop Doyle of Northampton, to say nothing.
The two bishops again wrote to Nichols in May 2019, requesting that the case be re-opened, to which Nichols did not reply. Egan stated that he believed Nichols refused to take action, due to his concerns that such a statement could be linked to the testimonies of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, and be used to attack Pope Francis.
Despite Cardinal Nichols’ denial that such was his chief motive, his statement was contradicted by Bishop Egan, Bishop Doyle, the Portsmouth safeguarding commissioner, and by the IICSA report itself, which states: “the primary focus of Cardinal Nichols’ concern was the impact of Bishop Doyle’s statement on the reputation of the Church and the Pope.”
Doyle wrote to the victim, saying that there would be no public statement of apology issued to her, as Nichols believed it “would be used by sections of the media internationally to get at Pope Francis.” LifeSiteNews was specifically mentioned as one such media outlet, both in Doyle’s letter, and in Nichols’s hearing.
The IICSA noted that when questioned, Nichols still refused to “accept that he had let her down or left her without support.” He is quoted as saying, “I think she’s had substantial, fundamental, unfailing support given in the name of the Church.”
The report summarizes: “he was particularly concerned about the impact the leak would have on the reputation of Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, rather than the impact the disclosure of RC- A710’s personal information had on her. In the 13 months between the leak and the final public hearing, RC-A710 had not received an apology from Cardinal Nichols. It appears that he did not do so as a result of his misplaced desire to give priority to the protection of the reputation of the Church, the Pope and Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor.”
Criticism of the Holy See
The IICSA report also commented on the response to the inquiry from the Papal Nuncio to the U.K as well as the Holy See itself.
The report noted that “[d]espite efforts by the Inquiry, very limited information was forthcoming.” The IICSA desired the Holy See to give a witness statement, as well as other information relevant to the investigation. After much contact, even through official government channels, “the Holy See belatedly confirmed it would not provide a witness statement.”
As for the information which the Holy See did send the inquiry, the report described it as doing “little more than confirm the bishops’ authority within their own dioceses and provide documents already within the public domain.”
The report also criticised the Holy See heavily, stating that the actions of the Holy See in relation to the inquiry, were in contrast to the Pope’s 2019 words promising more action to resolve child sexual abuse: “the Holy See’s stance was contrary to the spirit of its public statements.”
In sum, the report concluded that: “The Holy See’s limited response on this matter manifestly did not demonstrate a commitment to taking action. Their lack of cooperation passes understanding.”
Previously, in the IICSA 2019 investigation into Ealing Abbey, Nuncio Adams had been approached for a statement, but, after much attempted contact with the Vatican “no information was provided” from either party prior to the hearing.
Nichols’s response
Just the day before the IICSA report was released, Nichols released a letter saying that his resignation as Archbishop of Westminster had been accepted by Pope Francis due to his age, although he was to remain in office until “other provision is made.”
However, the next day Nichols presented a different interpretation of his message when responding to calls for his resignation in the wake of the IICSA report: “I sent my resignation into Pope Francis and I have received a very unequivocal reply, and that is that he tells me to stay in office here…I do what I’m told. The Holy Father put me here and he tells me to stay here – that’s enough for me.”
U.K. media outlets even reported that Nichols had suggested that Francis had turned down the cardinal’s resignation.
In a video response to the report, Nichols spoke to victims of abuse, claiming “I understand something, something of what you live with, of what you’ve gone through.”
The BBC noted that one victim of sexual abuse who testified in the inquiry, said that “thousands of pounds have been spent by the Diocese of Westminster in employing lawyers to keep me at arm’s length.”
U.K. newspaper The Guardian reported that “[o]ne survivor represented by Slater and Gordon who gave evidence before the inquiry” stated: “Vincent Nichols will retire with a full pension – meanwhile, the victims that he denied justice to have to live on, still suffering.
“The fact is Nichols is a serial protector of paedophiles and he is the person that you should least expect it from,” they continued.
“The head of a church should have the greatest morals of all but instead they were sending paedophiles to other areas of the country – and America – in an attempt to cover the abuse up.”
A lawyer for Slater and Gordon noted that the report contains “some of the most severe criticisms of a public figure ever made by a public inquiry,” and that it “comes close to concluding that Cardinal Nichols misled the inquiry.”
Noting that Nichols was described as lacking moral leadership, Deacon Nick Donnelly, a prominent commentator on Catholic news, described the report as a “[d]amning conclusion about someone who claims to be a successor of the apostles & follower of Christ.”
Deacon Donnelly added, it “exposes the sham of the Vatican’s claim to take clergy sex abuse of children seriously. Lying comes easily in the Empire of Dirt.”
RELATED
Cardinal pressured bishops to stay quiet on abuse case so as not to harm Pope’s image
Share


lifesitenews--2020-11-19--Illinois governor refuses to say whether he’ll obey Thanksgiving COVID lockdown

CHICAGO , Illinois , November 18 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — While taking questions from members of the media during his COVID-19 update ( 32.15 ) on Monday , Democrat Governor J.B. Pritzker of Illinois dodged questions about whether or not he will be traveling for Thanksgiving this year .
The City of Chicago , where Pritzker resides , is under a stay-at-home advisory for 30 days .
Pritzker was asked , “ What are you doing differently for Thanksgiving this year ?
” He answered that he and his wife traditionally have friends over who are unable to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ that ’ s not something we ’ re doing this year , as you can imagine.
” He went on to say , “ Keeping in your own pod of close family , that ’ s the best thing you could do .
You ’ re not bringing COVID in .
These are people that you ’ ve been with every day .
It ’ s much , much safer.
” Pritzker also was asked , “ Since you live in Chicago , are going to follow the no-travel advisory that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place at 6:00 A.M. this morning ?
” He answered , “ I don ’ t know what that says exactly , and I don ’ t know exactly what my plans will be.
” He was pressed on whether or not he would be joining his family , who are reported to be in Florida , and he admitted that he does have a home there .
“ Will you be in Illinois for Thanksgiving ?
” one member of the media insisted .
“ That is my hope , but I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responded .
Pritzker faced a similar set of questions back in April , when his family was reported to have left Illinois during his extended stay-at-home order .
He later claimed they had left Illinois before the order and were sheltering in place in Florida .

'I don’t know exactly what my plans will be,' Gov. J.B. Pritzker answered under a hail of questions from reporters.
CHICAGO, Illinois, November 18, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — While taking questions from members of the media during his COVID-19 update (32.15) on Monday, Democrat Governor J.B. Pritzker of Illinois dodged questions about whether or not he will be traveling for Thanksgiving this year. The City of Chicago, where Pritzker resides, is under a stay-at-home advisory for 30 days.
Pritzker was asked, “What are you doing differently for Thanksgiving this year?” He answered that he and his wife traditionally have friends over who are unable to join their families in other states but that “that’s not something we’re doing this year, as you can imagine.”
He went on to say, “Keeping in your own pod of close family, that’s the best thing you could do. You’re not bringing COVID in. These are people that you’ve been with every day. It’s much, much safer.”
Pritzker also was asked, “Since you live in Chicago, are going to follow the no-travel advisory that Mayor [Lori] Lightfoot put into place at 6:00 A.M. this morning?” He answered, “I don’t know what that says exactly, and I don’t know exactly what my plans will be.”
He was pressed on whether or not he would be joining his family, who are reported to be in Florida, and he admitted that he does have a home there. “Will you be in Illinois for Thanksgiving?” one member of the media insisted. “That is my hope, but I will let you know,” he responded.
Pritzker faced a similar set of questions back in April, when his family was reported to have left Illinois during his extended stay-at-home order. He later claimed they had left Illinois before the order and were sheltering in place in Florida.
Share