lifesitenews--2020-09-15--This pope’s defense of scripture’s inerrancy is more relevant today than it was 100 years ago

PETITION : Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying `` You ca n't be a Catholic and a Democrat. ''
!
Sign the petition here .
September 15 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Exactly one hundred years ago today , on September 15 , 1920 , Pope Benedict XV promulgated the encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus , dedicated to celebrating the life and work of St. Jerome , for the fifteenth centenary of St. Jerome ’ s death .
Although little remembered today ( as would be true of most features of Benedict XV ’ s pontificate ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vantage , especially for some elements that might be surprising today .
Benedict XV reminds us that Jerome was inflexible in adhering to the Church ’ s dogma of the inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures : Thus , not denying at all , but rather affirming the human authors as true ( albeit secondary ) causes , Jerome emphasizes that God works with these authors in a unique fashion to which no other creaturely activity can be equated : Thus , Jerome would hold no truck with modern-day scholars who claim to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Scripture : Benedict XV , having summarized Leo XIII ’ s extremely clear reaffirmation of this truth , then says : He describes and castigates the views of the Modernists , who separated the “ primary or religious ” truth of Scripture from its “ secondary or historical ” references , claiming that inerrant truth applies only to the former category , not to the latter .
The pope also rejects the idea that it is sufficient to say Scripture is free from error in the sense that the intentions of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what was commonly held at the time ( but was factually false ) .
None of this , says Benedict XV , is compatible with the truth of Scripture ’ s absolute freedom from any error of any kind , when correctly understood in accordance with the principles of biblical interpretation practiced by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church .
Benedict XV predicts that if the Bible is taken as a mere sourcebook for religious opinions and feelings , it will lose its authority altogether .
How right he is has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elapsed from Spiritus Paraclitus .
Benedict XV then asks : What virtues should we learn from Jerome ?
He writes : The pope urges the bishops to whom the letter is addressed to train good teachers of Scripture for the seminaries and other schools .
Several paragraphs of this encyclical are devoted to St. Jerome ’ s numerous relationships with students whom he instructed in Scripture and in biblical languages .
For example , Jerome describes how he taught Hebrew to Paula , which she learned so well that she could chant the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; the same is true of her daughter Eustochium .
If these matrons and virgins could learn their Bible , often memorizing whole sections of it , what excuse have the priests and teachers of the Law ?
“ Learned clerics sin through ignorance of the Bible ; therefore he demands of them an assiduous reading of the text ” ( §45 ) : Benedict XV then cites many passages from St. Jerome in which this worthy Father complains about excessively lengthy , elaborate , ornate discourses from the clergy , empty of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far from the Word of God , or handle it superficially .
It ’ s interesting to reflect on the different problems that afflict preaching in our own day : no longer ( usually ) too great a length or too fancy a style , but a frequent lack of any substantive doctrinal and moral content at all .
One wonders how a gifted polemicist like Jerome would react !
In the encyclical ’ s conclusion , the pope expends eloquence of his own to sing the praises of this immense scholar and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ telling us of the super-excellence of Holy Scripture , of its integral character and historical trustworthiness , telling us , too , of the pleasant fruits resulting from reading and meditating upon it .
His voice summons all the Church ’ s children to return to a truly Christian standard of life , to shake themselves free from a pagan type of morality which seems to have sprung to life again in these days .
... Today this flood [ of worldliness ] seems on the verge of sweeping away all human institutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
And surely this calamity must come if men persist in sweeping on one side God the Creator and Conserver of all things !
Surely whatever cuts itself off from Christ must perish !
Yet He Who at His disciples ’ prayer calmed the raging sea can restore peace to the tottering fabric of society .
( §68 ) The entire document merits a re-reading .
May Our Lady of Sorrows , who stood faithfully beneath the Cross of her divine Son , obtain for us all the grace of unbending fidelity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be our example and intercessor in plumbing the depths of God ’ s Word .

PETITION: Stand with priest who faces Church penalties for saying “You can't be a Catholic and a Democrat.”! Sign the petition here.
September 15, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Exactly one hundred years ago today, on September 15, 1920, Pope Benedict XV promulgated the encyclical Spiritus Paraclitus, dedicated to celebrating the life and work of St. Jerome, for the fifteenth centenary of St. Jerome’s death. Although little remembered today (as would be true of most features of Benedict XV’s pontificate), it deserves a fresh look from our vantage, especially for some elements that might be surprising to us.
Benedict XV reminds us that Jerome was inflexible in adhering to the Church’s dogma of the inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures:
Thus, not denying at all, but rather affirming the human authors as true (albeit secondary) causes, Jerome emphasizes that God works with these authors in a unique fashion to which no other creaturely activity can be equated:
If we ask how we are to explain this power and action of God, the principal cause, on the sacred writers we shall find that St. Jerome in no wise differs from the common teaching of the Catholic Church. For he holds that God, through His grace, illumines the writer’s mind regarding the particular truth which, “in the person of God,” he is to set before men; he holds, moreover, that God moves the writer’s will — nay, even impels it — to write; finally, that God abides with him unceasingly, in unique fashion, until his task is accomplished. Whence the Saint infers the supreme excellence and dignity of Scripture, and declares that knowledge of it is to be likened to the “treasure”[20] and the “pearl beyond price,” since in them are to be found the riches of Christ and “silver wherewith to adorn God’s house.” (§9)
Thus, Jerome would hold no truck with modern-day scholars who claim to identify all kinds of “errors” in Scripture:
Jerome further shows that the immunity of Scripture from error or deception is necessarily bound up with its Divine inspiration and supreme authority. He says he had learnt this in the most celebrated schools, whether of East or West, and that it was taught him as the doctrine of the Fathers, and generally received. Thus when, at the instance of Pope Damasus, he had begun correcting the Latin text of the New Testament, and certain “manikins” had vehemently attacked him for “making corrections in the Gospels in face of the authority of the Fathers and of general opinion,” Jerome briefly replied that he was not so utterly stupid nor so grossly uneducated as to imagine that the Lord’s words needed any correction or were not divinely inspired. … Here he is in full agreement with Augustine, who wrote to Jerome that to the Sacred Books alone had he been wont to accord such honor and reverence as firmly to believe that none of their writers had ever fallen into any error; and that consequently, if in the said books he came across anything which seemed to run counter to the truth, he did not think that that was really the case, but either that his copy was defective or that the translator had made a mistake, or again, that he himself had failed to understand. (§13; §15)
Benedict XV, having summarized Leo XIII’s extremely clear reaffirmation of this truth, then says:
It grieves us to find that not only men outside, but even children of the Catholic Church — nay, what is a peculiar sorrow to us, even clerics and professors of sacred learning — who in their own conceit either openly repudiate or at least attack in secret the Church’s teaching on this point. (§18)
He describes and castigates the views of the Modernists, who separated the “primary or religious” truth of Scripture from its “secondary or historical” references, claiming that inerrant truth applies only to the former category, not to the latter. The pope also rejects the idea that it is sufficient to say Scripture is free from error in the sense that the intentions of the authors were good, or they described what was commonly held at the time (but was factually false). None of this, says Benedict XV, is compatible with the truth of Scripture’s absolute freedom from any error of any kind, when correctly understood in accordance with the principles of biblical interpretation practiced by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Benedict XV predicts that if the Bible is taken as a mere sourcebook for religious opinions and feelings, it will lose its authority altogether. How right he is has been abundantly demonstrated in the century that has elapsed from Spiritus Paraclitus.
Benedict XV then asks: What virtues should we learn from Jerome? He writes:
We are deeply impressed by the intense love of the Bible which St. Jerome exhibits in his whole life and teaching: both are steeped in the Spirit of God. This intense love of the Bible he was ever striving to kindle in the hearts of the faithful, and his words on this subject to the maiden Demetrias are really addressed to us all: “Love the Bible and wisdom will love you; love it and it will preserve you; honor it and it will embrace you; these are the jewels which you should wear on your breast and in your ears.”… This [love of Scripture] is so conspicuous in his letters that they almost seem woven out of Scripture texts; and, as St. Bernard found no taste in things which did not echo the most sweet Name of Jesus, so no literature made any appeal to Jerome unless it derived its light from Holy Scripture. (§31, §33)
The pope urges the bishops to whom the letter is addressed to train good teachers of Scripture for the seminaries and other schools.
Was there ever a time, Venerable Brethren, when there was greater call than now for us all, lay and cleric alike, to imbibe the spirit of this “Greatest of Doctors”? For there are many contumacious folk now who sneer at the authority and government of God, Who has revealed Himself, and of the Church which teaches. You know — for Leo XIII warned us — “how insistently men fight against us; You know the arms and arts they rely upon.”[68] It is your duty, then, to train as many really fit defenders of this holiest of causes as you can. They must be ready to combat not only those who deny the existence of the Supernatural Order altogether, and are thus led to deny the existence of any divine revelation or inspiration, but those, too, who — through an itching desire for novelty — venture to interpret the sacred books as though they were of purely human origin[.] (§39)
Several paragraphs of this encyclical are devoted to St. Jerome’s numerous relationships with students whom he instructed in Scripture and in biblical languages. For example, Jerome describes how he taught Hebrew to Paula, which she learned so well that she could chant the psalms in Hebrew without a Latin accent; the same is true of her daughter Eustochium. If these matrons and virgins could learn their Bible, often memorizing whole sections of it, what excuse have the priests and teachers of the Law? “Learned clerics sin through ignorance of the Bible; therefore he demands of them an assiduous reading of the text” (§45):
How can a cleric teach others the way of salvation if through neglect of meditation on God’s word he fails to teach himself? What confidence can he have that, when ministering to others, he is really “a leader of the blind, a light to them that are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, having the form of knowledge and of truth in the law,” if he is unwilling to study the said Law and thus shuts the door on any divine illumination on it? Alas! many of God’s ministers, through never looking at their Bible, perish themselves and allow many others to perish also. “The children have asked for bread, and there was none to break it unto them” (Lam. 4:4); and “With desolation is all the land made desolate, for there is none than meditateth in the heart” (Jer. 12:11). (§47)
Benedict XV then cites many passages from St. Jerome in which this worthy Father complains about excessively lengthy, elaborate, ornate discourses from the clergy, empty of conviction and power because they stray so far from the Word of God, or handle it superficially. It’s interesting to reflect on the different problems that afflict preaching in our own day: no longer (usually) too great a length or too fancy a style, but a frequent lack of any substantive doctrinal and moral content at all. One wonders how a gifted polemicist like Jerome would react!
In the encyclical’s conclusion, the pope expends eloquence of his own to sing the praises of this immense scholar and saint:
His voice rings out, telling us of the super-excellence of Holy Scripture, of its integral character and historical trustworthiness, telling us, too, of the pleasant fruits resulting from reading and meditating upon it. His voice summons all the Church’s children to return to a truly Christian standard of life, to shake themselves free from a pagan type of morality which seems to have sprung to life again in these days. … Today this flood [of worldliness] seems on the verge of sweeping away all human institutions — unless God steps in to prevent it. And surely this calamity must come if men persist in sweeping on one side God the Creator and Conserver of all things! Surely whatever cuts itself off from Christ must perish! Yet He Who at His disciples’ prayer calmed the raging sea can restore peace to the tottering fabric of society. (§68)
The entire document merits a re-reading. May Our Lady of Sorrows, who stood faithfully beneath the Cross of her divine Son, obtain for us all the grace of unbending fidelity to Him, and may St. Jerome be our example and intercessor in plumbing the depths of God’s Word.
Peter Kwasniewski, Thomistic theologian, liturgical scholar, and choral composer, is a graduate of Thomas Aquinas College in California (B.A. Liberal Arts) and The Catholic University of America in Washington, DC (M.A. and Ph.D. in Philosophy). He taught at the International Theological Institute in Austria and the Franciscan University of Steubenville’s Austria Program, then helped establish Wyoming Catholic College in 2006. There he taught theology, philosophy, music, and art history and directed the choirs until leaving in 2018 to devote himself full-time to writing and lecturing. Today he contributes regularly to many websites and publications, including New Liturgical Movement, OnePeterFive, LifeSiteNews, Rorate Caeli, The Remnant, and Catholic Family News, and has published thirteen books, including four on traditional Catholicism: Resurgent in the Midst of Crisis (Angelico, 2014, also available in Czech, Polish, German, Portuguese, Spanish, and Belarusian), Noble Beauty, Transcendent Holiness (Angelico, 2017), Tradition and Sanity (Angelico, 2018), and Reclaiming Our Roman Catholic Birthright: The Genius and Timeliness of the Traditional Latin Mass (Angelico, 2020). His work has been translated into at least eighteen languages. Kwasniewski is a scholar of The Aquinas Institute in Green Bay, which is publishing the Opera Omnia of the Angelic Doctor, a Fellow of the Albertus Magnus Center for Scholastic Studies, and a Senior Fellow of the St. Paul Center. He has published over a thousand articles on Thomistic thought, sacramental and liturgical theology, the history and aesthetics of music, and the social doctrine of the Church. For news, information, article links, sacred music, and the home of Os Justi Press, visit his personal website, www.peterkwasniewski.com.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-15--Senator calls on Justice Department to investigate Netflix for ‘child porn’ film ‘Cuties’

PETITION : Boycott Disney 's new kids ' film 'Onward ' for pushing LGBT agenda !
Sign the petition here .
WASHINGTON , D.C. , September 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A number of politicians , most of them Republicans , have come out in recent days condemning the new Netflix movie Cuties , which has been widely characterized as “ child pornography.
” Senator Ted Cruz from Texas wrote in a letter to Attorney General Bill Barr , “ I urge the Department of Justice to investigate the production and distribution of this film to determine whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ individuals involved in the filming and production of ‘ Cuties ’ violated any federal laws against the production and distribution of child pornography.
” “ Although the First Amendment provides vigorous protection for artistic expression , it does not allow individuals or for-profit corporations to produce or distribute child pornography , ” Cruz explained .
In an interview on Sunday , Cruz said , “ Well , this movie Cuties , it sexualizes 11-year-old girls , has them dancing like strippers , has them in very suggestive sexual roles , and it ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be preserved , and we should protect them.
” “ I guarantee you every pedophile in America is going to watch this movie , ” Cruz continued , “ and that Netflix is sitting back fat and happy making money on it — that ’ s not right.
” Senator Josh Hawley ( R-Mo . )
summarized in a letter to the streaming service , “ Now Netflix is airing a film called Cuties depicting children being coached to engage in simulated sexual acts , for cameras both onscreen and off .
Your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of child safety and exploitation , including the possibility of copycat behavior and exploitation of child actors.
” Hawley asked the company to answer several questions , including about the fact that Netflix rated the movie “ TV-MA ” for “ language ” but not for “ its graphic sexual content.
” The rating “ TV-MA ” indicates that “ these programs are intended to be viewed by mature , adult audiences and may be unsuitable for children under 17.
” The senator also asked about Netflix taking steps to work with experts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law enforcement authorities regarding possible copycat behavior .
Hawley inquired whether the company had made sure that “ the physical , mental , and emotional health of child actors made to perform simulated sex acts and filmed in sexual or sexually suggestive ways ” was protected .
Other questions focused on the marketing of the movie , which seemed to emphasize its sexual content .
Senator Mike Lee , R-Utah , wrote a separate letter to Netflix .
“ While I have concerns with the movie ’ s young actresses ’ influence on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is with the possibility that the inappropriate scenes might encourage the sexual exploitation of young girls by adults , ” Lee pointed out .
“ I understand this film contains a broader storyline ; however , the film ’ s sexualization of young girls — if not itself the sexual exploitation of the child actors — will certainly contribute to child sexual exploitation by others .
At a minimum , it is certainly inappropriate and morally wrong to sexualize minors , regardless of whether the depiction is fictional.
” Lee called on Netflix @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and threatened legal action .
“ My staff is reviewing the film and the pertinent law to determine whether to refer presentation of this film to the United States Attorney General for investigation.
” Senator Tom Cotton from Arkansas , in a statement provided to The Daily Caller , said , “ There ’ s no excuse for the sexualization of children , and Netflix ’ s decision to promote the film ‘ Cuties ’ is disgusting at best and a serious crime at worst.
” Like Cruz , Cotton urged “ the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Netflix for their role in pushing explicit depictions of children into American homes.
” The only prominent Democrat to speak out against the movie is Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard .
In many ways an outsider in her own party , Gabbard tried to win the Democrat nomination for president in 2019 and 2020 .
“ [ Netflix ’ s ] child porn ‘ Cuties ’ will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking trade , ” Gabbard wrote on Twitter .
“ 1 in 4 victims of trafficking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ friend ’ s 13 year old daughter .
Netflix , you are now complicit.
” Gabbard also encouraged parents to monitor what their children consume online , especially on social media .
Like others , the congresswoman from Hawaii has canceled her Netflix subscription .
Plugged In , a publication of pro-family organization Focus on the Family , reviewed Cuties and pointed out the ubiquitous sexual content .
“ It ’ s clear that the Cuties have learned their sexualized moves from watching older girls and women dance both in real life and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Plugged In wrote .
“ The Cuties show Amy a video of teenage girls dancing in crop tops and short shorts , where one girl ’ s bare breast is momentarily exposed .
That girl goes to their high school , which obviously means she ’ s being depicted as a teen.
” “ The more that Amy posts sexualized pictures on social media , the more she receives likes and affirmation and wants to post more .
This goes to an extreme level when Amy uses the phone to take a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on social media .
We don ’ t see the picture , but we do see her pull down her pants and underwear to take the pic .
Amy does this in a moment of desperation to try to gain more attention and more likes for her group .
”

The First Amendment, Sen. Ted Cruz wrote to Attorney General Bill Barr, 'does not allow individuals or for-profit corporations to produce or distribute child pornography.'
PETITION: Boycott Disney's new kids' film 'Onward' for pushing LGBT agenda! Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A number of politicians, most of them Republicans, have come out in recent days condemning the new Netflix movie Cuties, which has been widely characterized as “child pornography.”
Senator Ted Cruz from Texas wrote in a letter to Attorney General Bill Barr, “I urge the Department of Justice to investigate the production and distribution of this film to determine whether Netflix, its executives, or the individuals involved in the filming and production of ‘Cuties’ violated any federal laws against the production and distribution of child pornography.”
“Although the First Amendment provides vigorous protection for artistic expression, it does not allow individuals or for-profit corporations to produce or distribute child pornography,” Cruz explained.
In an interview on Sunday, Cruz said, “Well, this movie Cuties, it sexualizes 11-year-old girls, has them dancing like strippers, has them in very suggestive sexual roles, and it’s frankly disgusting. Kids ought to be preserved, and we should protect them.”
“I guarantee you every pedophile in America is going to watch this movie,” Cruz continued, “and that Netflix is sitting back fat and happy making money on it — that’s not right.”
Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) summarized in a letter to the streaming service, “Now Netflix is airing a film called Cuties depicting children being coached to engage in simulated sexual acts, for cameras both onscreen and off. Your decision to do so raises major questions of child safety and exploitation, including the possibility of copycat behavior and exploitation of child actors.”
Hawley asked the company to answer several questions, including about the fact that Netflix rated the movie “TV-MA” for “language” but not for “its graphic sexual content.” The rating “TV-MA” indicates that “these programs are intended to be viewed by mature, adult audiences and may be unsuitable for children under 17.”
The senator also asked about Netflix taking steps to work with experts on sexual exploitation, as well as law enforcement authorities regarding possible copycat behavior. Hawley inquired whether the company had made sure that “the physical, mental, and emotional health of child actors made to perform simulated sex acts and filmed in sexual or sexually suggestive ways” was protected.
Other questions focused on the marketing of the movie, which seemed to emphasize its sexual content.
Senator Mike Lee, R-Utah, wrote a separate letter to Netflix. “While I have concerns with the movie’s young actresses’ influence on other young girls, my larger concern is with the possibility that the inappropriate scenes might encourage the sexual exploitation of young girls by adults,” Lee pointed out.
“I understand this film contains a broader storyline; however, the film’s sexualization of young girls — if not itself the sexual exploitation of the child actors — will certainly contribute to child sexual exploitation by others. At a minimum, it is certainly inappropriate and morally wrong to sexualize minors, regardless of whether the depiction is fictional.”
Lee called on Netflix “to cease distributing this movie” and threatened legal action. “My staff is reviewing the film and the pertinent law to determine whether to refer presentation of this film to the United States Attorney General for investigation.”
Senator Tom Cotton from Arkansas, in a statement provided to The Daily Caller, said, “There’s no excuse for the sexualization of children, and Netflix’s decision to promote the film ‘Cuties’ is disgusting at best and a serious crime at worst.”
Like Cruz, Cotton urged “the Department of Justice to take action against Netflix for their role in pushing explicit depictions of children into American homes.”
The only prominent Democrat to speak out against the movie is Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard. In many ways an outsider in her own party, Gabbard tried to win the Democrat nomination for president in 2019 and 2020.
“[Netflix’s] child porn ‘Cuties’ will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking trade,” Gabbard wrote on Twitter. “1 in 4 victims of trafficking are children. It happened to my friend’s 13 year old daughter. Netflix, you are now complicit.”
Gabbard also encouraged parents to monitor what their children consume online, especially on social media. Like others, the congresswoman from Hawaii has canceled her Netflix subscription.
Plugged In, a publication of pro-family organization Focus on the Family, reviewed Cuties and pointed out the ubiquitous sexual content.
“It’s clear that the Cuties have learned their sexualized moves from watching older girls and women dance both in real life and, mostly, on social media,” Plugged In wrote. “The Cuties show Amy a video of teenage girls dancing in crop tops and short shorts, where one girl’s bare breast is momentarily exposed. That girl goes to their high school, which obviously means she’s being depicted as a teen.”
“The more that Amy posts sexualized pictures on social media, the more she receives likes and affirmation and wants to post more. This goes to an extreme level when Amy uses the phone to take a picture of her genitals and posts them on social media. We don’t see the picture, but we do see her pull down her pants and underwear to take the pic. Amy does this in a moment of desperation to try to gain more attention and more likes for her group.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-15--English Catholics urge bishops to reverse support for compulsory pro-abortion, pro-LGBT sex ed

LONDON , United Kingdom , September 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A coalition formed in defense of parental rights has written to England ’ s senior bishop urging him to reverse the Bishops ' Conference ’ s policy of supporting the government 's pro-LGBT , pro-contraception , and pro-abortion “ Relationships and Sex Education ” legislation , made compulsory in all schools across England .
Leaders of three distinct national organizations — The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children ( SPUC ) , The Latin Mass Society ( LMS ) , and Catholic Man UK ( CMUK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Coalition in Defence of Primary Educators ” to deliver the letter in person to Archbishops ’ House at Westminster Cathedral this past Saturday , the residence of Cardinal Vincent Nichols , Catholic archbishop of Westminster .
A full copy of the letter can be found at the coalition ’ s website .
James Leatherland of CMUK ; Dr. Joseph Shaw , chairman of the LMS ; and John Smeaton , CEO of SPUC ( and father of the author of this article ) — all of whom head Catholic families — knelt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Westminster Cathedral prior to making the delivery .
At least one senior English Catholic cleric is known to have been in the piazza while they prayed , who told them he was en route to a meeting with Cardinal Nichols .
“ We write to you , as Catholic fathers , with the responsibility for the moral education and spiritual formation of our children , regarding the British government ’ s legislation imposing pro-LGBT Relationships and Sex Education on school-children in England , ” the letter begins .
It is shocking and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bishops ’ Conference of England and Wales ( CBCEW ) , of which you are President , have consistently and publicly supported legislative changes and RSE policy which now denies parents the right to remove their children from Relationships and Sex Education , and that , on your behalf , the Catholic Education Service ( CES ) has wrongly stated that the Government is committed to protecting the parents ’ right to withdraw their children from the new subjects .
In fact , parents have the right , only , to ‘ request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ sex education ’ parts of RSE , with the final decision to be made by the head teacher .
The signatories outline in their letter to Cardinal Nichols that the regulations for the legislation say that “ [ c ] hildren should be provided with ‘ the facts about the full range of contraceptive choices and options ’ and signposted as to where and how to obtain abortion and contraception services without parental knowledge or consent.
” Citing the government ’ s statutory guidance for schools , the signatories further point out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ at a timely point ’ , to be ‘ fully integrated ’ into the children ’ s programme of study , which should present homosexual relationships and family structures in a positive manner ” and that real marriage , between a man and a woman , is “ simply presented as one possible relationship option.
” The Children and Social Work Act ( 2017 ) has made “ Relationships Education ” compulsory in primary schools in England and “ Relationships and Sex Education ” compulsory in secondary schools in England , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encouraged to introduce these subjects in September 2020 .
But due to the extensive disruption caused by the coronavirus crisis , schools have now been given the permission to delay the full implementation of the new legislation until the summer term 2021 .
Under the new legislation , the relationships education will be compulsory in all primary schools , but parents will be able to withdraw their children in primary school from sex education classes .
Relationships and Sex Education ( RSE ) will be compulsory in all secondary schools .
Parents will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from RSE at secondary school , but will only be able to request that their children be withdrawn from the sex education parts of RSE , with the final decision being given to the headteacher .
From age 15 , the child has the right to override any parental request that he be withdrawn from sex education .
Prominent LGBT activist Peter Tatchell has said that requiring parents to pick their children up from school would be an effective way to stop them from exercising their right to withdraw children from sex education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done in at least one part of the U.K. “ This programme and its guidelines are clearly incompatible with Catholic teaching .
The bishops of England and Wales have not been proactive in responding to this incompatibility , ” Shaw said in an interview at the event .
Leatherhead explained that after writing to his local bishop , Bishop David Oakley of the Diocese of Northampton , he received a reply from Bishop Oakley in support of the new legislation .
“ He ’ s sent a response which basically says that Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole time and that they believe that what they are doing is in accordance with Church teaching and that the current legislation doesn ’ t impinge on the rights of parents of those children.
” But the letter to Cardinal Nichols also details how the Bishops ’ Conference itself , particularly through the work of the Catholic Education Service ( CES ) , has itself published pro-LGBT education guides .
“ Learning to Love ( 2017 ) , for example , an RSE guide for Catholic educators , published by the CES on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it calls its own ‘ fresh description ’ of the Church ’ s teaching , referring to same sex relationships as being able to constitute a ‘ powerful ’ and an ‘ exalted form of love ’ on a par with that between husband and wife in marriage , ” the signatories note .
“ The social , spiritual and psychological impact of natural fathers abandoning their families is overwhelming society and human individuals today , ” Smeaton said in an interview after the event .
“ And the social , psychological and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our children to the corrupt ideological agenda of the British government with its pro-LGBT Relationships and Sex education is even more overwhelming.
” Moreover , the letter mentions , in brief , the extensive record of Cardinal Nichols , other bishops , and the CES of facilitating access to abortion and contraception , as well as the promotion of LGBT issues at Catholic schools .
“ [ U ] nder your [ Cardinal Nichols ’ s ] chairmanship , the CES developed a policy that resulted in providing children in Catholic schools , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with access to abortion and contraception services , without parental knowledge or consent via the Government agency Connexions , ” the signatories write .
“ More recently in 2019 , in the archdiocese of Liverpool , No Outsiders , an RSE programme written by homosexual activist Andrew Moffat MBE , has been described as ‘ fine to use in school ’ .
” The signatories explain in their letter that they are praying for the bishops and ask them for their prayers also .
“ Before delivering this letter to you today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for you on the Piazza in front of Westminster Cathedral .
We , and the members of the groups which we lead , most of them parents like ourselves , are praying and offering sacrifices for you and for your brother bishops in England and Wales , and we respectfully ask you to pray for us , ” they explain .
“ As parents , we share with you , our bishops , the certainty that , on Judgement Day , we will be accountable to God for the eternal souls of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Government for the implementation of their ideological and corrupt agenda , ” they continue .
“ Above all our prayer is that the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales , endowed with the authority of Christ to teach the Catholic faith , will change direction and lead parents in Britain , both Catholic and non-Catholic , in resisting legislation which threatens the immortal souls of our nation ’ s children .
”

The curriculum, among other things and with the bishops' stamp of approval, 'refers to same sex relationships as being able to constitute a 'powerful' and an 'exalted form of love.''
PETITION: No to government and corporate penalties for refusing COVID-19 vaccine! Sign the petition here.
LONDON, United Kingdom, September 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A coalition formed in defense of parental rights has written to England’s senior bishop urging him to reverse the Bishops' Conference’s policy of supporting the government's pro-LGBT, pro-contraception, and pro-abortion “Relationships and Sex Education” legislation, made compulsory in all schools across England.
Leaders of three distinct national organizations — The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), The Latin Mass Society (LMS), and Catholic Man UK (CMUK) — joined as a newly formed “Coalition in Defence of Primary Educators” to deliver the letter in person to Archbishops’ House at Westminster Cathedral this past Saturday, the residence of Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Catholic archbishop of Westminster. A full copy of the letter can be found at the coalition’s website.
James Leatherland of CMUK; Dr. Joseph Shaw, chairman of the LMS; and John Smeaton, CEO of SPUC (and father of the author of this article) — all of whom head Catholic families — knelt and prayed the rosary in the piazza of Westminster Cathedral prior to making the delivery. At least one senior English Catholic cleric is known to have been in the piazza while they prayed, who told them he was en route to a meeting with Cardinal Nichols.
“We write to you, as Catholic fathers, with the responsibility for the moral education and spiritual formation of our children, regarding the British government’s legislation imposing pro-LGBT Relationships and Sex Education on school-children in England,” the letter begins.
It is shocking and deeply troubling to us that the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW), of which you are President, have consistently and publicly supported legislative changes and RSE policy which now denies parents the right to remove their children from Relationships and Sex Education, and that, on your behalf, the Catholic Education Service (CES) has wrongly stated that the Government is committed to protecting the parents’ right to withdraw their children from the new subjects. In fact, parents have the right, only, to ‘request’ withdrawal from the (undefined) ‘sex education’ parts of RSE, with the final decision to be made by the head teacher.
The signatories outline in their letter to Cardinal Nichols that the regulations for the legislation say that “[c]hildren should be provided with ‘the facts about the full range of contraceptive choices and options’ and signposted as to where and how to obtain abortion and contraception services without parental knowledge or consent.”
Citing the government’s statutory guidance for schools, the signatories further point out that “LGBT content is expected, ‘at a timely point’, to be ‘fully integrated’ into the children’s programme of study, which should present homosexual relationships and family structures in a positive manner” and that real marriage, between a man and a woman, is “simply presented as one possible relationship option.”
The Children and Social Work Act (2017) has made “Relationships Education” compulsory in primary schools in England and “Relationships and Sex Education” compulsory in secondary schools in England, including in Catholic schools. Schools are being encouraged to introduce these subjects in September 2020.
But due to the extensive disruption caused by the coronavirus crisis, schools have now been given the permission to delay the full implementation of the new legislation until the summer term 2021.
Under the new legislation, the relationships education will be compulsory in all primary schools, but parents will be able to withdraw their children in primary school from sex education classes.
Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) will be compulsory in all secondary schools. Parents will not be able to withdraw their children from RSE at secondary school, but will only be able to request that their children be withdrawn from the sex education parts of RSE, with the final decision being given to the headteacher. From age 15, the child has the right to override any parental request that he be withdrawn from sex education.
Prominent LGBT activist Peter Tatchell has said that requiring parents to pick their children up from school would be an effective way to stop them from exercising their right to withdraw children from sex education lessons and that this has already been done in at least one part of the U.K.
“This programme and its guidelines are clearly incompatible with Catholic teaching. The bishops of England and Wales have not been proactive in responding to this incompatibility,” Shaw said in an interview at the event.
Leatherhead explained that after writing to his local bishop, Bishop David Oakley of the Diocese of Northampton, he received a reply from Bishop Oakley in support of the new legislation.
“He’s sent a response which basically says that Church schools have been teaching sex education the whole time and that they believe that what they are doing is in accordance with Church teaching and that the current legislation doesn’t impinge on the rights of parents of those children.”
But the letter to Cardinal Nichols also details how the Bishops’ Conference itself, particularly through the work of the Catholic Education Service (CES), has itself published pro-LGBT education guides.
“Learning to Love (2017), for example, an RSE guide for Catholic educators, published by the CES on behalf of the CBCEW, offers what it calls its own ‘fresh description’ of the Church’s teaching, referring to same sex relationships as being able to constitute a ‘powerful’ and an ‘exalted form of love’ on a par with that between husband and wife in marriage,” the signatories note.
“The social, spiritual and psychological impact of natural fathers abandoning their families is overwhelming society and human individuals today,” Smeaton said in an interview after the event. “And the social, psychological and spiritual impact of our spiritual fathers abandoning our children to the corrupt ideological agenda of the British government with its pro-LGBT Relationships and Sex education is even more overwhelming.”
Moreover, the letter mentions, in brief, the extensive record of Cardinal Nichols, other bishops, and the CES of facilitating access to abortion and contraception, as well as the promotion of LGBT issues at Catholic schools.
“[U]nder your [Cardinal Nichols’s] chairmanship, the CES developed a policy that resulted in providing children in Catholic schools, including adolescents under the age of consent, with access to abortion and contraception services, without parental knowledge or consent via the Government agency Connexions,” the signatories write.
“More recently in 2019, in the archdiocese of Liverpool, No Outsiders, an RSE programme written by homosexual activist Andrew Moffat MBE, has been described as ‘fine to use in school’.”
The signatories explain in their letter that they are praying for the bishops and ask them for their prayers also.
“Before delivering this letter to you today, we knelt and prayed the Rosary for you on the Piazza in front of Westminster Cathedral. We, and the members of the groups which we lead, most of them parents like ourselves, are praying and offering sacrifices for you and for your brother bishops in England and Wales, and we respectfully ask you to pray for us,” they explain.
“As parents, we share with you, our bishops, the certainty that, on Judgement Day, we will be accountable to God for the eternal souls of the children in our care, and not to the Government for the implementation of their ideological and corrupt agenda,” they continue.
“Above all our prayer is that the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales, endowed with the authority of Christ to teach the Catholic faith, will change direction and lead parents in Britain, both Catholic and non-Catholic, in resisting legislation which threatens the immortal souls of our nation’s children.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-15--Australian state reverses COVID ban on Last Rites, senior politician apologizes for regulation

PETITION : Tell politicians not to discriminate against churches when reopening society !
Sign the petition here .
MELBOURNE , Australia , September 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Victoria ’ s senior politician has apologized and reversed government regulations banning administration of the Last Rites to those nearing death .
State premier Daniel Andrews , who is spearheading Victoria ’ s draconian lockdown regime , said during a press conference last week that there has been “ a little bit of confusion ” about the administration of sacraments for those nearing death and that the government ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Andrews made the remarks last week , the Victorian government website clearly stated that under the “ Stage 4 restrictions ” in place in Melbourne , the capital of Victoria , “ faith leaders can not visit someone in their home ( or in a hospital or care facility ) for last rites or to perform other religious ceremonies in person ” and that “ [ l ] ast rites and religious ceremonies can be provided using video or livestreaming.
” Andrews has now said it is “ completely permissible ” for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ In the broadest of terms , last rites and similar sacraments are , in fact , allowed and we obviously apologize if there ’ s been any confusion about that matter , ” Andrews said .
Monsignor Charles Portelli told journalist Tess Livingstone of The Australian newspaper that he and others priests have been administering the Last Rites despite the regulations .
Portelli said that providing the sacraments to the dying is one of a priest ’ s most serious obligations and can not be done via “ livestream.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priorities in church law and can only be done in person , not virtually , ’ ’ he said .
Portelli also stressed that those close to death have “ a most profound need for human contact.
” “ They can feel very lonely , ” he said .
“ This is the least we can do .
The people support their priests in so many ways .
We must be there when they need us most.
’ ’ Portelli said hospital staff in Melbourne have helped priests with protective clothing , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wearing personal protective clothing .
Melbourne archbishop Peter Comensoli told The Australian that he had been unaware of the ban on the Last Rites but had subsequently sought “ urgent clarification ’ ’ from the government .
While announcing the reversal of the policy , Andrews said that he had been in contact with Comensoli .
Andrews said he wanted to tell people of all faiths that he understands that “ 2020 has been a very difficult year ” and thanked faith leaders for their engagement with the government .
Monsignor Portelli also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restrictions on the Church and society at large .
“ The normal activities which promote social cohesion have all been suspended , ” he said .
“ Sporting activities , the business of education , the simple pleasures of meeting friends and acquaintances , the celebration of important family milestones ; these can only exist within the parameters of a screen or mobile phone.
” Noting that even during world wars , churches were not closed indefinitely , Portelli explained that Victoria residents have no idea if or when things will return to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that five people may be able to gather outside near a place of worship at the end of September .
However ‘ religious ceremonies ’ are forbidden , ” he said .
“ This number increases to ten people at the end of October .
This depends on there being a very limited number of new infections over the preceding weeks .
By the end of November the number of attendees may increase to a limited number .
This remains undefined in the regulations .
Curiously , and inexplicably , baptisms are specifically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mass will be a very quiet affair .
”

Daniel Andrews has now said it is 'completely permissible' for the Last Rites to be administered in person.
PETITION: Tell politicians not to discriminate against churches when reopening society! Sign the petition here.
MELBOURNE, Australia, September 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Victoria’s senior politician has apologized and reversed government regulations banning administration of the Last Rites to those nearing death.
State premier Daniel Andrews, who is spearheading Victoria’s draconian lockdown regime, said during a press conference last week that there has been “a little bit of confusion” about the administration of sacraments for those nearing death and that the government’s website would soon be updated.
When Andrews made the remarks last week, the Victorian government website clearly stated that under the “Stage 4 restrictions” in place in Melbourne, the capital of Victoria, “faith leaders cannot visit someone in their home (or in a hospital or care facility) for last rites or to perform other religious ceremonies in person” and that “[l]ast rites and religious ceremonies can be provided using video or livestreaming.”
Andrews has now said it is “completely permissible” for the Last Rites to be administered in person.
“In the broadest of terms, last rites and similar sacraments are, in fact, allowed and we obviously apologize if there’s been any confusion about that matter,” Andrews said.
Monsignor Charles Portelli told journalist Tess Livingstone of The Australian newspaper that he and others priests have been administering the Last Rites despite the regulations.
Portelli said that providing the sacraments to the dying is one of a priest’s most serious obligations and cannot be done via “livestream.”
“It is given one of the highest priorities in church law and can only be done in person, not virtually,’’ he said.
Portelli also stressed that those close to death have “a most profound need for human contact.”
“They can feel very lonely,” he said. “This is the least we can do. The people support their priests in so many ways. We must be there when they need us most.’’
Portelli said hospital staff in Melbourne have helped priests with protective clothing, with some priests administering the Last Rites while wearing personal protective clothing.
Melbourne archbishop Peter Comensoli told The Australian that he had been unaware of the ban on the Last Rites but had subsequently sought “urgent clarification’’ from the government. While announcing the reversal of the policy, Andrews said that he had been in contact with Comensoli. Andrews said he wanted to tell people of all faiths that he understands that “2020 has been a very difficult year” and thanked faith leaders for their engagement with the government.
Monsignor Portelli also emphasized the devastating impact of the lockdown restrictions on the Church and society at large.
“The normal activities which promote social cohesion have all been suspended,” he said. “Sporting activities, the business of education, the simple pleasures of meeting friends and acquaintances, the celebration of important family milestones; these can only exist within the parameters of a screen or mobile phone.”
Noting that even during world wars, churches were not closed indefinitely, Portelli explained that Victoria residents have no idea if or when things will return to normal.
“There is a possibility that five people may be able to gather outside near a place of worship at the end of September. However ‘religious ceremonies’ are forbidden,” he said.
“This number increases to ten people at the end of October. This depends on there being a very limited number of new infections over the preceding weeks. By the end of November the number of attendees may increase to a limited number. This remains undefined in the regulations. Curiously, and inexplicably, baptisms are specifically prohibited. It seems likely that Christmas Mass will be a very quiet affair.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-17--Invalid baptism: Another ‘priest’ finds out he wasn’t even Catholic

PETITION : Urge U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference to defend Catholic heritage and statues !
Sign the petition here .
OKLAHOMA CITY , Oklahoma , September 17 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Within just a few weeks , a second man who thought he had been ordained a priest found out that his baptism was invalid , leading him to receive the sacraments from baptism to ordination properly for the first time .
Zachary Boazman had watched a video of what he thought was his baptism .
It turned out the deacon used the words “ We baptize you ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , ” which made the sacrament invalid .
The problem : Boazman had already lived what seemed to be a normal Catholic life .
He went to Mass and to Confession , received Holy Communion , was “ confirmed , ” moved on to the seminary , and was “ ordained ” a deacon and , in 2019 , a priest .
None of it was real .
It is impossible for anyone to receive the sacraments who wasn ’ t first baptized .
Catholic News Agency reported on a letter sent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Oklahoma City – Boazman ’ home – saying he “ immediately contacted ” the archdiocese “ to explain the situation and seek guidance ” after his discovery .
“ To rectify the issue , Father Boazman was baptized , confirmed and received the Eucharist on Sept. 8 at Saint Francis of Assisi Catholic Church in Oklahoma City , ” wrote the archbishop .
“ He was ordained by Archbishop Coakley a transitional deacon and a priest on Sept. 12 also at Saint Francis of Assisi Catholic Church.
” Coakley added , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as unsettling as it was , will further strengthen Father Zak ’ s resolve to serve God ’ s people and develop an even deeper appreciation for the gift of the priesthood.
” In the Archdiocese of Detroit , Michigan , Father Matthew Hood had an experience similar to that of Boazman .
Hood had watched a video of his “ baptism , ” realizing it was invalid .
In order to rectify the situation , he was “ baptized , confirmed and received the Eucharist on Aug. 9 , ordained a transitional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Aug. 17 , ” as reported by Detroit Catholic .
Hood was thinking about all the sacraments he thought he had conferred on his faithful , which were just as invalid as his ordination .
“ My heart goes out and breaks for those for whom I ’ ve celebrated Mass , Mass intentions I ’ ve offered , the confessions I ’ ve heard , and especially the sacraments of anointing of the sick that I ’ ve celebrated for people on their deathbeds , my grandmother included among them , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faithful have been reviewing their baptisms , if possible , after the Vatican ’ s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on August 6 issued a statement , approved by Pope Francis , affirming that a baptism using the words “ We baptize you ” is invalid .
The statement explained , “ When the minister says ‘ I baptize you … ’ he does not speak as a functionary who carries out a role entrusted to him , but he enacts ministerially the sign-presence of Christ , who acts in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make the concrete liturgical assembly a manifestation of ‘ the real nature of the true Church , ’ insofar as liturgical services are not private functions , but are celebrations of the Church , which is the ‘ sacrament of unity , ’ namely , the holy people united and ordered under their bishops.
” The priest , or any other minister of baptism , is not acting “ on behalf of the parents , godparents , relatives or friends , nor in the name of the assembly gathered for the celebration , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christ .
Fr .
John Zuhlsdorf , a popular blogger , didn ’ t mince words when he reported on the invalid baptism affecting Fr .
Boazman .
“ This , because some jackass priest took it on himself many years ago to change the words of the form of Baptism , ” he wrote .
“ Maybe he was well-meaning .
Maybe he was so poorly formed that he barely grasped what the Church understands .
Seminaries were really really , really bad for a long time .
However , the BOOK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poorly formed priests know that the BLACK part is what the Church approves… you know , the old ‘ institutional ’ Church not the ‘ spirit-filled ’ prophetic Church , for whom BLACK is a suggestion.
” Zuhlsdorf encouraged priests to review the validity of their baptisms , if at all possible .
After Fr .
Hood ’ s case in Michigan was revealed , Joseph Shaw , chairman of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales , commented that two things remain worrisome .
“ One is that it is impossible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affected by invalid sacraments .
The other is that many Catholic commentators seem not to care.
” In his article , Shaw focused on the second point .
“ Part of the problem here among Catholic commentators on this story is that they are not concerned about the life of grace : the day to day of years and decades that a practicing Catholic can reasonably expect to be in friendship with God , ” he argued .
“ They are too concerned with the conditions for salvation at the point of death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We should be concerned not only to die in a state of grace , but to live in one .
”

Fr. Zachary Boazman is the second priest in recent weeks who had to properly receive the sacraments, including baptism and ordination, all over again.
PETITION: Urge U.S. Catholic Bishops Conference to defend Catholic heritage and statues! Sign the petition here.
OKLAHOMA CITY, Oklahoma, September 17, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Within just a few weeks, a second man who thought he had been ordained a priest found out that his baptism was invalid, leading him to receive the sacraments from baptism to ordination properly for the first time.
Zachary Boazman had watched a video of what he thought was his baptism. It turned out the deacon used the words “We baptize you” instead of the proper “I baptize you,” which made the sacrament invalid. The problem: Boazman had already lived what seemed to be a normal Catholic life. He went to Mass and to Confession, received Holy Communion, was “confirmed,” moved on to the seminary, and was “ordained” a deacon and, in 2019, a priest.
None of it was real. It is impossible for anyone to receive the sacraments who wasn’t first baptized.
Catholic News Agency reported on a letter sent out by the Archbishop Paul S. Coakley of Oklahoma City – Boazman’ home – saying he “immediately contacted” the archdiocese “to explain the situation and seek guidance” after his discovery.
“To rectify the issue, Father Boazman was baptized, confirmed and received the Eucharist on Sept. 8 at Saint Francis of Assisi Catholic Church in Oklahoma City,” wrote the archbishop. “He was ordained by Archbishop Coakley a transitional deacon and a priest on Sept. 12 also at Saint Francis of Assisi Catholic Church.”
Coakley added, “I am certain this past week, as unsettling as it was, will further strengthen Father Zak’s resolve to serve God’s people and develop an even deeper appreciation for the gift of the priesthood.”
In the Archdiocese of Detroit, Michigan, Father Matthew Hood had an experience similar to that of Boazman. Hood had watched a video of his “baptism,” realizing it was invalid.
In order to rectify the situation, he was “baptized, confirmed and received the Eucharist on Aug. 9, ordained a transitional deacon on Aug. 15 and a priest on Aug. 17,” as reported by Detroit Catholic.
Hood was thinking about all the sacraments he thought he had conferred on his faithful, which were just as invalid as his ordination. “My heart goes out and breaks for those for whom I’ve celebrated Mass, Mass intentions I’ve offered, the confessions I’ve heard, and especially the sacraments of anointing of the sick that I’ve celebrated for people on their deathbeds, my grandmother included among them,” he said.
Priests and lay faithful have been reviewing their baptisms, if possible, after the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on August 6 issued a statement, approved by Pope Francis, affirming that a baptism using the words “We baptize you” is invalid.
The statement explained, “When the minister says ‘I baptize you … ’ he does not speak as a functionary who carries out a role entrusted to him, but he enacts ministerially the sign-presence of Christ, who acts in his Body to give his grace and to make the concrete liturgical assembly a manifestation of ‘the real nature of the true Church,’ insofar as liturgical services are not private functions, but are celebrations of the Church, which is the ‘sacrament of unity,’ namely, the holy people united and ordered under their bishops.”
The priest, or any other minister of baptism, is not acting “on behalf of the parents, godparents, relatives or friends, nor in the name of the assembly gathered for the celebration,” but in the name of Jesus Christ.
Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, a popular blogger, didn’t mince words when he reported on the invalid baptism affecting Fr. Boazman. “This, because some jackass priest took it on himself many years ago to change the words of the form of Baptism,” he wrote.
“Maybe he was well-meaning. Maybe he was so poorly formed that he barely grasped what the Church understands. Seminaries were really really, really bad for a long time. However, the BOOK has the words in BLACK and even poorly formed priests know that the BLACK part is what the Church approves… you know, the old ‘institutional’ Church not the ‘spirit-filled’ prophetic Church, for whom BLACK is a suggestion.”
Zuhlsdorf encouraged priests to review the validity of their baptisms, if at all possible.
After Fr. Hood’s case in Michigan was revealed, Joseph Shaw, chairman of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales, commented that two things remain worrisome. “One is that it is impossible to know how many other people are affected by invalid sacraments. The other is that many Catholic commentators seem not to care.”
In his article, Shaw focused on the second point. “Part of the problem here among Catholic commentators on this story is that they are not concerned about the life of grace: the day to day of years and decades that a practicing Catholic can reasonably expect to be in friendship with God,” he argued.
“They are too concerned with the conditions for salvation at the point of death to notice the issue of life. We should be concerned not only to die in a state of grace, but to live in one.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-17--BREAKING: Undercover pro-life journalist Daleiden fights Planned Parenthood with Federal defamation

BREAKING: Undercover pro-life journalist Daleiden fights Planned Parenthood with Federal defamation lawsuit

NEW YORK CITY , September 17 , 2020 ( Thomas More Society ) – Undercover journalist David Daleiden is turning the tables on abortion giant Planned Parenthood Federation of America ( PPFA ) with a defamation lawsuit filed in New York federal district court on September 17 , 2020 .
Represented by the Thomas More Society , Daleiden is taking the abortion giant to task for telling the media that he and The Center for Medical Progress “ manufacture [ d ] ” and “ created ” a “ false smear campaign ” by releasing videos showing clear evidence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ PPFA network ’ s participation in illegal harvesting and selling of aborted fetal body parts .
PPFA ’ s statements are provably false and betray their own admissions about the veracity of the videos .
Daleiden has been a target of Planned Parenthood since the 2015 release of his investigative videos exposed the abortion company ’ s apparent involvement in illegal aborted baby body parts trafficking .
Daleiden ’ s undercover research into abortion industry fetal tissue sales spurred Congressional investigations into Planned Parenthood and its business partners and instigated a national public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congressional probes and multi-pronged legal action resulted in the severing of services to Planned Parenthood by their one-time biowaste disposal company , Stericycle .
Court testimony in lawsuits and hearings related to Daleiden ’ s investigation revealed shocking details about the lengths to which abortion providers are willing to go to make a profit off of the babies they abort .
In the wake of the negative publicity , Planned Parenthood has filed lawsuits and levied public accusations at Daleiden , including a steady stream of misleading claims and disingenuous narrative .
Yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ veracity of Daleiden ’ s videos on trial in a court of law , where it has even stipulated that the words used by Planned Parenthood officials in the videos indeed “ were spoken by those persons.
” But in the court of public opinion , Planned Parenthood has taken a different approach , calling the videos “ manufactured ” and “ false.
” These statements are clearly false and actionable in court .
According to Tom Brejcha , president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society , “ Planned Parenthood is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by killing off America ’ s next generation and endangering pregnant women .
Additionally , they feel that they must obliterate the reputation of anyone who dares to challenge them and suggest that what they are doing is not the great philanthropic work that they pretend it is .
Planned Parenthood ’ s very existence is an anathema to America ’ s pursuit of the most basic of human rights and they know it .
We have not been surprised over their campaign to smear the reputation of Mr. Daleiden , but they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reputation for exposing the truth.
” “ Instead of coming clean about its ruthless pursuit of profit from selling the remains of aborted children , Planned Parenthood tried to smear David Daleiden , the man who blew the whistle on its dirty secret , '' said Peter Breen , Vice President and Senior Counsel for the Thomas More Society .
`` In its earlier lawsuit against David and the Center for Medical Progress , Planned Parenthood fought to avoid scrutiny of its illegal fetal tissue trafficking .
This new lawsuit puts Planned Parenthood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ center , to prove the truth of the conclusions of David ’ s investigation , which were also confirmed and echoed by the United States Congress and other government officials.
” Daleiden ’ s lawsuit zeroes in on a false statement issued by Planned Parenthood Federation of America Senior Vice President of Communication and Culture Melanie Newman on September 18 , 2019 , in which she told Rewire News that Daleiden and The Center for Medical Progress “ manufacture [ d ] a fake smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.
” The filing also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweet posted by Planned Parenthood Federation of America on their official Twitter feed that said Daleiden and others associated with The Center for Medical Progress “ created a false smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.
” The lawsuit assures that the Daleiden undercover videos , as shown in court and admitted by Planned Parenthood itself , have truly and accurately recorded Planned Parenthood officials ’ own shocking words spoken in real life .
Read the Verified Complaint and Jury Demand filed by the Thomas More Society on behalf of David Daleiden and The Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Center for Medical Progress and David Daleiden v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America at The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 17 , 2020 , here Background on the Thomas More Society ’ s defense of David Daleiden for his exposé of Planned Parenthood ’ s alleged participation in trafficking baby body parts can be found here .
The Thomas More Society is a national not-for-profit law firm dedicated to restoring respect in law for life , family , and religious liberty .
Headquartered in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NJ , the Thomas More Society fosters support for these causes by providing high quality pro bono legal services from local trial courts all the way up to the United States Supreme Court .
For more information , visit thomasmoresociety.org .

Daleiden is taking the abortion giant to task for telling the media that the undercover journalist manufactured a 'false smear campaign' by releasing videos showing evidence of Planned Parenthood's involvment in illegal harvesting and selling of aborted fetal body parts
NEW YORK CITY, September 17, 2020 (Thomas More Society) – Undercover journalist David Daleiden is turning the tables on abortion giant Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) with a defamation lawsuit filed in New York federal district court on September 17, 2020.
Represented by the Thomas More Society, Daleiden is taking the abortion giant to task for telling the media that he and The Center for Medical Progress “manufacture[d]” and “created” a “false smear campaign” by releasing videos showing clear evidence of high-level Planned Parenthood officials candidly discussing the PPFA network’s participation in illegal harvesting and selling of aborted fetal body parts. PPFA’s statements are provably false and betray their own admissions about the veracity of the videos.
Daleiden has been a target of Planned Parenthood since the 2015 release of his investigative videos exposed the abortion company’s apparent involvement in illegal aborted baby body parts trafficking. Daleiden’s undercover research into abortion industry fetal tissue sales spurred Congressional investigations into Planned Parenthood and its business partners and instigated a national public outcry to “Defund Planned Parenthood.” Congressional probes and multi-pronged legal action resulted in the severing of services to Planned Parenthood by their one-time biowaste disposal company, Stericycle. Court testimony in lawsuits and hearings related to Daleiden’s investigation revealed shocking details about the lengths to which abortion providers are willing to go to make a profit off of the babies they abort.
In the wake of the negative publicity, Planned Parenthood has filed lawsuits and levied public accusations at Daleiden, including a steady stream of misleading claims and disingenuous narrative. Yet Planned Parenthood has scrupulously avoided putting the veracity of Daleiden’s videos on trial in a court of law, where it has even stipulated that the words used by Planned Parenthood officials in the videos indeed “were spoken by those persons.” But in the court of public opinion, Planned Parenthood has taken a different approach, calling the videos “manufactured” and “false.” These statements are clearly false and actionable in court.
According to Tom Brejcha, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, “Planned Parenthood is not content to make obscene financial profit by killing off America’s next generation and endangering pregnant women. Additionally, they feel that they must obliterate the reputation of anyone who dares to challenge them and suggest that what they are doing is not the great philanthropic work that they pretend it is. Planned Parenthood’s very existence is an anathema to America’s pursuit of the most basic of human rights and they know it. We have not been surprised over their campaign to smear the reputation of Mr. Daleiden, but they are not allowed to falsely besmirch his reputation for exposing the truth.”
“Instead of coming clean about its ruthless pursuit of profit from selling the remains of aborted children, Planned Parenthood tried to smear David Daleiden, the man who blew the whistle on its dirty secret,” said Peter Breen, Vice President and Senior Counsel for the Thomas More Society. “In its earlier lawsuit against David and the Center for Medical Progress, Planned Parenthood fought to avoid scrutiny of its illegal fetal tissue trafficking. This new lawsuit puts Planned Parenthood’s grisly business practices front and center, to prove the truth of the conclusions of David’s investigation, which were also confirmed and echoed by the United States Congress and other government officials.”
Daleiden’s lawsuit zeroes in on a false statement issued by Planned Parenthood Federation of America Senior Vice President of Communication and Culture Melanie Newman on September 18, 2019, in which she told Rewire News that Daleiden and The Center for Medical Progress “manufacture[d] a fake smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.”
The filing also names a November 15, 2019, tweet posted by Planned Parenthood Federation of America on their official Twitter feed that said Daleiden and others associated with The Center for Medical Progress “created a false smear campaign against Planned Parenthood.”
The lawsuit assures that the Daleiden undercover videos, as shown in court and admitted by Planned Parenthood itself, have truly and accurately recorded Planned Parenthood officials’ own shocking words spoken in real life.
Read the Verified Complaint and Jury Demand filed by the Thomas More Society on behalf of David Daleiden and The Center for Medical Progress in the lawsuit, The Center for Medical Progress and David Daleiden v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America at The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 17, 2020, here .
Background on the Thomas More Society’s defense of David Daleiden for his exposé of Planned Parenthood’s alleged participation in trafficking baby body parts can be found here.
The Thomas More Society is a national not-for-profit law firm dedicated to restoring respect in law for life, family, and religious liberty. Headquartered in Chicago, Omaha, and Fairfield, NJ, the Thomas More Society fosters support for these causes by providing high quality pro bono legal services from local trial courts all the way up to the United States Supreme Court. For more information, visit thomasmoresociety.org.
Share