lifesitenews--2020-04-03--US bishop reverses confession ban after Governor tells churches they’re ‘essential services’

Urgent appeal to bishops : Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here .
LUBBOCK , Texas , April 2 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A Texas bishop today reversed his Sunday order banning priests from hearing confessions after the Governor of Texas deemed churches as “ essential services ” on Tuesday .
“ No priests are to make themselves available to hear Confessions , ” Bishop Robert M. Coerver of Lubbock , Texas , had originally ordered priests within his diocese in response to the coronavirus outbreak .
Coerver noted in an April @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an executive order Tuesday “ with which we are to comply in carrying out what he defined as our ‘ essential services ’ as Church.
” The bishop had banned confessions without any explicit directive to do so .
The bishop said in his Sunday statement , however , that he had banned confession because Mayor Don Pope had issued a stay-in-place order .
In his executive order , Abbot encouraged essential services be provided “ through remote telework , ” but said that if religious services “ can not be conducted from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they should be conducted consistent with the guidelines from the president and the CDC by “ practicing good hygiene , environmental cleanliness , and sanitation , and by implementing social distancing to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
” The order mentioned not only the “ providing ” of essential services , for instance a priest saying Mass , but also the “ obtaining.
” Accordingly , Catholics are now in a position to go to church and receive the sacraments , as long as due precautions are taken .
The governor offered as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where people remain in their cars , according to Texas news outlet KBTX.TV .
“ That seems like it would satisfy the criteria that we 're talking about , '' he said .
Abbott also prohibited local authorities from going beyond what he had deemed permissible restrictions , citing religious services as an example , KBTX.TV reported .
“ So to the extent , for example , that religious services are permitted as specified in this executive order , they can not be denied by a local ordinance under this order , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ most of the Bishops of Texas ” took part in a conference call Wednesday , and decided to keep Masses private .
( There are 15 dioceses in Texas and about 17 active bishops and auxiliary bishops , as well as a number of retired bishops . )
While Abbott designated churches as essential services , “ we are still under orders to carry out such services in keeping with the national guidelines set forth by the federal government , ” Coerver said .
That includes gatherings of no more than ten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distance ” between them of least six feet .
“ In keeping with those guidelines , there is a consensus among the Bishops of Texas that the practice of only private Masses be continued , hopefully live-streamed , with only needed liturgical ministers and video technicians present , never to exceed a total of 10 persons ( counting the priest ) , ” Coerver stated .
“ Due to the danger of contagion , Holy Communion can not be distributed to persons not within the church building , ” he added , leaving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be distributed without the church building .
The bishops also discussed “ the sensitive issue of the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation , ” he said .
While about 30 dioceses across the country have suspended confession , Coerver ’ s March 29 directive , which he issued in response to a stay-in-place order by Lubbock ’ s mayor , was notable in that he made no exception for Catholics in danger of imminent death .
In his April 2 statement , Coerver said he has now decided to implement the “ best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discussed on the conference call .
“ Given the situation of pervasive fear and serious illness , any member of the Faithful in serious need of making a Confession can contact a priest to make an appointment to have their Confession heard , ” he said .
“ The Sacrament must be celebrated either outside or in a large well-ventilated space , with ‘ social distancing ’ scrupulously observed.was not the first bishop to suspend confession because of the pandemic , ” Coerver noted .
“ I am asking our good priests , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adaptations on behalf of our Faithful , to now make themselves available in this manner to penitents who are experiencing grave necessity for Confession.
” Coerver added that regularly scheduled confessions were not possible “ because that would equate to gathering a group that would violate ‘ Stay at Home ’ and ‘ Shelter in Place ’ orders.
” According to an April 1 tweet by Eric Sammons , 30 American dioceses so far have banned confession except in the danger of death .
Meanwhile , a number of prominent and well-respected Catholics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything you can to make the sacraments more available to us ” during the COVID-19 pandemic in an April 1 open letter , titled “ We Are An Easter People.
” LifeSiteNews is collaborating with the initiative as well , launching an “ urgent appeal to bishops ” on the LifePetitions platform .
“ Something is terribly wrong with a culture that allows abortion clinics and liquor stores to remain open but shuts down places of worship , ” the open letter pointed out .
“ While safety and cooperation with civil authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we can to have access to what is essential for our spiritual lives .
We should certainly not voluntarily deprive ourselves of the sacraments.
” Sign LifeSite ’ s petition to the bishops here .

Texas Bishop Robert Coerver had declared that 'No priests are to make themselves available to hear Confessions'
Urgent appeal to bishops: Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here.
LUBBOCK, Texas, April 2, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A Texas bishop today reversed his Sunday order banning priests from hearing confessions after the Governor of Texas deemed churches as “essential services” on Tuesday.
“No priests are to make themselves available to hear Confessions,” Bishop Robert M. Coerver of Lubbock, Texas, had originally ordered priests within his diocese in response to the coronavirus outbreak.
Coerver noted in an April 2 statement that Governor Greg Abbott issued an executive order Tuesday “with which we are to comply in carrying out what he defined as our ‘essential services’ as Church.”
The bishop had banned confessions without any explicit directive to do so. The bishop said in his Sunday statement, however, that he had banned confession because Mayor Don Pope had issued a stay-in-place order.
In his executive order, Abbot encouraged essential services be provided “through remote telework,” but said that if religious services “cannot be conducted from home or through remote services,” they should be conducted consistent with the guidelines from the president and the CDC by “practicing good hygiene, environmental cleanliness, and sanitation, and by implementing social distancing to prevent the spread of COVID-19.”
The order mentioned not only the “providing” of essential services, for instance a priest saying Mass, but also the “obtaining.” Accordingly, Catholics are now in a position to go to church and receive the sacraments, as long as due precautions are taken.
The governor offered as an example a “drive-up service” where people remain in their cars, according to Texas news outlet KBTX.TV.
“That seems like it would satisfy the criteria that we're talking about,” he said.
Abbott also prohibited local authorities from going beyond what he had deemed permissible restrictions, citing religious services as an example, KBTX.TV reported.
“So to the extent, for example, that religious services are permitted as specified in this executive order, they cannot be denied by a local ordinance under this order,” said Abbott.
Coerver said he and “most of the Bishops of Texas” took part in a conference call Wednesday, and decided to keep Masses private. (There are 15 dioceses in Texas and about 17 active bishops and auxiliary bishops, as well as a number of retired bishops.)
While Abbott designated churches as essential services, “we are still under orders to carry out such services in keeping with the national guidelines set forth by the federal government,” Coerver said.
That includes gatherings of no more than ten people who must keep the “social distance” between them of least six feet.
“In keeping with those guidelines, there is a consensus among the Bishops of Texas that the practice of only private Masses be continued, hopefully live-streamed, with only needed liturgical ministers and video technicians present, never to exceed a total of 10 persons (counting the priest),” Coerver stated.
“Due to the danger of contagion, Holy Communion cannot be distributed to persons not within the church building,” he added, leaving open the possibility that Holy Communion could be distributed without the church building.
The bishops also discussed “the sensitive issue of the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation,” he said.
While about 30 dioceses across the country have suspended confession, Coerver’s March 29 directive, which he issued in response to a stay-in-place order by Lubbock’s mayor, was notable in that he made no exception for Catholics in danger of imminent death.
In his April 2 statement, Coerver said he has now decided to implement the “best practice” for confession which the bishops discussed on the conference call.
“Given the situation of pervasive fear and serious illness, any member of the Faithful in serious need of making a Confession can contact a priest to make an appointment to have their Confession heard,” he said.
“The Sacrament must be celebrated either outside or in a large well-ventilated space, with ‘social distancing’ scrupulously observed.was not the first bishop to suspend confession because of the pandemic,” Coerver noted.
“I am asking our good priests, who have made so many concessions and adaptations on behalf of our Faithful, to now make themselves available in this manner to penitents who are experiencing grave necessity for Confession.”
Coerver added that regularly scheduled confessions were not possible “because that would equate to gathering a group that would violate ‘Stay at Home’ and ‘Shelter in Place’ orders.”
According to an April 1 tweet by Eric Sammons, 30 American dioceses so far have banned confession except in the danger of death.
The latest map showing which dioceses have stopped confessions (except in danger of death). The good news: I made two mistakes on my last map—Kansas City and Little Rock *do* allow for confession. The bad news: 30 dioceses have banned confessions, except in danger of death. pic.twitter.com/3MpXFRC6ge — Eric Sammons (@EricRSammons) April 1, 2020
Meanwhile, a number of prominent and well-respected Catholics have urged the bishops “to do everything you can to make the sacraments more available to us” during the COVID-19 pandemic in an April 1 open letter, titled “We Are An Easter People.”
LifeSiteNews is collaborating with the initiative as well, launching an “urgent appeal to bishops” on the LifePetitions platform.
“Something is terribly wrong with a culture that allows abortion clinics and liquor stores to remain open but shuts down places of worship,” the open letter pointed out.
“While safety and cooperation with civil authorities is necessary, we must do everything we can to have access to what is essential for our spiritual lives. We should certainly not voluntarily deprive ourselves of the sacraments.”
Sign LifeSite’s petition to the bishops here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-02--US bishop’s memo forbidding priests to say Mass ad orientem contains two serious errors

Urgent appeal to bishops : Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here .
April 2 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — It is no surprise to any Catholic with a pulse that there are profound differences of opinion about the sacred liturgy .
We can see these coming to a head in a memorandum or “ clarification ” from the Most Reverend Peter Christensen , bishop of Boise , dated February 28 but published only in the latest edition ( March 27–April 9 ) of the Idaho Catholic Register .
In this memo , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 ) they should not consider trustworthy any websites or sources not approved by the Vatican or the USCCB ; ( 2 ) priests must face the people when celebrating the Novus Ordo ; ( 3 ) Communion shall be received standing , and no altar rail or prie-dieu is to be set out for the use of the faithful ; ( 4 ) priests must inform the bishop of any celebration of the “ Extraordinary Form , ” which is to remain marginal ( 5 ) ; priests must refrain from any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the two forms of the Roman Rite .
There is much that can be said to refute each of these points , but my purpose in the present article is to point out two factual falsehoods in the bishop ’ s memo .
As a scholar , I am particularly concerned that no one , regardless of what position he holds , should resort to falsehoods in making his case .
I will not call the two falsehoods “ lies ” because that implies deliberate intention to deceive .
At the same time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter of culpability for pastors who have a duty to know what they are talking about .
1 .
The Latin of GIRM 299 has been analyzed by many Latinists who have shown , grammatically , that it either can not or need not mean what the bishop says it means — and this is important , as he rests his case on the GIRM .
A helpful article at Corpus Christi Watershed gathers together various sources on this paragraph .
Fr .
Zuhlsdorf proposes the following translation : It is a matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases based on what authoritative texts actually say , not on dubious or flawed translations , even if , regrettably , they exist in the approved vernacular translation .
Nor is this a surprise ; it is well known that many Vatican translations contain glaring errors when compared to the definitive Latin text published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis .
For definitive interpretation of magisterial documents , the buck stops at the Latin text , not at the plethora of vernacular translations of it .
2 .
The bishop ’ s claim that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mind of the Council that the priest should face the people ” is totally unsustainable .
According to a most useful resource , Henri De Lubac ’ s Vatican Council Notebooks , vol .
I , which provides summaries for almost every intervention on the liturgy in the Council ’ s first session , there were two Council Fathers who brought up the issue of versus populum in the aula : Luis Gonzaga da Cunha Marelin , Brazil , on October 31 , 1962 : “ talk about the celebratio versus populum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Josef Duschak , Philippines , on November 5 , 1962 : “ Christ celebrated coram popula , alta voce , lingua vernacula ” ( p. 235 ) .
I find two things interesting here .
First , there were hundreds of speeches in the aula on Latin ( it was by far the most controversial subject , to which De Lubac ’ s book bears witness ) but , as far as I can tell , only these two mentions of versus populum .
To get a sense of comparison , the question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more frequently than that .
Second , the Brazilian intervention says the topic should merely get a mention in the Constitution , not that it should be recommended or enforced , and Duschak ’ s viewpoint about the Last Supper , popular in his day , has been called into question , since the ancient customs of dining could not accurately be called versus populum ( see my article “ The Possibly Dubious Liturgical Legacy of Leonardo ’ s Last Supper ” ) .
The great scholar Joachim Jeremias in The Eucharistic Words @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notes that Our Lord could well have spoken the words of institution in liturgical Hebrew .
These two points in the bishop of Boise ’ s memo remind me of the similarly inaccurate statements of Pope Francis ( who appointed him ) in the Apostolic Letter Magnum Principium of 2017 : The great principle , established by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council , according to which liturgical prayer be accommodated to the comprehension of the people so that it might be understood , required the weighty task of introducing the vernacular language into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the versions of the liturgical books , a charge that was entrusted to the Bishops .
... [ E ] specially given the various clearly expressed views of the Council Fathers with regard to the use of the vernacular language in the liturgy , the Church was aware of the difficulties that might present themselves in this regard .
This paragraph is telling for its mixture of accurate and inaccurate phrases .
For it was the same Council that emphasized the other great principle that “ the use of the Latin language is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ( SC 36.1 ) , “ steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them ” ( SC 54 ) , and “ [ i ] n accordance with the centuries-old tradition of the Latin rite , the Latin language is to be retained by clerics in the divine office ” ( SC 101.1 ) .
The “ clearly expressed views of the Council Fathers ” included an avalanche @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or for the fixed parts of services , as catalogued in my article “ The Council Fathers in Support of Latin : Correcting a Narrative Bias.
” Once again , it is a matter of moral integrity that we make our cases based on what authoritative texts actually say , not on the “ Spirit of Vatican II .
”

It is a matter of moral integrity that we make our cases based on what authoritative texts actually say, not on the 'Spirit of Vatican II.'
Urgent appeal to bishops: Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here.
April 2, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — It is no surprise to any Catholic with a pulse that there are profound differences of opinion about the sacred liturgy. We can see these coming to a head in a memorandum or “clarification” from the Most Reverend Peter Christensen, bishop of Boise, dated February 28 but published only in the latest edition (March 27–April 9) of the Idaho Catholic Register.
In this memo, the prelate tells his presbyterate that (1) they should not consider trustworthy any websites or sources not approved by the Vatican or the USCCB; (2) priests must face the people when celebrating the Novus Ordo; (3) Communion shall be received standing, and no altar rail or prie-dieu is to be set out for the use of the faithful; (4) priests must inform the bishop of any celebration of the “Extraordinary Form,” which is to remain marginal (5); priests must refrain from any “mixing” of the customs of the two forms of the Roman Rite.
There is much that can be said to refute each of these points, but my purpose in the present article is to point out two factual falsehoods in the bishop’s memo. As a scholar, I am particularly concerned that no one, regardless of what position he holds, should resort to falsehoods in making his case. I will not call the two falsehoods “lies” because that implies deliberate intention to deceive. At the same time, ignorance in such matters is a matter of culpability for pastors who have a duty to know what they are talking about.
1. The Latin of GIRM 299 has been analyzed by many Latinists who have shown, grammatically, that it either cannot or need not mean what the bishop says it means — and this is important, as he rests his case on the GIRM. A helpful article at Corpus Christi Watershed gathers together various sources on this paragraph. Fr. Zuhlsdorf proposes the following translation:
The main altar should be built separated from the wall, which is useful wherever it is possible, so that it can be easily walked around and a celebration toward the people can be carried out.
Fr. John Hunwicke, a formidable classicist, has proposed this translation:
The High Altar [not, be it observed, every altar] should be constructed away from the wall, so that the option is open [possit] of walking easily around it and using it for Mass facing the people. This [i.e., having the altar free-standing so that the options are open] is desirable wherever possible.
According to further research summarized at Corpus Christi Watershed, the official translation of GIRM 299 on which Bishop Christensen relies is defensible. However, as the same CCW article demonstrates with six arguments (and accompanying documentation), the Congregation for Divine Worship has repeatedly clarified that the ad orientem position is by no means ruled out and remains fully legitimate in the Ordinary Form. Moreover, there are other authoritative sources that suggest the normativity of ad orientem, which leads to a tension between different sources. This larger context points out the serious weakness of Bishop Christensen’s claim that the GIRM is “unambivalent” (he seems to have meant “unambiguous”) on the matter.
2. The bishop’s claim that “[i]t was clearly the mind of the Council that the priest should face the people” is totally unsustainable.
According to a most useful resource, Henri De Lubac’s Vatican Council Notebooks, vol. I, which provides summaries for almost every intervention on the liturgy in the Council’s first session, there were two Council Fathers who brought up the issue of versus populum in the aula: Luis Gonzaga da Cunha Marelin, Brazil, on October 31, 1962: “talk about the celebratio versus populum” (p. 227) and Wilhelm Josef Duschak, Philippines, on November 5, 1962: “Christ celebrated coram popula, alta voce, lingua vernacula” (p. 235).
I find two things interesting here. First, there were hundreds of speeches in the aula on Latin (it was by far the most controversial subject, to which De Lubac’s book bears witness) but, as far as I can tell, only these two mentions of versus populum. To get a sense of comparison, the question of whether to abolish the maniple arose more frequently than that.
Second, the Brazilian intervention says the topic should merely get a mention in the Constitution, not that it should be recommended or enforced, and Duschak’s viewpoint about the Last Supper, popular in his day, has been called into question, since the ancient customs of dining could not accurately be called versus populum (see my article “The Possibly Dubious Liturgical Legacy of Leonardo’s Last Supper”). The great scholar Joachim Jeremias in The Eucharistic Words of Jesus (pp. 196–97) notes that Our Lord could well have spoken the words of institution in liturgical Hebrew.
These two points in the bishop of Boise’s memo remind me of the similarly inaccurate statements of Pope Francis (who appointed him) in the Apostolic Letter Magnum Principium of 2017:
The great principle, established by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, according to which liturgical prayer be accommodated to the comprehension of the people so that it might be understood, required the weighty task of introducing the vernacular language into the liturgy and of preparing and approving the versions of the liturgical books, a charge that was entrusted to the Bishops. … [E]specially given the various clearly expressed views of the Council Fathers with regard to the use of the vernacular language in the liturgy, the Church was aware of the difficulties that might present themselves in this regard.
This paragraph is telling for its mixture of accurate and inaccurate phrases. For it was the same Council that emphasized the other great principle that “the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites” (SC 36.1), “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them” (SC 54), and “[i]n accordance with the centuries-old tradition of the Latin rite, the Latin language is to be retained by clerics in the divine office” (SC 101.1). The “clearly expressed views of the Council Fathers” included an avalanche in favor of retaining Latin either totally or for the fixed parts of services, as catalogued in my article “The Council Fathers in Support of Latin: Correcting a Narrative Bias.”
Once again, it is a matter of moral integrity that we make our cases based on what authoritative texts actually say, not on the “Spirit of Vatican II.”
This post has been updated (04-07-2020).
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--2020-04-02--US bishop forbids priests to say Mass facing tabernacle, bans communion rails

Urgent appeal to bishops : Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here .
BOISE , Idaho , April 2 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― An Idaho bishop has prohibited priests in his diocese from saying the Mass facing toward the tabernacle ( ad orientem ) and from using communion rails for Catholics who prefer to kneel to receive the Eucharist .
In addition , the bishop wants to be informed of every traditional Latin Mass that takes place in his diocese .
Bishop Peter Christensen , 67 , of the Diocese of Boise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his diocese to enforce his liturgical preferences on February 28 .
It was subsequently published in the Idaho Catholic Register in late March .
In the memo , Christensen underscored that priests are not to “ imply a particular superiority or greater holiness of approach amongst the valid forms of worship in the Roman Catholic Church ” before aiming at priests ’ worship ad orientem .
“ Priests in the Diocese of Boise will face the people when presiding at the Ordinary Form of the Mass , ” he instructed and cited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roman Missal , saying that Paragraph 299 “ makes it plain that the universal Church envisions the priest presiding at Mass facing the people.
” “ This is unambivalent , and I am instructing priests in the diocese to preside facing the people at every celebration of the Ordinary Form of the Mass , ” Christensen wrote .
However , author Dr. Peter Kwasniewski told LifeSIteNews that the bishop is “ factually wrong ” about what GIRM Paragraph 299 says about facing the people .
“ And he should know better as this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scholar added .
But Bishop Christensen also believes that the priest celebrating Mass facing the people has contributed to their “ sanctification.
” “ There are priests who prefer ad orientem , ” he acknowledged .
“ I am convinced that they mean well and find it a devout way to pray .
But the overwhelming experience worldwide after Vatican II is that the priest faces the people for the Mass and that this has contributed to the sanctification of the people.
” Christensen rejected “ attempts to justify ” priests facing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ clearly in the mind of the Council that the priest should face the people.
” This statement was contradicted by expert Gregory Di Pippo , editor of The New Liturgical Movement online magazine , who pointed out that the Council Fathers had no explicit plans to radically transform the Mass .
`` Dietrich von Hildebrand once joked that in the case of Vatican II , it is the spirit that killeth , and the letter that giveth life.
” Di Pippo told LifeSiteNews from Rome .
“ Bishop Christensen is entirely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mind of the Council that the priest should face the people , ' ” he continued .
“ The Council 's declaration on the Sacred Liturgy , Sacrosanctum Concilium , mentions ‘ the people ’ more than 40 times , and not once does it suggest in any way that the altars should be turned around , or that celebrant of the Mass should be looking at them while addressing God . ''
Boise ’ s Ordinary also took aim at the practise of receiving Holy Communion while kneeling .
While acknowledging that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Eucharist in this way and may not be refused Communion because they kneel , he ordered that they not be assisted in doing so .
“ While it is the right of the faithful to kneel to receive , nor may any communicant be denied Communion based on posture , given that the established norm in this country is standing , I am instructing that priests do not use furniture or such items as prie dieus or communion rails , as these may seem to undermine the norm or to imply a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he wrote .
Peter Kwasniewski told LifeSiteNews that “ it is always a bad sign for a bishop to want to discourage the faithful from kneeling before their Lord and God.
” In an article he prepared for the Remnant newspaper , Kwasniewski stated that the ban on prie dieus is “ vindictive.
” “ It amounts to saying : ‘ You knuckleheads can get down on your knees if you really want to—but not if you ’ re elderly .
Tough luck for you cronies .
No help from the church , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t it surprising , too , just how rigidly some bishops want to exclude kneeling before the SON OF GOD ?
‘ Hey you—cut it out—no kneeling around here to the Word made flesh !
We don ’ t do that anymore .
It ’ s okay for the three kings and medieval peasants and what not , but not in this democratic age .
Besides , the USCCB has spoken , and it has more authority than a millennium of Catholic practice ’ .
” Christensen 's focus on traditional elements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Paul VI , however .
In his memo he also indicated that he wants to be informed “ as a matter of courtesy ” when the Mass of John XXIII , otherwise known as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass , or the Traditional Latin Mass , is celebrated in his diocese .
While acknowledging that Benedict XVI ’ s motu proprio Summorum pontificum freed priests from the obligation of seeking episcopal permission to celebrate the ancient rite , Christensen wrote “ I request that you report the practise to me , along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that this was for “ accurate record-keeping ” as the Holy See demands such information during ad limina visits .
“ It ’ s almost like he ’ s asking for a confession of mortal sins in kind and number , ” he wrote .
“ And as for his barb that the TLM should not be anything other than extraordinary in its occurrence—one wonders when he will issue the next memo stating that extraordinary ministers should also be of rare occurrence , since the priests and deacons are the ordinary ministers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a long time before that buskin drops.
” Christensen cited “ confusion ” among Catholics as his reason for vetoing the traditional elements .
“ In order to reduce the confusion among the faithful and the increasing disinformation regarding liturgical matters in the Diocese , and to promote harmony and unity that is strengthened in our Eucharistic celebrations , I am promulgating this Instruction , ” he wrote .
Subsequently the bishop suspended all public masses in his diocese as a response to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic .
Christensen ’ s approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Divine Worship , Cardinal Robert Sarah , who in 2016 asked priests to pray with their people towards the east , which represents Christ ’ s return .
In an interview earlier that year , Sarah , now 74 , said that one way to return God to the center of divine worship would be for priests and people “ to turn together in the same direction.
” “ To convert is to turn towards God .
I am profoundly convinced that our bodies must participate in this conversion , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way is certainly to celebrate — priests and faithful — turned together in the same direction : toward the Lord who comes .
It isn ’ t , as one hears sometimes , to celebrate with the back turned toward the faithful or facing them .
That isn ’ t the problem .
It ’ s to turn together toward the apse , which symbolizes the East , where the cross of the risen Lord is enthroned , ” he continued .
“ By this manner of celebrating , we experience , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ God and of adoration .
We understand that the liturgy is first our participation at the perfect sacrifice of the cross .
I have personally had this experience : In celebrating thus , with the priest at its head , the assembly is almost physically drawn up by the mystery of the cross at the moment of the elevation.
” Sarah also asked the faithful to kneel to receive Holy Communion .
The “ Complicit Clergy ” website has offered a means to Catholics to voice their disapproval of Christensen 's prohibitions here @

In addition, the bishop wants to be informed of every traditional Latin Mass that takes place in his diocese.
Urgent appeal to bishops: Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here.
BOISE, Idaho, April 2, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― An Idaho bishop has prohibited priests in his diocese from saying the Mass facing toward the tabernacle (ad orientem) and from using communion rails for Catholics who prefer to kneel to receive the Eucharist. In addition, the bishop wants to be informed of every traditional Latin Mass that takes place in his diocese.
Bishop Peter Christensen, 67, of the Diocese of Boise, issued a memo to the priests of his diocese to enforce his liturgical preferences on February 28. It was subsequently published in the Idaho Catholic Register in late March.
In the memo, Christensen underscored that priests are not to “imply a particular superiority or greater holiness of approach amongst the valid forms of worship in the Roman Catholic Church” before aiming at priests’ worship ad orientem.
“Priests in the Diocese of Boise will face the people when presiding at the Ordinary Form of the Mass,” he instructed and cited 1970’s General Instruction to the Roman Missal, saying that Paragraph 299 “makes it plain that the universal Church envisions the priest presiding at Mass facing the people.”
“This is unambivalent, and I am instructing priests in the diocese to preside facing the people at every celebration of the Ordinary Form of the Mass,” Christensen wrote.
However, author Dr. Peter Kwasniewski told LifeSIteNews that the bishop is “factually wrong” about what GIRM Paragraph 299 says about facing the people.
“And he should know better as this has been discussed extensively,” the scholar added.
But Bishop Christensen also believes that the priest celebrating Mass facing the people has contributed to their “sanctification.”
“There are priests who prefer ad orientem,” he acknowledged.
“I am convinced that they mean well and find it a devout way to pray. But the overwhelming experience worldwide after Vatican II is that the priest faces the people for the Mass and that this has contributed to the sanctification of the people.”
Christensen rejected “attempts to justify” priests facing the east with their people, saying it was “clearly in the mind of the Council that the priest should face the people.”
This statement was contradicted by expert Gregory Di Pippo, editor of The New Liturgical Movement online magazine, who pointed out that the Council Fathers had no explicit plans to radically transform the Mass.
“Dietrich von Hildebrand once joked that in the case of Vatican II, it is the spirit that killeth, and the letter that giveth life.” Di Pippo told LifeSiteNews from Rome.
“Bishop Christensen is entirely wrong to say 'It was clearly the mind of the Council that the priest should face the people,'” he continued.
“The Council's declaration on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, mentions ‘the people’ more than 40 times, and not once does it suggest in any way that the altars should be turned around, or that celebrant of the Mass should be looking at them while addressing God.”
Boise’s Ordinary also took aim at the practise of receiving Holy Communion while kneeling. While acknowledging that the faithful have the right to receive the Eucharist in this way and may not be refused Communion because they kneel, he ordered that they not be assisted in doing so.
“While it is the right of the faithful to kneel to receive, nor may any communicant be denied Communion based on posture, given that the established norm in this country is standing, I am instructing that priests do not use furniture or such items as prie dieus or communion rails, as these may seem to undermine the norm or to imply a preference for kneeling to receive,” he wrote.
Peter Kwasniewski told LifeSiteNews that “it is always a bad sign for a bishop to want to discourage the faithful from kneeling before their Lord and God.”
In an article he prepared for the Remnant newspaper, Kwasniewski stated that the ban on prie dieus is “vindictive.”
“It amounts to saying: ‘You knuckleheads can get down on your knees if you really want to—but not if you’re elderly. Tough luck for you cronies. No help from the church,’” he wrote.
“Isn’t it surprising, too, just how rigidly some bishops want to exclude kneeling before the SON OF GOD? ‘Hey you—cut it out—no kneeling around here to the Word made flesh! We don’t do that anymore. It’s okay for the three kings and medieval peasants and what not, but not in this democratic age. Besides, the USCCB has spoken, and it has more authority than a millennium of Catholic practice’.”
Christensen's focus on traditional elements was not confined to the Mass of Paul VI, however. In his memo he also indicated that he wants to be informed “as a matter of courtesy” when the Mass of John XXIII, otherwise known as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, or the Traditional Latin Mass, is celebrated in his diocese.
While acknowledging that Benedict XVI’s motu proprio Summorum pontificum freed priests from the obligation of seeking episcopal permission to celebrate the ancient rite, Christensen wrote “I request that you report the practise to me, along with frequency and attendance.” He explained that this was for “accurate record-keeping” as the Holy See demands such information during ad limina visits.
Kwasniewski found the bishop’s tone here “sinister.”
“It’s almost like he’s asking for a confession of mortal sins in kind and number,” he wrote.
“And as for his barb that the TLM should not be anything other than extraordinary in its occurrence—one wonders when he will issue the next memo stating that extraordinary ministers should also be of rare occurrence, since the priests and deacons are the ordinary ministers of the Holy Eucharist. It’ll be a long time before that buskin drops.”
Christensen cited “confusion” among Catholics as his reason for vetoing the traditional elements.
“In order to reduce the confusion among the faithful and the increasing disinformation regarding liturgical matters in the Diocese, and to promote harmony and unity that is strengthened in our Eucharistic celebrations, I am promulgating this Instruction,” he wrote.
Subsequently the bishop suspended all public masses in his diocese as a response to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic.
Christensen’s approach is contrary to that of the Prefect for the Divine Worship, Cardinal Robert Sarah, who in 2016 asked priests to pray with their people towards the east, which represents Christ’s return.
In an interview earlier that year, Sarah, now 74, said that one way to return God to the center of divine worship would be for priests and people “to turn together in the same direction.”
“To convert is to turn towards God. I am profoundly convinced that our bodies must participate in this conversion,” the cardinal said.
“The best way is certainly to celebrate — priests and faithful — turned together in the same direction: toward the Lord who comes. It isn’t, as one hears sometimes, to celebrate with the back turned toward the faithful or facing them. That isn’t the problem. It’s to turn together toward the apse, which symbolizes the East, where the cross of the risen Lord is enthroned,” he continued.
“By this manner of celebrating, we experience, even in our bodies, the primacy of God and of adoration. We understand that the liturgy is first our participation at the perfect sacrifice of the cross. I have personally had this experience: In celebrating thus, with the priest at its head, the assembly is almost physically drawn up by the mystery of the cross at the moment of the elevation.”
Sarah also asked the faithful to kneel to receive Holy Communion.
The “Complicit Clergy” website has offered a means to Catholics to voice their disapproval of Christensen's prohibitions here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-02--UPDATED: US bishop reverses decision for priests to give Communion on Holy Thursday

Urgent appeal to bishops : Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here .
April 3 , 2020 , 10:30 AM EST update : Bishop Robert J. Baker wrote today in the Diocese of Birmingham ’ s newspaper One Voice that he now deems it best to “ delay ” distribution of Holy Communion : “ Conscious of the spiritual needs of our people , I sent a memo to priests , deacons , and others who minister in the diocese earlier this week appealing to them to consider distributing Communion in an appropriate way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ observe proper hygiene given our present circumstances .
Since then , I have heard arguments for and against this initiative ( some of which were even presented in a respectful manner ) , and have ultimately decided that it is best to delay it a bit longer .
It seems that scientists do not yet agree on whether the virus can be passed through the air .
As long as the virus is still so prevalent ( it has not yet peaked in Alabama ) and we do not yet have clear answers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judge it best that we revisit the possibility of distributing Holy Communion after Easter.
” BIRMINGHAM , Alabama , April 2 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Bishop Robert J. Baker , the outgoing head of the Diocese of Birmingham , Alabama , has encouraged his priests to distribute Holy Communion to the faithful on Holy Thursday , the Thursday before Easter .
“ With this letter I wish to appeal to your pastoral sensitivity and ask that you find an appropriate way to distribute Holy Communion to your people on Holy Thursday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bishop wrote on March 31 .
“ I am very conscious of the hardship that the suspension of public worship has caused for our people , who are so devoted to Our Lord in the Eucharist , ” he continued .
Baker also reminded his clergy that Holy Thursday is “ the day on which we recall the Institution of the Holy Eucharist and the Holy Priesthood.
” He suggested it might be best to distribute Holy Communion outdoors , during a specified time frame , “ with people driving in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the local rules on public gatherings , adding that priests “ may want to have ushers assist in controlling the line and the flow of people .
If you choose a drive-up option , I ask that you have people exit their vehicle before receiving.
” Baker also advised his priests to set up kneelers , and have a lamp burning .
He said it would be good for priests to offer “ expanded hours for Confession on the days ahead , so that all may be properly disposed to receive Holy Communion.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ commended his priests for having found “ appropriately creative ways the Sacraments of Reconciliation and Anointing of the Sick during this time , even as we all take the extra health precautions required to slow the pandemic.
” Baker emphasized that the reception of Holy Communion on the Thursday before Easter would be “ a one-time event.
” He also said it was only an “ appeal , ” not a mandate .
“ I understand that some of you have serious concerns about your own health , given underlying conditions or age @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his diocese are liberal-leaning and elderly .
“ I am concerned not only with the physical health of our people , but more importantly , with their spiritual health , ” he concluded his letter .
By now , all dioceses within the United States have canceled public Masses .
Often , access to other sacraments has also been restricted .
Bishop Anthony B. Taylor Little Rock , Arkansas , had said giving the sacrament of anointing of the sick to people suffering from coronavirus “ would be problematic.
” The very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a danger to others.
” Instead , the bishop recommended leading “ such persons in prayer for healing , maintaining a distance of at least 3 feet.
” Bishop Luis Rafael Zarama of Raleigh , North Carolina , prohibited Confessions , “ except for those in danger of death.
” His prohibition even included “ the practice being observed of ‘ stational penance ’ via automobile ‘ drive throughs.
’ ” The Archdiocese of Baltimore , led by Archbishop William Lori , has ordered all of its churches to be locked and instructed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faithful if “ the individual is in danger of dying.
” “ No priests are to make themselves available to hear Confessions , ” ordered Bishop Robert M. Coerver of Lubbock , Texas .
Bishop Mitchell Rozanski of Springfield , Massachusetts has suspended all Last Rites .
However , the government decrees of individual states are not always to blame for some bishops ’ draconian measures .
In Ohio , for instance , churches are considered an essential business and allowed to stay open .
Also , “ religious gatherings ” may continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ohio , organized as the Catholic Conference of Ohio , had already decided on March 16 to cancel all public Masses and liturgies , “ at least through the celebrations of Holy Week and Easter.
” On April 1 , a great number of prominent and well-respected Catholics urged the bishops “ to do everything you can to make the sacraments more available to us ” during the COVID-19 pandemic .
“ Something is terribly wrong with a culture that allows abortion clinics and liquor stores to remain open but shuts down places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Robert J. Baker has been bishop of Birmingham since 2007 .
Pope Francis accepted Baker ’ s resignation on March 25 , which is the regular process for bishops aged 75 .
Before being called to Birmingham , Baker was bishop of Charleston , South Carolina , for roughly ten years .

'I am very conscious of the hardship that the suspension of public worship has caused for our people,' Bishop Baker of Birmingham stated.
Urgent appeal to bishops: Fight to make sacraments more available to your faithful Sign the petition here.
April 3, 2020, 10:30 AM EST update: Bishop Robert J. Baker wrote today in the Diocese of Birmingham’s newspaper One Voice that he now deems it best to “delay” distribution of Holy Communion: “Conscious of the spiritual needs of our people, I sent a memo to priests, deacons, and others who minister in the diocese earlier this week appealing to them to consider distributing Communion in an appropriate way on Holy Thursday – being careful to observe proper hygiene given our present circumstances. Since then, I have heard arguments for and against this initiative (some of which were even presented in a respectful manner), and have ultimately decided that it is best to delay it a bit longer. It seems that scientists do not yet agree on whether the virus can be passed through the air. As long as the virus is still so prevalent (it has not yet peaked in Alabama) and we do not yet have clear answers on such weighty issues, I now judge it best that we revisit the possibility of distributing Holy Communion after Easter.”
BIRMINGHAM, Alabama, April 2, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Bishop Robert J. Baker, the outgoing head of the Diocese of Birmingham, Alabama, has encouraged his priests to distribute Holy Communion to the faithful on Holy Thursday, the Thursday before Easter.
“With this letter I wish to appeal to your pastoral sensitivity and ask that you find an appropriate way to distribute Holy Communion to your people on Holy Thursday, April 9, 2020,” the bishop wrote on March 31.
“I am very conscious of the hardship that the suspension of public worship has caused for our people, who are so devoted to Our Lord in the Eucharist,” he continued.
Baker also reminded his clergy that Holy Thursday is “the day on which we recall the Institution of the Holy Eucharist and the Holy Priesthood.”
He suggested it might be best to distribute Holy Communion outdoors, during a specified time frame, “with people driving in their cars.” The bishop cautioned to respect the local rules on public gatherings, adding that priests “may want to have ushers assist in controlling the line and the flow of people. If you choose a drive-up option, I ask that you have people exit their vehicle before receiving.”
Baker also advised his priests to set up kneelers, and have a lamp burning.
He said it would be good for priests to offer “expanded hours for Confession on the days ahead, so that all may be properly disposed to receive Holy Communion.”
At the same time, Baker commended his priests for having found “appropriately creative ways the Sacraments of Reconciliation and Anointing of the Sick during this time, even as we all take the extra health precautions required to slow the pandemic.”
Baker emphasized that the reception of Holy Communion on the Thursday before Easter would be “a one-time event.” He also said it was only an “appeal,” not a mandate. “I understand that some of you have serious concerns about your own health, given underlying conditions or age,” he explained. Many priests in his diocese are liberal-leaning and elderly.
“I am concerned not only with the physical health of our people, but more importantly, with their spiritual health,” he concluded his letter.
By now, all dioceses within the United States have canceled public Masses. Often, access to other sacraments has also been restricted.
Bishop Anthony B. Taylor Little Rock, Arkansas, had said giving the sacrament of anointing of the sick to people suffering from coronavirus “would be problematic.” The very exposure to them “would make you a danger to others.”
Instead, the bishop recommended leading “such persons in prayer for healing, maintaining a distance of at least 3 feet.”
Bishop Luis Rafael Zarama of Raleigh, North Carolina, prohibited Confessions, “except for those in danger of death.” His prohibition even included “the practice being observed of ‘stational penance’ via automobile ‘drive throughs.’”
The Archdiocese of Baltimore, led by Archbishop William Lori, has ordered all of its churches to be locked and instructed priests only to administer sacraments to the faithful if “the individual is in danger of dying.”
“No priests are to make themselves available to hear Confessions,” ordered Bishop Robert M. Coerver of Lubbock, Texas. Bishop Mitchell Rozanski of Springfield, Massachusetts has suspended all Last Rites.
However, the government decrees of individual states are not always to blame for some bishops’ draconian measures. In Ohio, for instance, churches are considered an essential business and allowed to stay open. Also, “religious gatherings” may continue.
The bishops within the state of Ohio, organized as the Catholic Conference of Ohio, had already decided on March 16 to cancel all public Masses and liturgies, “at least through the celebrations of Holy Week and Easter.”
On April 1, a great number of prominent and well-respected Catholics urged the bishops “to do everything you can to make the sacraments more available to us” during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Something is terribly wrong with a culture that allows abortion clinics and liquor stores to remain open but shuts down places of worship,” they pointed out.
Robert J. Baker has been bishop of Birmingham since 2007. Pope Francis accepted Baker’s resignation on March 25, which is the regular process for bishops aged 75. Before being called to Birmingham, Baker was bishop of Charleston, South Carolina, for roughly ten years.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-04--Abp Viganò: Has Pope Francis now ‘disavowed’ being Vicar of Christ?

April 4 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Former papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has called the dropping of Pope Francis ’ essential title “ Vicar of Christ ” from the 2020 Pontifical Yearbook an act that appears to “ officially alter the Papacy , ” such that the Pope “ no longer recognizes himself as guardian.
” “ This change in the layout and content of an official text of the Catholic Church can not be ignored , nor is it possible to attribute it to a gesture of humility on the part of Francis , which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so prominently featured , ” wrote Viganò in a statement he sent to LifeSiteNews ( read full statement below ) .
“ Instead , it seems possible to see in it the admission — passed over in silence — of a sort of usurpation , whereby it is not the “ Servus servorum Dei ” [ The Servant of the Servants of God ] who reigns , but the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio , who has officially disavowed being the Vicar of Christ , the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were annoying trappings of the past : only mere ‘ historical titles , ’ ” he added .
LifeSite reported April 2 that Pope Francis , in a surprise move , dropped the historic and essential title “ Vicar of Christ ” from the 2020 Pontifical Yearbook , the Holy See ’ s annual directory , relegating the title to a footnote , calling it a “ historical title.
” While previous yearbooks listed the title “ Vicar of Christ ” and the name of the reigning Pope under that title , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lists the name “ Jorge Mario Bergoglio , ” the name of the man who became Pope Francis in 2013 .
The title “ Vicar of Jesus Christ ” stems from Holy Scripture where Jesus granted St. Peter the power of the keys in the Church .
Archbishop Viganò said it ’ s as if Pope Francis now views himself as becoming “ master of the Church , free to demolish it from within without having to answer to anyone.
” Cardinal Gerhard Müller , former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the Pope ’ s move , calling the change “ theological barbarism.
” “ No Pope or Ecumenical Council , ” the German prelate continued , “ could , with reference to their highest authority over the Church , do away with the primacy , the episcopacy , or the Sacraments , or to re-interpret them in their essence.
” Matteo Bruni , director of the Vatican press office , told Catholic News Service that “ there has been no suppression ” of a title .
“ The definition of 'historic ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pope on one of the pages dedicated to him in the Annuario Pontificio of 2020 seems to me to indicate the bond with the history of the papacy , '' said Bruni , adding that all the other titles “ are understood to be tied historically to the title of bishop of Rome because at the moment he is designated by the conclave to guide the church of Rome , the one elected acquires the titles tied to this nomination.
” Archbishop Viganò gained prominence worldwide when he made it public in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the cover-up for then-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick who abused seminarians and priests .
“ Truly , I say to you , one of you will betray me.
” And they were very sorrowful , and began to say to him one after another , “ Is it I , Lord ?
” He answered , “ He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me , will betray me .
The Son of man goes as it is written of him , but woe to that man by whom the Son @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been better for that man if he had not been born.
” Judas , who betrayed him , said , “ Is it I , Master ?
” He said to him , “ You have said so.
” Mt 26 , 20-25 On March 25 , the 2020 Pontifical Yearbook was published with a real novelty .
It may seem like a typographical trifle , in the part dedicated to the reigning pontiff , but this is not the case .
Until last year , in fact , Francis ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the page , beginning with “ Vicar of Christ ” , “ Successor of the Prince of the Apostles ” etc.
, and ending with his birth name and a very brief biography .
In the new edition , on the other hand , the secular name JORGE MARIO BERGOGLIO stands out in large letters , followed by the biography , the date of election and the beginning of his “ ministry as universal Pastor of the Church.
” Separated by a dash and the words , “ Historical titles , ” all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then listed , as if they were no longer an integral part of the Munus Petrinum that legitimizes the authority which the Church recognizes in the Pope .
This change in the layout and content of an official text of the Catholic Church can not be ignored , nor is it possible to attribute it to a gesture of humility on the part of Francis , which is not in keeping with his name being so prominently featured .
Instead , it seems possible to see in it the admission — passed over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ usurpation , whereby it is not the “ Servus servorum Dei ” who reigns , but the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio , who has officially disavowed being the Vicar of Christ , the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles and the Supreme Pontiff , as if they were annoying trappings of the past : only mere “ historical titles.
” An almost defiant gesture — one might say — in which Francis transcends every title .
Or worse : an act to officially alter the Papacy , by which he no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ becomes master of the Church , free to demolish it from within without having to answer to anyone .
In short , a tyrant .
May the significance of this most serious act not escape pastors and the faithful , for by it the sweet Christ on earth — as St. Catherine called the Pope — releases himself from his role as Vicar to proclaim himself , in a delirium of pride , absolute monarch even with respect to Christ .
We are approaching the sacred days of the Savior ’ s Passion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the betrayal of one of the Twelve .
It is not illegitimate to wonder whether the understanding words with which Bergoglio tried to rehabilitate Judas on June 16 , 2016 were not a clumsy attempt to exonerate himself .
This chilling thought is further confirmed by the terrible decision to allow an almost universal ban of the public celebration of Easter , for the first time since the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ .
“ The Son of man goes as it is written of him , but woe to that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is betrayed !
” ( Mt 26:24 ) + Carlo Maria Viganò , Archbishop

The Pope now seems to declare himself 'absolute monarch even with respect to Christ,' according to the archbishop.
April 4, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Former papal nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has called the dropping of Pope Francis’ essential title “Vicar of Christ” from the 2020 Pontifical Yearbook an act that appears to “officially alter the Papacy,” such that the Pope “no longer recognizes himself as guardian.”
“This change in the layout and content of an official text of the Catholic Church cannot be ignored, nor is it possible to attribute it to a gesture of humility on the part of Francis, which is not in keeping with his name being so prominently featured,” wrote Viganò in a statement he sent to LifeSiteNews (read full statement below).
“Instead, it seems possible to see in it the admission — passed over in silence — of a sort of usurpation, whereby it is not the “Servus servorum Dei” [The Servant of the Servants of God] who reigns, but the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who has officially disavowed being the Vicar of Christ, the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles and the Supreme Pontiff, as if they were annoying trappings of the past: only mere ‘historical titles,’” he added.
LifeSite reported April 2 that Pope Francis, in a surprise move, dropped the historic and essential title “Vicar of Christ” from the 2020 Pontifical Yearbook, the Holy See’s annual directory, relegating the title to a footnote, calling it a “historical title.”
While previous yearbooks listed the title “Vicar of Christ” and the name of the reigning Pope under that title, this year’s annual directory simply lists the name “Jorge Mario Bergoglio,” the name of the man who became Pope Francis in 2013. The title “Vicar of Jesus Christ” stems from Holy Scripture where Jesus granted St. Peter the power of the keys in the Church.
Archbishop Viganò said it’s as if Pope Francis now views himself as becoming “master of the Church, free to demolish it from within without having to answer to anyone.”
“In short, a tyrant,” he said.
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, also raised concern about the Pope’s move, calling the change “theological barbarism.”
“No Pope or Ecumenical Council,” the German prelate continued, “could, with reference to their highest authority over the Church, do away with the primacy, the episcopacy, or the Sacraments, or to re-interpret them in their essence.”
Matteo Bruni, director of the Vatican press office, told Catholic News Service that “there has been no suppression” of a title.
“The definition of 'historic' in relation to the titles attributed to the pope on one of the pages dedicated to him in the Annuario Pontificio of 2020 seems to me to indicate the bond with the history of the papacy,” said Bruni, adding that all the other titles “are understood to be tied historically to the title of bishop of Rome because at the moment he is designated by the conclave to guide the church of Rome, the one elected acquires the titles tied to this nomination.”
Archbishop Viganò gained prominence worldwide when he made it public in August 2018 that Pope Francis was part of the cover-up for then-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick who abused seminarians and priests.
***
Full statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò:
“You Have Said So”
“Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” And they were very sorrowful, and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?” He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me. The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.” Mt 26, 20-25
On March 25, the 2020 Pontifical Yearbook was published with a real novelty. It may seem like a typographical trifle, in the part dedicated to the reigning pontiff, but this is not the case. Until last year, in fact, Francis’s titles were listed at the top of the page, beginning with “Vicar of Christ”, “Successor of the Prince of the Apostles” etc., and ending with his birth name and a very brief biography.
In the new edition, on the other hand, the secular name JORGE MARIO BERGOGLIO stands out in large letters, followed by the biography, the date of election and the beginning of his “ministry as universal Pastor of the Church.” Separated by a dash and the words, “Historical titles,” all the titles of the Roman Pontiff are then listed, as if they were no longer an integral part of the Munus Petrinum that legitimizes the authority which the Church recognizes in the Pope.
This change in the layout and content of an official text of the Catholic Church cannot be ignored, nor is it possible to attribute it to a gesture of humility on the part of Francis, which is not in keeping with his name being so prominently featured. Instead, it seems possible to see in it the admission — passed over in silence — of a sort of usurpation, whereby it is not the “Servus servorum Dei” who reigns, but the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who has officially disavowed being the Vicar of Christ, the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles and the Supreme Pontiff, as if they were annoying trappings of the past: only mere “historical titles.”
An almost defiant gesture — one might say — in which Francis transcends every title. Or worse: an act to officially alter the Papacy, by which he no longer recognizes himself as guardian, but becomes master of the Church, free to demolish it from within without having to answer to anyone. In short, a tyrant.
May the significance of this most serious act not escape pastors and the faithful, for by it the sweet Christ on earth — as St. Catherine called the Pope — releases himself from his role as Vicar to proclaim himself, in a delirium of pride, absolute monarch even with respect to Christ.
We are approaching the sacred days of the Savior’s Passion, which commences in the Upper Room with the betrayal of one of the Twelve. It is not illegitimate to wonder whether the understanding words with which Bergoglio tried to rehabilitate Judas on June 16, 2016 were not a clumsy attempt to exonerate himself.
This chilling thought is further confirmed by the terrible decision to allow an almost universal ban of the public celebration of Easter, for the first time since the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
“The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed!” (Mt 26:24) + Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
Friday in Passion Week 2020
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-04--Kansas governor backs abortion as ‘essential health care’ during pandemic

TOPEKA , Kansas , April 3 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― The governor of Kansas is determined that abortion businesses will remain open during the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic .
“ I think the women ’ s reproductive [ sic ] centers are considered a healthcare facility and therefore essential , ” Democrat Laura Kelly said on Wednesday at a press conference in Topeka .
The governor was responding to a question from a reporter regarding an attempt in the Wichita area to stop abortions .
According to the Associated Press , Sedgwick County commissioners voted that day to recommend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ only essential medical procedures ” during the national health crisis .
The recommendation will be sent to Sedgwick County health officer Dr. Garold Minns , the Kansas Department of Health and Environment , and Governor Kelly herself .
According to the Wichita Eagle , the vote was 4-1 and followed a “ tense debate ” among commissioners Michael O ’ Donnell , who proposed the recommendation ; Jim Howell , who supported it ; and Lacey Cruse , who opposed it on the grounds that a rape victim seeking an abortion might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rapist ’ s baby ” and that women whose lives are endangered by pregnancy could die .
According to Human Life International , only 0.36 % of abortions are performed in the United States to save the life or health of the mother ( 5,200 per year ) , and only 0.09 % are done in cases of rape or incest ( 1,300 abortions per year ) .
Commissioner O ’ Donnell argued that the Wichita abortuary is being frequented by staff and clients from areas where the virus is more prevalent .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ vulnerable , putting them in a much more vulnerable situation by not knowing if these people who are practicing at the clinic have the virus , have come in contact with other people with the virus , ” he said .
“ This isn ’ t political , this is concern about human life , protecting life whether it ’ s the unborn or individuals that may or may not come in contact with COVID-19 , ” he added .
Kansas Senate president Susan Wagle has also questioned the squandering of medical resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ While high-risk screenings and all elective procedures throughout the state are being canceled and doctor ’ s offices are struggling to survive , why should an elective abortion be an exception ?
” she asked .
“ Personal protective equipment is in short supply during this pandemic .
Making an exception for an elective abortion is inexcusable .
”

PETITION: Urge state governors to stop abortions during coronavirus crisis Sign the petition here.
TOPEKA, Kansas, April 3, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― The governor of Kansas is determined that abortion businesses will remain open during the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic.
“I think the women’s reproductive [sic] centers are considered a healthcare facility and therefore essential,” Democrat Laura Kelly said on Wednesday at a press conference in Topeka.
The governor was responding to a question from a reporter regarding an attempt in the Wichita area to stop abortions. According to the Associated Press, Sedgwick County commissioners voted that day to recommend that abortion facilities be restricted to performing “only essential medical procedures” during the national health crisis.
The recommendation will be sent to Sedgwick County health officer Dr. Garold Minns, the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, and Governor Kelly herself.
According to the Wichita Eagle, the vote was 4-1 and followed a “tense debate” among commissioners Michael O’Donnell, who proposed the recommendation; Jim Howell, who supported it; and Lacey Cruse, who opposed it on the grounds that a rape victim seeking an abortion might have to give birth to her “rapist’s baby” and that women whose lives are endangered by pregnancy could die.
According to Human Life International, only 0.36% of abortions are performed in the United States to save the life or health of the mother (5,200 per year), and only 0.09% are done in cases of rape or incest (1,300 abortions per year).
Commissioner O’Donnell argued that the Wichita abortuary is being frequented by staff and clients from areas where the virus is more prevalent.
“We are putting people that are vulnerable, putting them in a much more vulnerable situation by not knowing if these people who are practicing at the clinic have the virus, have come in contact with other people with the virus,” he said.
“This isn’t political, this is concern about human life, protecting life whether it’s the unborn or individuals that may or may not come in contact with COVID-19,” he added.
Kansas Senate president Susan Wagle has also questioned the squandering of medical resources on abortion businesses at such a time.
“While high-risk screenings and all elective procedures throughout the state are being canceled and doctor’s offices are struggling to survive, why should an elective abortion be an exception?” she asked.
“Personal protective equipment is in short supply during this pandemic. Making an exception for an elective abortion is inexcusable.”


lifesitenews--2020-04-04--Euthanasia doctor drafts Ontario’s coronavirus triage protocol deciding who gets care

TORONTO , April 3 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A doctor who has euthanized people and lobbied to legalize lethal injection for sick patients in Canada is behind Ontario ’ s proposed triage protocol to decide who will get care if the medical system is overwhelmed by coronavirus patients .
The protocol appears to suggest that those suffering from dementia would be denied life-saving care on that basis , according to the Toronto Globe and Mail .
Dr. James Downar , former chair of the physicians advisory committee for Dying with Dignity , led the drafting of the Ontario @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but was leaked to the media this week , with the Globe and the Toronto Star reporting on it .
The draft document proposes a triage protocol that will be triggered when the medical system is at a “ breaking point , ” which it defines as working at 200 percent of normal capacity , reported the Star .
The protocol has three levels of criteria that become more restrictive as strain on the system increases .
The first level “ would deny life-saving treatment to those with more than an 80-per-cent chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who are unable to perform daily tasks because of a severe cognitive impairment from a progressive illness , ” the Globe reported .
“ The wording suggests that some individuals with dementia would be denied life-saving care , but that individuals with developmental delays not caused by progressive illness would still qualify for such care , ” it added .
The second level “ denies life-saving treatment to those with more than a 50-per-cent chance of death .
The third level applies to those with more than a 30-per-cent chance of death.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ utility ( those who derive maximum benefit receive the care ) ; proportionality ( the number harmed by the protocol should not exceed the number harmed under a first-come , first-served approach ) and fairness ( ‘ priority should not be given to anyone on the basis of socio-economic privilege or political rank ’ ) , ” according to the Globe .
The triage system will assess patients using “ inclusion and exclusion criteria , ” the Star reported , with patients “ who are very likely to die from their critical illness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to die in the near future even if they recovered from their critical illness ” excluded .
Patients who “ no longer meet the criteria for care ” will be taken off ventilators or not offered them .
However , they will receive “ the highest priority for palliative care , ” the Star reported , adding that the triage protocol is “ coupled with a clear palliative care plan.
” It appears that Downar , head of the division of palliative care at the University of Ottawa and a palliative care physician @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , also had a hand in this palliative care plan .
He and three others published a draft document in the Canadian Medical Association Journal ( CMAJ ) on Tuesday on “ Pandemic palliative care , ” which said “ palliative sedation ” could be used to bypass the law for patients dying of the coronavirus who allegedly expressed a desire for euthanasia .
“ In our opinion , palliative sedation is preferable to medical assistance in dying ( MAiD ) for patients with severe respiratory failure caused by SARS-CoV-2 , given the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and assessors required , and the current requirement for full capacity to determine eligibility for MAiD , ” wrote Downar , et al .
“ Attempting to honour an urgent MAiD request is likely to prolong suffering in those who are imminently dying.
” Alex Schadenberg , executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition , said the proposed triage protocol is illegal because Ontario courts have been clear that consent is required both to provide and to withdraw treatment .
“ Therefore , to remove a patient from life-saving intervention , even with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without consent , ” he told LifeSiteNews .
While Catholic medical ethics considers a respirator as “ extraordinary means , so it ’ s not obligatory , with COVID-19 , we ’ re not talking about a permanent respirator ; we ’ re talking about temporary use of a respirator — that ’ s a very important distinction , ” he said .
“ Denying this to someone would actually be denying them use of effective treatment that would result in them getting better.
” While “ it is ethical to recognize that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s nothing we can do , ” denying people life-saving care on a utilitarian basis and because their lives are viewed as less valuable , such as on the basis of age , dementia , or disability , is discriminatory and “ immoral , ” he said .
That was echoed by Joseph Meaney , president of the Philadelphia-based National Catholic Bioethics Center ( NCBC ) , who told Crux that medical centers may need a “ just form of triage ” to cope with the crisis .
“ There is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no one should be refused medical help .
The agonizing problem that is currently confronting Italy , and potentially other countries soon , is that certain very intensive therapies can not be given to more than a certain number of patients at a time .
There are only so many ventilators available , for instance , ” Meaney said .
“ Succinctly speaking , objective criteria must be used to give the most limited intensive therapies to those most in need who can still benefit from them , ” he added .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to triage a person out simply on the basis of their age , disability , sex , etc .
It is true that some elderly patients may not meet objective criteria for ventilator access in a crisis situation because they are dying and it is impossible to save them , but that can also be true of younger patients .
We have to be very mindful of not discriminating .
The slippery slope goes downhill very rapidly once one starts on that road .
”

A doctor who has euthanized people and lobbied to legalize lethal injection for sick patients in Canada is behind Ontario’s proposed coronavirus triage protocol.
TORONTO, April 3, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A doctor who has euthanized people and lobbied to legalize lethal injection for sick patients in Canada is behind Ontario’s proposed triage protocol to decide who will get care if the medical system is overwhelmed by coronavirus patients.
The protocol appears to suggest that those suffering from dementia would be denied life-saving care on that basis, according to the Toronto Globe and Mail.
Dr. James Downar, former chair of the physicians advisory committee for Dying with Dignity, led the drafting of the Ontario Health protocol, which is not public but was leaked to the media this week, with the Globe and the Toronto Star reporting on it.
The draft document proposes a triage protocol that will be triggered when the medical system is at a “breaking point,” which it defines as working at 200 percent of normal capacity, reported the Star.
The protocol has three levels of criteria that become more restrictive as strain on the system increases.
The first level “would deny life-saving treatment to those with more than an 80-per-cent chance of death from trauma, and those who are unable to perform daily tasks because of a severe cognitive impairment from a progressive illness,” the Globe reported.
“The wording suggests that some individuals with dementia would be denied life-saving care, but that individuals with developmental delays not caused by progressive illness would still qualify for such care,” it added.
The second level “denies life-saving treatment to those with more than a 50-per-cent chance of death. The third level applies to those with more than a 30-per-cent chance of death.”
The protocol has three principles: “utility (those who derive maximum benefit receive the care); proportionality (the number harmed by the protocol should not exceed the number harmed under a first-come, first-served approach) and fairness (‘priority should not be given to anyone on the basis of socio-economic privilege or political rank’),” according to the Globe.
The triage system will assess patients using “inclusion and exclusion criteria,” the Star reported, with patients “who are very likely to die from their critical illness, and people who are very likely to die in the near future even if they recovered from their critical illness” excluded.
Patients who “no longer meet the criteria for care” will be taken off ventilators or not offered them. However, they will receive “the highest priority for palliative care,” the Star reported, adding that the triage protocol is “coupled with a clear palliative care plan.”
It appears that Downar, head of the division of palliative care at the University of Ottawa and a palliative care physician at Ottawa Hospital and Bruyère Continuing Care, also had a hand in this palliative care plan.
He and three others published a draft document in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) on Tuesday on “Pandemic palliative care,” which said “palliative sedation” could be used to bypass the law for patients dying of the coronavirus who allegedly expressed a desire for euthanasia.
“In our opinion, palliative sedation is preferable to medical assistance in dying (MAiD) for patients with severe respiratory failure caused by SARS-CoV-2, given the 10-day reflection period, number of witnesses and assessors required, and the current requirement for full capacity to determine eligibility for MAiD,” wrote Downar, et al.
“Attempting to honour an urgent MAiD request is likely to prolong suffering in those who are imminently dying.”
Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, said the proposed triage protocol is illegal because Ontario courts have been clear that consent is required both to provide and to withdraw treatment.
“Therefore, to remove a patient from life-saving intervention, even with good intention, cannot be done without consent,” he told LifeSiteNews.
While Catholic medical ethics considers a respirator as “extraordinary means, so it’s not obligatory, with COVID-19, we’re not talking about a permanent respirator; we’re talking about temporary use of a respirator — that’s a very important distinction,” he said.
“Denying this to someone would actually be denying them use of effective treatment that would result in them getting better.”
While “it is ethical to recognize that somebody is not getting better and there’s nothing we can do,” denying people life-saving care on a utilitarian basis and because their lives are viewed as less valuable, such as on the basis of age, dementia, or disability, is discriminatory and “immoral,” he said.
That was echoed by Joseph Meaney, president of the Philadelphia-based National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC), who told Crux that medical centers may need a “just form of triage” to cope with the crisis.
“There is a medical-moral duty to deliver care, so no one should be refused medical help. The agonizing problem that is currently confronting Italy, and potentially other countries soon, is that certain very intensive therapies cannot be given to more than a certain number of patients at a time. There are only so many ventilators available, for instance,” Meaney said.
“Succinctly speaking, objective criteria must be used to give the most limited intensive therapies to those most in need who can still benefit from them,” he added.
However, “it would not be ethical to triage a person out simply on the basis of their age, disability, sex, etc. It is true that some elderly patients may not meet objective criteria for ventilator access in a crisis situation because they are dying and it is impossible to save them, but that can also be true of younger patients. We have to be very mindful of not discriminating. The slippery slope goes downhill very rapidly once one starts on that road.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-04--Migrants in Europe who convert to Christianity do so ‘in secret’ due to persecution: researcher

April 3 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — As the coronavirus causes more and more countries to go on lockdown , the topics of globalization and immigration are increasingly being discussed by high-ranking officials across the world .
One issue often conveniently avoided by world leaders is the undue amount of discrimination Christians in Europe and the Middle East face from their governments .
That and more is discussed in full on this week ’ s episode of The Jonathon van Maren Show .
Among other things , guest Ellen Fantini , the executive director of the Observatory on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , shares the shocking research she ’ s uncovered about persecuted Christians in the region .
Fantini says that migrants who convert to Christianity after arriving in Europe often face precarious situations .
“ To enter the Catholic Church [ in Vienna , Austria ] has gone from a public joyful ceremony in the cathedral to an event that is joyful but not public .
There is a secret location .
It 's not in the Cathedral .
And only up until the day of the event does anybody know where it is.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than forty laws in Europe that have a negative impact on Christians , Fantini said people have a “ very hard time understanding that Christians can be victims of intolerance , discrimination and persecution.
” Fantini also made the point that even though it is difficult to be without a church here in the West , how much more difficult must it be for those Christians in so many countries in the Middle East who can never attend church ?
To listen to the entire interview , click below : The Van @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including Spotify , SoundCloud , YouTube , iTunes , and Google Play .
For a full listing of episodes , and to subscribe to various channels , visit our Acast webpage here .
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded , subscribe below :

People have a 'very hard time understanding that Christians can be victims of intolerance, discrimination and persecution,' she said.
April 3, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — As the coronavirus causes more and more countries to go on lockdown, the topics of globalization and immigration are increasingly being discussed by high-ranking officials across the world.
One issue often conveniently avoided by world leaders is the undue amount of discrimination Christians in Europe and the Middle East face from their governments.
That and more is discussed in full on this week’s episode of The Jonathon van Maren Show.
Among other things, guest Ellen Fantini, the executive director of the Observatory on the Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians in Europe, shares the shocking research she’s uncovered about persecuted Christians in the region.
Fantini says that migrants who convert to Christianity after arriving in Europe often face precarious situations.
“To enter the Catholic Church [in Vienna, Austria] has gone from a public joyful ceremony in the cathedral to an event that is joyful but not public. There is a secret location. It's not in the Cathedral. And only up until the day of the event does anybody know where it is.”
Citing the fact that there are more than forty laws in Europe that have a negative impact on Christians, Fantini said people have a “very hard time understanding that Christians can be victims of intolerance, discrimination and persecution.”
Fantini also made the point that even though it is difficult to be without a church here in the West, how much more difficult must it be for those Christians in so many countries in the Middle East who can never attend church?
To listen to the entire interview, click below:
The Van Maren Show is hosted on numerous platforms, including Spotify, SoundCloud, YouTube, iTunes, and Google Play.
For a full listing of episodes, and to subscribe to various channels, visit our Acast webpage here.
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded, subscribe below:
Email Address *
First Name *
Last Name *


lifesitenews--2020-04-04--As president, Joe Biden would smash religious freedom with ‘Equality Act’

April 3 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — As COVID-19 captures headlines , Joe Biden ’ s plan to promote equality at the expense of religious liberty has quietly slid under the media radar .
His newly unveiled policy is called “ The Plan to Address LGBTQ Equality in America and Around the World.
” It has vast implications for people of faith .
In his plan , Biden solidifies the Democratic Party ’ s lurch to the left , leaving behind moderate faith voters whose support he , conceivably , might have won .
A quiet legion of faith @ @ @ @ @ @ @ privately confess they could be wooed by his personality and winning smile .
Before Christians jump on the Biden bandwagon , though , they should carefully consider what his equality policy would mean to their everyday lives — and those of their children .
His plan profoundly undermines religious liberty , which is the right to live out religious convictions in the public square .
It leaves scarcely any aspect of life untouched .
The centerpiece of Biden ’ s 7000-word plan is the passage of the Equality Act , which includes the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The real rub is that sexual orientation and gender identity are granted special legal status with the power to trump religious convictions .
Faith-based adoption and foster care agencies would not receive federal grants unless they agreed to place children in same-sex homes .
Housing , employment , medical services — all would feel the impact of policies that label religious conviction as discrimination , with the power to sue in court .
Some have called this “ persecutory progressivism.
” In Biden ’ s plan , students would be guaranteed access to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Conversion therapy becomes a punishable offense .
Government forms would be required to have a “ third option ” for non-binary individuals .
It would be legal nightmare to terminate a pastor or Christian schoolteacher who decides to present himself as the opposite sex or live a gay lifestyle .
Women ’ s sports would be dominated by men on hormones .
In the last two years of Obama ’ s administration , he was able to recalibrate “ discrimination ” as anything that openly espoused traditional marriage or insisted that a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sex .
Biden ’ s plan is all that , and more .
Biden and his fellow Democrats seem to miss that socially conservative , fiscally progressive voters propelled a populist named Donald Trump to victory .
Many of those conservative voters struggle with this president ’ s persona .
But they are even more wary of being coerced into liberal social policies that breed chaos and the demise of functioning families .
At the time , the Obergefell decision to redefine marriage passed ( by one vote ) , 70 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman constitute a marital union .
Those views have softened somewhat , but they have not disappeared .
Who wants his church or school or foster care agency to be accused of bigotry and hate speech because it espouses male-female marriage and biological sex distinctions — views the majority of Americans held until quite recently ?
How would this shape the lives of the next generation ?
Joe Biden appears to be headed to the Democratic nomination for president .
His equality plan will allow LGBT ideology to re-shape our civil liberties , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Christians , especially , hold dear .
Biden might have a winsome personality and well edited tweets .
But religious voters tempted to get behind Biden should carefully consider what his plan would mean for their children and the freedom to live their faith .

April 3, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — As COVID-19 captures headlines, Joe Biden’s plan to promote equality at the expense of religious liberty has quietly slid under the media radar. His newly unveiled policy is called “The Plan to Address LGBTQ Equality in America and Around the World.” It has vast implications for people of faith.
In his plan, Biden solidifies the Democratic Party’s lurch to the left, leaving behind moderate faith voters whose support he, conceivably, might have won. A quiet legion of faith voters whom Biden likely cannot see privately confess they could be wooed by his personality and winning smile.
Before Christians jump on the Biden bandwagon, though, they should carefully consider what his equality policy would mean to their everyday lives — and those of their children. His plan profoundly undermines religious liberty, which is the right to live out religious convictions in the public square. It leaves scarcely any aspect of life untouched.
The centerpiece of Biden’s 7000-word plan is the passage of the Equality Act, which includes the goal of overturning Trump-era religious policies. The real rub is that sexual orientation and gender identity are granted special legal status with the power to trump religious convictions. Faith-based adoption and foster care agencies would not receive federal grants unless they agreed to place children in same-sex homes. Housing, employment, medical services — all would feel the impact of policies that label religious conviction as discrimination, with the power to sue in court. Some have called this “persecutory progressivism.”
In Biden’s plan, students would be guaranteed access to bathrooms and locker rooms of their choosing. Conversion therapy becomes a punishable offense. Government forms would be required to have a “third option” for non-binary individuals. It would be legal nightmare to terminate a pastor or Christian schoolteacher who decides to present himself as the opposite sex or live a gay lifestyle. Women’s sports would be dominated by men on hormones.
In the last two years of Obama’s administration, he was able to recalibrate “discrimination” as anything that openly espoused traditional marriage or insisted that a person actually is his or her biological sex. Biden’s plan is all that, and more.
Biden and his fellow Democrats seem to miss that socially conservative, fiscally progressive voters propelled a populist named Donald Trump to victory. Many of those conservative voters struggle with this president’s persona. But they are even more wary of being coerced into liberal social policies that breed chaos and the demise of functioning families.
At the time, the Obergefell decision to redefine marriage passed (by one vote), 70% of Americans believed that a man and a woman constitute a marital union. Those views have softened somewhat, but they have not disappeared. Who wants his church or school or foster care agency to be accused of bigotry and hate speech because it espouses male-female marriage and biological sex distinctions — views the majority of Americans held until quite recently? How would this shape the lives of the next generation?
Joe Biden appears to be headed to the Democratic nomination for president. His equality plan will allow LGBT ideology to re-shape our civil liberties, undermining the cultural and faith norms that Christians, especially, hold dear. Biden might have a winsome personality and well edited tweets.
But religious voters tempted to get behind Biden should carefully consider what his plan would mean for their children and the freedom to live their faith.
Paula Rinehart, LCSW, is a therapist in Raleigh, N.C.
Share