lifesitenews--2020-04-15--Sex ‘education’ brainwashing never stops even while schools are closed

April 14 , 2020 ( Everyday for Life Canada ) – If there is one thing that the coronavirus crisis might make parents realize about their children 's education , it 's this : How useless and dangerous is the propaganda in public school about the need for radical sex- '' education '' programs .
Sex lessons that include teaching children that boys can be girls and girls can be boys .
Give `` consent '' for sex and everything will be fine .
Children are just too young to deal with these kinds of explicit content .
Topics such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be properly processed by a young mind that has not yet developed the executive function of the brain .
This is why much of the content taught under the guise of sex `` education '' amounts to child abuse .
One would think that the sex activists would have relented somewhat during this coronavirus shutdown of public schools .
But parents beware because they have n't .
The sexual brainwashing continues unabated .
Parents , be on guard .
Comprehensive school sex-programs exploit and grooms children .
It does n't educate them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Council of the United States ( SIECUS ) , and do n't let the nice sounding name fool anyone : They 're actually pushing sex `` education '' for homeschooling .
One resource asks parents , `` Need some homeschool-style sex ed resources ?
We got you . ''
Children from the ages of 8 to 12 can even watch videos such as `` Growing Into You , Virtual Puberty Workshops . ''
The message is clear : do n't not let social distancing get in the way of sex `` education .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , contraception and abortion services .
Then there is Amaze that brainwashes children about sexual `` rights . ''
Scarletten tells children that all sexual activities are acceptable .
And Sex Positive Families will tell children to do what they want sexually just to be `` inclusive '' and never to shame anyone .
And not to be outdone , Planned Parenthood allows young people to ask with its online service called Roo any question they want about sex .
Instead , this school closure is the perfect time for parents to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these irresponsible online services .
These sex peddlers lie to children .
They tell them that they have sexual `` rights . ''
There are human parental rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , but nothing about anal sex or abortion being a `` right . ''
These organizations view sex `` education '' as away to achieve social change .
Sex is viewed as relativistic , selfish , mechanical and a pleasure-seeking activity .
The strategy is Machiavellian .
However , it 's both unhealthy and abusive to children .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Christian values .
The sexual revolution has now entered your local public school and your home via the Internet .
It 's the real virus that parents must stop from infecting their children .
Schools are now closed and parents should make sure that an innocent child 's body and soul are protected from this sexual dangerous propaganda coming from Siecus , Amaze , Planned Parenthood and other similar groups .
Parents , do n't let these activists steal your right to direct your child 's education at home and when school @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closed , have a great opportunity to reclaim the right to teach their children about chastity , purity , marriage , and responsible sex education , should the children ask any questions .
Reprinted with permission from Everyday for Life Canada .

April 14, 2020 (Everyday for Life Canada) – If there is one thing that the coronavirus crisis might make parents realize about their children's education, it's this: How useless and dangerous is the propaganda in public school about the need for radical sex-“education” programs. Sex lessons that include teaching children that boys can be girls and girls can be boys. Give “consent” for sex and everything will be fine. Children are just too young to deal with these kinds of explicit content. Topics such as anal sex and gender identity cannot be properly processed by a young mind that has not yet developed the executive function of the brain. This is why much of the content taught under the guise of sex “education” amounts to child abuse.
One would think that the sex activists would have relented somewhat during this coronavirus shutdown of public schools. But parents beware because they haven't. The sexual brainwashing continues unabated. Parents, be on guard. Comprehensive school sex-programs exploit and grooms children. It doesn't educate them.
Take the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), and don't let the nice sounding name fool anyone: They're actually pushing sex “education” for homeschooling. One resource asks parents, “Need some homeschool-style sex ed resources? We got you.” Children from the ages of 8 to 12 can even watch videos such as “Growing Into You, Virtual Puberty Workshops.” The message is clear: don't not let social distancing get in the way of sex “education.” Children must be taught about sex, contraception and abortion services.
Then there is Amaze that brainwashes children about sexual “rights.” Scarletten tells children that all sexual activities are acceptable. And Sex Positive Families will tell children to do what they want sexually just to be “inclusive” and never to shame anyone. And not to be outdone, Planned Parenthood allows young people to ask with its online service called Roo any question they want about sex. Instead, this school closure is the perfect time for parents to make sure that their children are protected from these irresponsible online services.
These sex peddlers lie to children. They tell them that they have sexual “rights.” There are human parental rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but nothing about anal sex or abortion being a “right.” These organizations view sex “education” as away to achieve social change. Sex is viewed as relativistic, selfish, mechanical and a pleasure-seeking activity. The strategy is Machiavellian. However, it's both unhealthy and abusive to children. It also intentionally contradicts family, moral and Christian values. The sexual revolution has now entered your local public school and your home via the Internet. It's the real virus that parents must stop from infecting their children.
Schools are now closed and parents should make sure that an innocent child's body and soul are protected from this sexual dangerous propaganda coming from Siecus, Amaze, Planned Parenthood and other similar groups. Parents, don't let these activists steal your right to direct your child's education at home and when school reopens. Parents, while schools are closed, have a great opportunity to reclaim the right to teach their children about chastity, purity, marriage, and responsible sex education, should the children ask any questions.
Reprinted with permission from Everyday for Life Canada.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-14--Trump halts funding to World Health Organization over coronavirus outbreak

WASHINGTON , D.C. , April 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – President Donald Trump announced this evening he is instructing his administration to halt funding to the World Health Organization ( WHO ) “ while a review is conducted to assess the World Health Organization ’ s role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus.
” PETITION : Urge President Trump to defund pro-abortion World Health Organization Sign the petition here .
“ American taxpayers provide between $ 400 million and $ 500 million per year to the WHO .
In contrast , China contributes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointed out .
“ As the organization ’ s leading sponsor , the United States has a duty to insist on full accountability .
One of the most dangerous and costly decisions from the WHO was its disastrous decision to oppose travel restrictions from China and other nations.
” “ They were very much opposed to what we did .
Fortunately , I was not convinced and suspended travel from China , ” saving thousands of American lives , Trump said .
“ The WHO ’ s attack on travel restrictions put political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if other nations had “ likewise suspended travel from China , countless more lives would have been saved .
Instead , look at the rest of the world .
Look at parts of Europe .
Other nations and regions who followed WHO guidelines and kept their borders open to China , accelerated the pandemic all around the world .
Many countries said , ‘ we ’ re gon na listen to the WHO.
’ They have problems the likes of which they can not believe .
Nobody can believe .
The decision of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was one of the great tragedies and missed opportunities from the early days ” of the pandemic .
Trump blasted the WHO for failing in its “ basic duty ” to “ work with countries to ensure that accurate information about international health is shared in a timely manner .
And if it ’ s not , to independently tell the world the truth about what is happening.
” The WHO “ must be held accountable , ” he insisted .
“ It is time , after all of these decades .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sources in Wuhan that conflicted directly with the chinese government 's official accounts.
” Pro-life advocates have long opposed the WHO over its support of abortion , and the coronavirus pandemic has also shed light on the U.N. entity ’ s suspicious ties to communist China .
Senator Marco Rubio , R-FL , has been a sharp critic of the WHO .
Its “ subservience to Beijing ” and the Chinese Communist Party has “ undermined global health ” and “ could prove fatal ” in the coronavirus pandemic , the senator argued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dr. Antonella Lavalanet , a medical officer in the WHO ’ s “ Maternal and Perinatal Health & Preventing Unsafe Abortion Team , ” said that abortion should be considered an “ essential service ” during the coronavirus crisis .
The WHO representative said that even “ where supplies of antibiotics are not available , abortion should not be denied ” and women should be encouraged to self-abort at home during the first trimester of pregnancy .
On March 22 , Mike Ryan , WHO ’ s executive director of emergencies program , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who may have the coronavirus in family homes and “ remove them.
” Ryan declared that in response to the COVID-19 pandemic , officials may have to enter homes and remove family members .
The contagion has been “ taken off the streets and pushed back into family units.
” “ Now we need to go and look in families to find those people who may be sick and remove them and isolate them in a safe and dignified manner , ” Ryan said March 22 , a “ threat ” FOX host @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this day , ” the WHO “ has deprived the scientific community of essential data , ” Trump said , and “ the silence of the WHO on the disappearance of scientific research and doctors and ... new restrictions on the sharing of research into the origins of COVID-19 in the country of origin is deeply concerning.
” “ Our country will be forced to find other ways to work with other nations to achieve public health goals .
We will have no choice but to do that .
Our country is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world – tremendous death and economic devastation .
Those tasked with protecting us by being truthful and transparent failed to do so .
It would have been so easy to be truthful .
So much death has been caused by their mistakes.
” “ If the World Health Organization wants to behave like the China Health Organization , then let China pay for it , ” commented China expert Steven Mosher , president of the Population Research Institute .
“ As a practical matter , America 's foreign aid dollars will go a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American charities , rather than funnelled through an inefficient and corrupt U.N. bureaucracy.
” On April 7 , Trump hinted during a coronavirus briefing that he was open to defunding the WHO .
“ They seem to err always on the side of China and we fund it , so I want to look into it , ” he said .
A reporter pressed him , “ Is it time to freeze [ U.S. ] funding to the WHO during a pandemic ?
” “ No , maybe not , I am not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , but we are going to look at it , ” Trump replied .
“ We are going to investigate it , we are going to look into it ... but we will look at ending funding because you know what , they called it wrong and if you look back over the years even , they ’ re very much – everything seems to be very biased towards China – that 's not right.
” Reggie Littlejohn , President of Women ’ s Rights Without Frontiers – a group that fights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s defunding of WHO a “ bold and appropriate move.
” “ The WHO has botched its handling of the coronavirus pandemic from the beginning , costing countless lives , ” she told LifeSiteNews .
“ The head of the WHO went to China and met with Xi Jinping .
Instead of exposing the lack of transparency of the Chinese government , the WHO simply believed the CCP ’ s propaganda playing down the severity of the outbreak .
The WHO opposed President Trump ’ s travel ban from China , choosing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The WHO dragged its feet on declaring the coronavirus a pandemic , long after this reality had been recognized by other world leaders.
” Everyone has been affected .
I have a close friend whose small family business that she sacrificed deeply to build from the ground up has now been decimated .
I have another close friend who we believe had the coronavirus and now , thank God , is slowly recovering .
If he had died , my life would never be the same .
My heart is wrenched when thinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ died alone in quarantine , their family members prevented from being with them .
How much of this could have been prevented if the WHO had been doing its job ?
The world counted on the WHO to exert leadership in this global crisis .
They failed miserably .
U.S. tax dollars will be better spent either helping other organizations with proven track records effectively combatting this pandemic or founding a new organization to address this crisis .
The WHO and the Chinese government should be held accountable together for every life lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transparency .
Former American ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley praised Trump for ceasing funding to WHO .
So did Republican lawmakers .
Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey called it “ one of the best decisions of his presidency.
” The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation has published an analysis and timeline of the Chinese communist party ’ s deception of the world regarding the coronavirus and how it is “ using the World Health Organization as an instrument of propaganda.
” Read all LifeSiteNews coverage of the coronavirus crisis and how it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and freedom here .
This article was updated at 9:29 p.m. EST on April 14 , 2020 to include comments from Steven Mosher and Reggie Littlejohn .

‘So much death has been caused by their mistakes,' he said.
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – President Donald Trump announced this evening he is instructing his administration to halt funding to the World Health Organization (WHO) “while a review is conducted to assess the World Health Organization’s role in severely mismanaging and covering up the spread of the coronavirus.”
PETITION: Urge President Trump to defund pro-abortion World Health Organization Sign the petition here.
“American taxpayers provide between $400 million and $500 million per year to the WHO. In contrast, China contributes roughly $40 million,” Trump pointed out. “As the organization’s leading sponsor, the United States has a duty to insist on full accountability. One of the most dangerous and costly decisions from the WHO was its disastrous decision to oppose travel restrictions from China and other nations.”
“They were very much opposed to what we did. Fortunately, I was not convinced and suspended travel from China,” saving thousands of American lives, Trump said. “The WHO’s attack on travel restrictions put political correctness above lifesaving measures.”
Trump said if other nations had “likewise suspended travel from China, countless more lives would have been saved. Instead, look at the rest of the world. Look at parts of Europe. Other nations and regions who followed WHO guidelines and kept their borders open to China, accelerated the pandemic all around the world. Many countries said, ‘we’re gonna listen to the WHO.’ They have problems the likes of which they cannot believe. Nobody can believe. The decision of other major countries to keep travel open was one of the great tragedies and missed opportunities from the early days” of the pandemic.
Trump blasted the WHO for failing in its “basic duty” to “work with countries to ensure that accurate information about international health is shared in a timely manner. And if it’s not, to independently tell the world the truth about what is happening.”
The WHO “must be held accountable,” he insisted. “It is time, after all of these decades. The WHO failed to investigate credible reports from sources in Wuhan that conflicted directly with the chinese government's official accounts.”
Pro-life advocates have long opposed the WHO over its support of abortion, and the coronavirus pandemic has also shed light on the U.N. entity’s suspicious ties to communist China. Senator Marco Rubio, R-FL, has been a sharp critic of the WHO. Its “subservience to Beijing” and the Chinese Communist Party has “undermined global health” and “could prove fatal” in the coronavirus pandemic, the senator argued on April 1.
In March, Dr. Antonella Lavalanet, a medical officer in the WHO’s “Maternal and Perinatal Health & Preventing Unsafe Abortion Team,” said that abortion should be considered an “essential service” during the coronavirus crisis. The WHO representative said that even “where supplies of antibiotics are not available, abortion should not be denied” and women should be encouraged to self-abort at home during the first trimester of pregnancy.
On March 22, Mike Ryan, WHO’s executive director of emergencies program, suggested to authorities that they find those who may have the coronavirus in family homes and “remove them.”
Ryan declared that in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, officials may have to enter homes and remove family members. The contagion has been “taken off the streets and pushed back into family units.”
“Now we need to go and look in families to find those people who may be sick and remove them and isolate them in a safe and dignified manner,” Ryan said March 22, a “threat” FOX host Tucker Carlson found ominous.
WHO’s silence on Chinese whistleblower disappearances ‘deeply concerning’
“To this day,” the WHO “has deprived the scientific community of essential data,” Trump said, and “the silence of the WHO on the disappearance of scientific research and doctors and…new restrictions on the sharing of research into the origins of COVID-19 in the country of origin is deeply concerning.”
“Our country will be forced to find other ways to work with other nations to achieve public health goals. We will have no choice but to do that. Our country is now experiencing – you look all around the world – tremendous death and economic devastation. Those tasked with protecting us by being truthful and transparent failed to do so. It would have been so easy to be truthful. So much death has been caused by their mistakes.”
“If the World Health Organization wants to behave like the China Health Organization, then let China pay for it,” commented China expert Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute. “As a practical matter, America's foreign aid dollars will go a lot further if they are given to American charities, rather than funnelled through an inefficient and corrupt U.N. bureaucracy.”
He added:
The corruption of the WHO by the CCP is part of its ongoing long march through UN institutions. China now controls four UN agencies, and has its operatives in high positions in most of the others. The idea that the CCP would ever be a responsible member of the WHO or or any UN agency is delusionary. Xi Jinping's “dream” remains that of Mao, one national aggrandizement and eventual world domination. The capture and corruption of UN agencies is simply a means to that larger end. It must stop. And defunding UN agencies until it does is a good first step.
On April 7, Trump hinted during a coronavirus briefing that he was open to defunding the WHO.
“They seem to err always on the side of China and we fund it, so I want to look into it,” he said.
A reporter pressed him, “Is it time to freeze [U.S.] funding to the WHO during a pandemic?”
“No, maybe not, I am not saying that I am going to do it, but we are going to look at it,” Trump replied. “We are going to investigate it, we are going to look into it… but we will look at ending funding because you know what, they called it wrong and if you look back over the years even, they’re very much – everything seems to be very biased towards China – that's not right.”
Reggie Littlejohn, President of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers – a group that fights forced abortion in China – called Trump’s defunding of WHO a “bold and appropriate move.”
“The WHO has botched its handling of the coronavirus pandemic from the beginning, costing countless lives,” she told LifeSiteNews. “The head of the WHO went to China and met with Xi Jinping. Instead of exposing the lack of transparency of the Chinese government, the WHO simply believed the CCP’s propaganda playing down the severity of the outbreak. The WHO opposed President Trump’s travel ban from China, choosing political correctness over health and safety. The WHO dragged its feet on declaring the coronavirus a pandemic, long after this reality had been recognized by other world leaders.”
Littlejohn continued:
Everyone has been affected. I have a close friend whose small family business that she sacrificed deeply to build from the ground up has now been decimated. I have another close friend who we believe had the coronavirus and now, thank God, is slowly recovering. If he had died, my life would never be the same. My heart is wrenched when thinking of the tens of thousands who have died alone in quarantine, their family members prevented from being with them. How much of this could have been prevented if the WHO had been doing its job? The world counted on the WHO to exert leadership in this global crisis. They failed miserably. U.S. tax dollars will be better spent either helping other organizations with proven track records effectively combatting this pandemic or founding a new organization to address this crisis. The WHO and the Chinese government should be held accountable together for every life lost due to their lack of leadership and transparency.
Former American ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley praised Trump for ceasing funding to WHO. So did Republican lawmakers. Conservative commentator Allie Beth Stuckey called it “one of the best decisions of his presidency.”
Great move by @realDonaldTrump. We should not send funds until the WHO has been reformed and been held accountable. https://t.co/931wYHoXmF — Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) April 14, 2020
GREAT on Trump for pausing funding to WHO. One of the best decisions of his presidency — Allie Beth Stuckey (@conservmillen) April 14, 2020
Exactly right @realDonaldTrump. The #WHO has become a propaganda arm of the #China Communist Party and is filled with CCP apologists. It has failed the world in this emergency https://t.co/LOuIppJOuZ — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) April 14, 2020
Agree �� % with @realDonaldTrump decision to halt funding to @WHO due to their abject failure regarding #COVID-19 – instead @WHO spewed Chinese Communist Party propaganda that led to terrible global loss of life and economic wreckage�� pic.twitter.com/oNA3cMDHS8 — Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) April 14, 2020
I’m glad to see @realDonaldTrump take this step. The @WHO has fiercely defended the Chinese Communist Party while they created a worldwide pandemic. American taxpayers shouldn’t have to give them another dime. https://t.co/wr5Q3v4ZIl — Rep. Doug Collins (@RepDougCollins) April 14, 2020
The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation has published an analysis and timeline of the Chinese communist party’s deception of the world regarding the coronavirus and how it is “using the World Health Organization as an instrument of propaganda.”
Read all LifeSiteNews coverage of the coronavirus crisis and how it relates to pro-life issues, faith, and freedom here.
This article was updated at 9:29 p.m. EST on April 14, 2020 to include comments from Steven Mosher and Reggie Littlejohn.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-14--Vatican liturgy chief: COVID-19 victims have ‘inalienable right’ to sacraments

April 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A top Vatican cardinal stated that the coronavirus , “ a microscopic virus , has brought this world to its knees , ” a world that was “ drunk with self-satisfaction because it believed itself to be invulnerable.
” According to Cardinal Robert Sarah , prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship , the present COVID-19 pandemic is a “ parable ” that should lead mankind to ponder its dependence on God , faulty priorities and help it discover the true values of entrusting oneself to God , returning to prayer and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bonds .
At a time when so many are dying alone without the comforting presence of loved ones and the assistance of Last Rites , Cardinal Sarah insisted that “ no one has the right to deprive a sick or dying person of the spiritual assistance of a priest .
It is an absolute and inalienable right.
” Cardinal Sarah spoke at length with Charlotte d ’ Ornellas of the French conservative weekly Valeurs actuelles , drawing human , political and religious lessons from an epidemic that , he said , “ has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ particular , the Cardinal opposed materialism of pre-epidemic times , when we were told : “ You can consume without limits , ” to the collapse in the present situation .
“ Stock markets are falling .
Bankruptcies are everywhere , ” he observed , also noting that man ’ s dreams of “ transhumanism ” and “ augmented humanity ” that “ biotechnologies would make invincible and immortal ” have been dashed by the coronavirus .
“ The so-called almighty man appears in his stark reality .
All at once , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are glaring .
Being confined to our homes will , I hope , enable us to turn once again to the essential things , to rediscover the importance of our relationship with God , and thus the centrality of prayer in human existence .
And , in the awareness of our fragility , to entrust ourselves to God and to his paternal mercy , ” Cardinal Sarah said .
According to Sarah , the experience of the epidemic and confinement will show that modern man can not be “ radically independent ” nor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ network of dependence , inheritance and filiation.
” “ When everything collapses , only the bonds of marriage , family and friendship remain .
We have rediscovered that as members of a nation , we are bound by invisible but real bonds .
Most of all , we have rediscovered that we are dependent on God , ” he insisted .
The author of The Power of Silence remarked on the “ wave of silence that has swept through Europe , ” adding , “ Many have found themselves alone , in silence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hermitages or monastic cells.
” “ What a paradox !
It took a virus to silence us .
( … ) The question of eternal life can not fail to arise when we are told every day of a large number of contagions and deaths , ” he added .
Cardinal Sarah suggested that we use solitude and confinement to “ dare pray.
” “ What if we dared to transform our family and our home into a domestic church ?
” he asked .
“ A church is a sacred place that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of prayer everything must be lived in seeking to direct everything and every choice towards the Glory of God.
” “ Is death really the end of everything ?
” the Cardinal asked .
In France , a more deeply secularized nation than the United States , such a question is particularly relevant .
He also gave the answer : “ Or is it not a passage , painful indeed , but which leads to life ?
That is why the Risen Christ is our great hope .
( … ) Are we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Depleted of everything , empty-handed , with an anxious heart : What do we have left ?
Anger against God is absurd .
We are left with adoration , trust and contemplation of the mystery.
” Cardinal Sarah added that the world now “ expects a strong word from the Church.
” “ If we refuse to believe that we are the fruit of a loving will of Almighty God , then all this is too hard , and it makes no sense .
How can we live in a world where a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ innocent people ?
There is only one answer : the certainty that God is love and that he is not indifferent to our suffering .
Our vulnerability opens our heart to God and it inclines God to have mercy on us .
I believe that it is time to dare these words of faith.
” Asked what priests should do in this situation , the cardinal replied : “ The Pope was very clear .
Priests must do everything they can to remain close to the faithful .
They must do everything in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without complicating the task of the caretakers and the civil authorities .
But no one has the right to deprive a sick or dying person of the spiritual assistance of a priest .
It is an absolute and inalienable right .
In Italy , the clergy has already paid a heavy price .
Seventy-five priests have died assisting the sick .
“ But I also believe that many priests are rediscovering their vocation to prayer and intercession on behalf of the whole people .
The priest is made to stand constantly before God @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Thus , in confined countries , priests find themselves in the situation inaugurated by Benedict XVI .
They learn to spend their days in prayer , solitude and silence offered for the salvation of mankind .
If they can not physically hold the hand of each dying person as they would like , they discover that , in adoration , they can intercede for each one.
” The cardinal underscored that priests praying alone and celebrating Mass in solitude discover that “ they are not primarily leaders of meetings or communities , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prayer , worshippers of the majesty of God and contemplatives .
They then measure the immense greatness of the Eucharistic Sacrifice which does not need a large audience to produce its fruits .
Through the Mass , the priest touches the whole world , ” he recalled .
Cardinal Sarah also had advice for the faithful and especially for families who can experience “ the communion of saints ” in these times .
First of all , they should “ pray ” and center themselves on God : “ It is important to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of reading the Word of God , reciting the Rosary in the family and dedicating time to God , in an attitude of self-giving , listening and silent adoration.
” He added : “ It is time to rediscover family prayer .
It is time for fathers to learn how to bless their children .
Christians , deprived of the Eucharist , realize how much communion was a grace for them .
I encourage them to practice adoration from their homes , for there is no Christian life without sacramental life .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Lord remains present .
Sometimes heroism is also asked of Christians : when hospitals ask for volunteers , when isolated or homeless people have to be cared for.
” Cardinal Sarah said that many people have been saying he hopes that “ nothing will be the same ” once this is over .
He added , “ But I am rather afraid that everything will start again as it was before , because as long as man does not return to God with all his heart , his march towards the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we can see how globalized consumerism has isolated individuals and reduced them to the status of consumers left to the jungle of the market and finance .
Globalization , which they told us would be joyful , has turned out to be an illusion .
In times of hardship , nations and families stick together.
” The cardinal also said that the current crisis shows that “ a society can not be founded on economic ties.
” “ We are reawakening our awareness of being a nation , with its borders , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the defense , protection and security of our people .
At the foundation of the life of the city are the ties that precede us : those of family and national solidarity .
It is beautiful to see them resurface today .
It is beautiful to see the young taking care of the elders .
A few months ago , there was talk of euthanasia and some people wanted to get rid of the very sick and handicapped .
Today , nations are mobilizing to protect the elderly.
” This , unfortunately , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least , where patients over age 70 are largely not receiving treatment for coronavirus-related problems and are at risk of receiving high doses of so-called “ palliative ” analgesics and relaxants that can precipitate death .
In homes for the dependent elderly , no treatment is given for COVID-19-related respiratory issues and no visits are allowed , creating great distress for those who can not understand why .
He concluded his interview with a mention of all the medical personnel who are our “ everyday heroes.
” “ Suddenly , one dares to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our time had a thirst for heroes and saints , but it had concealed it and was ashamed of it , ” he observed .
“ Will we be able to retain this scale of values ?
” he asked .
“ Will we be able to rebuild our cities on something other than growth , consumption and the race for money ?
I believe that we would be guilty if , at the end of this crisis , we were to fall back into the same mistakes .
This crisis shows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only a question of private convictions , it raises the question of the foundation of our civilization .
”

‘No one has the right to deprive a sick or dying person of the spiritual assistance of a priest. It is an absolute and inalienable right.’
Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world: Feed your flock Sign the petition here.
April 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A top Vatican cardinal stated that the coronavirus, “a microscopic virus, has brought this world to its knees,” a world that was “drunk with self-satisfaction because it believed itself to be invulnerable.”
According to Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, the present COVID-19 pandemic is a “parable” that should lead mankind to ponder its dependence on God, faulty priorities and help it discover the true values of entrusting oneself to God, returning to prayer and rediscovering the importance of national and family bonds.
At a time when so many are dying alone without the comforting presence of loved ones and the assistance of Last Rites, Cardinal Sarah insisted that “no one has the right to deprive a sick or dying person of the spiritual assistance of a priest. It is an absolute and inalienable right.”
Cardinal Sarah spoke at length with Charlotte d’Ornellas of the French conservative weekly Valeurs actuelles, drawing human, political and religious lessons from an epidemic that, he said, “has dispersed the smoke of illusion.”
In particular, the Cardinal opposed materialism of pre-epidemic times, when we were told: “You can consume without limits,” to the collapse in the present situation. “Stock markets are falling. Bankruptcies are everywhere,” he observed, also noting that man’s dreams of “transhumanism” and “augmented humanity” that “biotechnologies would make invincible and immortal” have been dashed by the coronavirus.
“The so-called almighty man appears in his stark reality. All at once, he is naked. His weakness and vulnerability are glaring. Being confined to our homes will, I hope, enable us to turn once again to the essential things, to rediscover the importance of our relationship with God, and thus the centrality of prayer in human existence. And, in the awareness of our fragility, to entrust ourselves to God and to his paternal mercy,” Cardinal Sarah said.
According to Sarah, the experience of the epidemic and confinement will show that modern man cannot be “radically independent” nor refuse to be “part of a network of dependence, inheritance and filiation.”
“When everything collapses, only the bonds of marriage, family and friendship remain. We have rediscovered that as members of a nation, we are bound by invisible but real bonds. Most of all, we have rediscovered that we are dependent on God,” he insisted.
The author of The Power of Silence remarked on the “wave of silence that has swept through Europe,” adding, “Many have found themselves alone, in silence, in apartments that have become like hermitages or monastic cells.”
“What a paradox! It took a virus to silence us. (…) The question of eternal life cannot fail to arise when we are told every day of a large number of contagions and deaths,” he added.
Cardinal Sarah suggested that we use solitude and confinement to “dare pray.” “What if we dared to transform our family and our home into a domestic church?” he asked. “A church is a sacred place that reminds us that in such a house of prayer everything must be lived in seeking to direct everything and every choice towards the Glory of God.”
“Is death really the end of everything?” the Cardinal asked. In France, a more deeply secularized nation than the United States, such a question is particularly relevant.
He also gave the answer: “Or is it not a passage, painful indeed, but which leads to life? That is why the Risen Christ is our great hope. (…) Are we not like Job in the Bible? Depleted of everything, empty-handed, with an anxious heart: What do we have left? Anger against God is absurd. We are left with adoration, trust and contemplation of the mystery.”
Cardinal Sarah added that the world now “expects a strong word from the Church.” “If we refuse to believe that we are the fruit of a loving will of Almighty God, then all this is too hard, and it makes no sense. How can we live in a world where a virus strikes at random and mows down innocent people? There is only one answer: the certainty that God is love and that he is not indifferent to our suffering. Our vulnerability opens our heart to God and it inclines God to have mercy on us. I believe that it is time to dare these words of faith.”
Asked what priests should do in this situation, the cardinal replied:
“The Pope was very clear. Priests must do everything they can to remain close to the faithful. They must do everything in their power to assist the dying, without complicating the task of the caretakers and the civil authorities. But no one has the right to deprive a sick or dying person of the spiritual assistance of a priest. It is an absolute and inalienable right. In Italy, the clergy has already paid a heavy price. Seventy-five priests have died assisting the sick.
“But I also believe that many priests are rediscovering their vocation to prayer and intercession on behalf of the whole people. The priest is made to stand constantly before God to adore, glorify and serve him. Thus, in confined countries, priests find themselves in the situation inaugurated by Benedict XVI. They learn to spend their days in prayer, solitude and silence offered for the salvation of mankind. If they cannot physically hold the hand of each dying person as they would like, they discover that, in adoration, they can intercede for each one.”
The cardinal underscored that priests praying alone and celebrating Mass in solitude discover that “they are not primarily leaders of meetings or communities, but men of God, men of prayer, worshippers of the majesty of God and contemplatives. They then measure the immense greatness of the Eucharistic Sacrifice which does not need a large audience to produce its fruits. Through the Mass, the priest touches the whole world,” he recalled.
Cardinal Sarah also had advice for the faithful and especially for families who can experience “the communion of saints” in these times. First of all, they should “pray” and center themselves on God: “It is important to rediscover how precious can be the habit of reading the Word of God, reciting the Rosary in the family and dedicating time to God, in an attitude of self-giving, listening and silent adoration.”
He added: “It is time to rediscover family prayer. It is time for fathers to learn how to bless their children. Christians, deprived of the Eucharist, realize how much communion was a grace for them. I encourage them to practice adoration from their homes, for there is no Christian life without sacramental life. In the midst of our towns and villages, the Lord remains present. Sometimes heroism is also asked of Christians: when hospitals ask for volunteers, when isolated or homeless people have to be cared for.”
Cardinal Sarah said that many people have been saying he hopes that “nothing will be the same” once this is over. He added, “But I am rather afraid that everything will start again as it was before, because as long as man does not return to God with all his heart, his march towards the abyss is inescapable. In any case, we can see how globalized consumerism has isolated individuals and reduced them to the status of consumers left to the jungle of the market and finance. Globalization, which they told us would be joyful, has turned out to be an illusion. In times of hardship, nations and families stick together.”
The cardinal also said that the current crisis shows that “a society cannot be founded on economic ties.” “We are reawakening our awareness of being a nation, with its borders, which we can open or close for the defense, protection and security of our people. At the foundation of the life of the city are the ties that precede us: those of family and national solidarity. It is beautiful to see them resurface today. It is beautiful to see the young taking care of the elders. A few months ago, there was talk of euthanasia and some people wanted to get rid of the very sick and handicapped. Today, nations are mobilizing to protect the elderly.”
This, unfortunately, is wishful thinking, in France at least, where patients over age 70 are largely not receiving treatment for coronavirus-related problems and are at risk of receiving high doses of so-called “palliative” analgesics and relaxants that can precipitate death. In homes for the dependent elderly, no treatment is given for COVID-19-related respiratory issues and no visits are allowed, creating great distress for those who cannot understand why.
He concluded his interview with a mention of all the medical personnel who are our “everyday heroes.” “Suddenly, one dares to cheer for those who serve the weakest. Our time had a thirst for heroes and saints, but it had concealed it and was ashamed of it,” he observed.
“Will we be able to retain this scale of values?” he asked. “Will we be able to rebuild our cities on something other than growth, consumption and the race for money? I believe that we would be guilty if, at the end of this crisis, we were to fall back into the same mistakes. This crisis shows that the question of God is not only a question of private convictions, it raises the question of the foundation of our civilization.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-14--‘Women cannot become priests’: Cardinal Müller

April 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Cardinal Gerhard Müller , the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , has in a recent interview argued against allowing Protestants to receive Holy Communion along with Catholics ( intercommunion ) and against female ordination .
The latter topic has once more been in the news after Pope Francis established yet another commission for the study of the female diaconate .
On April 8 , Pope Francis announced that after consultation with the new head of the CDF , Cardinal Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer , he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question of a female diaconate .
No further details about the commission 's mission were stated .
Listed , however , were the names of the twelve new members of this commission .
With this decision , the Pope is following up on the October 2019 Amazon Synod in Rome which had asked , in its Final Document ( no .
115 ) , that the question of the female diaconate be further studied by the Church .
The female diaconate also has come up in the discussions of the German bishops ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of increasing the influence of women in the Church .
Independent of this new female deacon commission set up by Pope Francis , Cardinal Müller makes it clear in this new interview , conducted by Lothar D. Rilinger — a German Catholic lawyer and book author — that women may not have any access to the Sacrament of Holy Orders ( read full interview below ) .
“ Women can not become priests , ” he states , “ because this is excluded by the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that one can aspire to.
” It was Christ Himself who chose twelve men to be His Apostles , and even today , men have not a “ right ” to become priests , but have to receive a “ call to the priesthood ” from Jesus Christ .
This ban on female ordination , states Cardinal Müller , is “ normative and as a truth contained in Revelation , not a habit subject to change.
” Concerning the matter of giving Holy Communion to non-Catholic Christians , the German prelate also makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not acceptable .
“ There are objective conditions for receiving Holy Communion , ” Cardinal Müller says .
“ One must belong to the Catholic Church through Baptism and the profession of faith and must not have offended against the Commandments of God by the way one lives .
It is essential for the communio with Christ and the Church that I affirm the doctrine of the Catholic Church .
This is not normally the case with Protestant Christians.
” The interviewer , Lothar Rilinger , has just published a book about Rome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ German Catholic when visiting the Eternal City .
VRBS AETERNA III : Encounter with the German-speaking religious Culture in Rome is its title , and it is the third and last volume of this project , with a preface by Cardinal Müller .
It is obvious that the Church in the western world has been in crisis for some time .
That is also why the call for reforms is getting louder and louder .
While some people want to approach the reforms with the means of politics and thereby celebrate themselves as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Church into a better future on the basis of Scripture and Tradition .
Cardinal Müller bases his arguments on principles , and that gives his arguments a stringency that is not to be seen either in the Synodal Way or in the Amazon Synod .
Could it be that the arguments from the mainstream are helpful in order to tackle reforms , we ask the Cardinal .
“ The mainstream is a construct that simply corresponds to conformity , ” he replies .
“ As with dictators , thought is controlled .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Dachau .
In this respect , mainstreaming is the expression of an intended dictatorship over opinions .
This contradicts all the principles of our liberal democracy .
Surely democracy means that every person is allowed to express his or her well-founded opinion and put it up for discussion , that he or she can also learn something from opposing views.
” It is also part of the mainstream to demand the admission of so-called Intercommunion .
But the German cardinal opposes this idea .
“ There are objective conditions for receiving Holy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unmistakably clear .
“ One must belong to the Catholic Church through Baptism and the profession of faith and must not have offended against the Commandments of God by the way one lives .
It is essential for the communio with Christ and the Church that I affirm the doctrine of the Catholic Church .
This is not normally the case with Protestant Christians .
They are evangelical and reformatory and therefore differ from the Catholic Faith in their creed .
Calvin and Luther taught that the Catholic celebration of Mass is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longer so brutally said today .
Or the Reformers declared that the Pope is the Antichrist – they did not say that the Pope of that time was personally a bad Pope , they rather stated that the Pope as such , that is to say the papacy as such , was the Antichrist.
” “ The reason given for this view was the argument that the Pope with his infallible teaching authority is said to have claimed – and continues to claim – by his definitive interpretation , to be in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is to apply equally to the Catholic Magisterium , the bishops and the councils .
Furthermore , the Reformers denied that Confirmation , the Anointing of the Sick , Penance and Holy Matrimony were sacraments , i.e .
means of grace instituted by Christ and effective in the Holy Ghost .
If the sacraments are means of grace instituted by Christ , I can not argue that they can be understood also a little differently .
In this respect , I can only go to Holy Communion if I myself am in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also in accordance with this community , the Catholic Church – with the full profession of faith and with my own way of life.
” The church is accused by the critics who believe in progress of getting entangled in clerical structures instead of opening itself to modernism and adopting democratic structures .
Cardinal Müller states on this : The Church is not a political event , and therefore the state models do not fit , they can not be transferred to the Church , ” clarifies Müller , “ If the Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where it is about a worldly rule , one could demand democracy , starting from popular sovereignty .
But the Church is the People of God , and the sovereign in the Church is God Himself .
The hierarchy , i.e .
the bishops and the Pope , exists so that the teaching and pastoral ministry of the Church can be exercised in the name of God .
In the episcopal and priestly ordination it is God Who enables us to proclaim His Word with authority and to exercise pastoral care as pastors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to God .
Neither the bishops nor the laity can say that they want to give themselves a new ecclesiastical constitution .
The Church is not our property .
The call for democratic structures is accompanied by the call to accept women as equal partners in pastoral care and to admit them to the ordained ministries .
But the prelate also opposes this reform project .
“ The church leadership , ” according to the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , “ is formed by the bishops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is excluded by the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders .
It is just not simply a ministry that one can aspire to .
Nor can a man simply say that he has a right to become a priest .
One is called to the priesthood , and Jesus called to Him those He wanted .
He appointed the twelve disciples as his Apostles .
Throughout the history of the Church , this has always been understood as normative and as a truth contained in Revelation , not a habit subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that many who want to be priestesses understand the Church and the ministry in a political sense or in the context of social prestige .
The priesthood is not , however , as many secular vocations were once , a kind of 'male domain ' to be cracked under the sign of women 's emancipation .
Men and women who think this way are very angry with anyone who says that for theological reasons this request can not be fulfilled .
They accuse him of motivations that are absurd in themselves , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has the power to decide on faith and morals according to his own discretion .
And , as a woman , one would also like to have so much power and prestige as to demonstrate that one is equal to men in human dignity and as children of God , which would be an evil heresy to deny .
”

April 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has in a recent interview argued against allowing Protestants to receive Holy Communion along with Catholics (intercommunion) and against female ordination.
The latter topic has once more been in the news after Pope Francis established yet another commission for the study of the female diaconate. On April 8, Pope Francis announced that after consultation with the new head of the CDF, Cardinal Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, he had established a new commission to study the question of a female diaconate. No further details about the commission's mission were stated. Listed, however, were the names of the twelve new members of this commission.
With this decision, the Pope is following up on the October 2019 Amazon Synod in Rome which had asked, in its Final Document (no. 115), that the question of the female diaconate be further studied by the Church.
The female diaconate also has come up in the discussions of the German bishops' Synodal Path which aims at seeking ways of increasing the influence of women in the Church.
Independent of this new female deacon commission set up by Pope Francis, Cardinal Müller makes it clear in this new interview, conducted by Lothar D. Rilinger — a German Catholic lawyer and book author — that women may not have any access to the Sacrament of Holy Orders (read full interview below).
“Women cannot become priests,” he states, “because this is excluded by the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. It is just not simply a ministry that one can aspire to.” It was Christ Himself who chose twelve men to be His Apostles, and even today, men have not a “right” to become priests, but have to receive a “call to the priesthood” from Jesus Christ.
This ban on female ordination, states Cardinal Müller, is “normative and as a truth contained in Revelation, not a habit subject to change.”
Concerning the matter of giving Holy Communion to non-Catholic Christians, the German prelate also makes it clear that such a reform is not acceptable.
“There are objective conditions for receiving Holy Communion,” Cardinal Müller says. “One must belong to the Catholic Church through Baptism and the profession of faith and must not have offended against the Commandments of God by the way one lives. It is essential for the communio with Christ and the Church that I affirm the doctrine of the Catholic Church. This is not normally the case with Protestant Christians.”
The interviewer, Lothar Rilinger, has just published a book about Rome and his reflections and impressions as a German Catholic when visiting the Eternal City. VRBS AETERNA III: Encounter with the German-speaking religious Culture in Rome is its title, and it is the third and last volume of this project, with a preface by Cardinal Müller.
***
Lothar C. Rilinger’s interview with Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller
It is obvious that the Church in the western world has been in crisis for some time. That is also why the call for reforms is getting louder and louder. While some people want to approach the reforms with the means of politics and thereby celebrate themselves as progressive, others want to lead the Church into a better future on the basis of Scripture and Tradition. Cardinal Müller bases his arguments on principles, and that gives his arguments a stringency that is not to be seen either in the Synodal Way or in the Amazon Synod.
Could it be that the arguments from the mainstream are helpful in order to tackle reforms, we ask the Cardinal.
“The mainstream is a construct that simply corresponds to conformity,” he replies.
“As with dictators, thought is controlled. Those who thought differently ended up in Siberia or Dachau. In this respect, mainstreaming is the expression of an intended dictatorship over opinions. This contradicts all the principles of our liberal democracy. Surely democracy means that every person is allowed to express his or her well-founded opinion and put it up for discussion, that he or she can also learn something from opposing views.”
It is also part of the mainstream to demand the admission of so-called Intercommunion. But the German cardinal opposes this idea.
“There are objective conditions for receiving Holy Communion,” Cardinal Müller makes it unmistakably clear.
“One must belong to the Catholic Church through Baptism and the profession of faith and must not have offended against the Commandments of God by the way one lives. It is essential for the communio with Christ and the Church that I affirm the doctrine of the Catholic Church. This is not normally the case with Protestant Christians. They are evangelical and reformatory and therefore differ from the Catholic Faith in their creed. Calvin and Luther taught that the Catholic celebration of Mass is an idol sacrifice, but this is no longer so brutally said today. Or the Reformers declared that the Pope is the Antichrist – they did not say that the Pope of that time was personally a bad Pope, they rather stated that the Pope as such, that is to say the papacy as such, was the Antichrist.”
“The reason given for this view was the argument that the Pope with his infallible teaching authority is said to have claimed – and continues to claim – by his definitive interpretation, to be in his dogmas above the Word of God. This is to apply equally to the Catholic Magisterium, the bishops and the councils. Furthermore, the Reformers denied that Confirmation, the Anointing of the Sick, Penance and Holy Matrimony were sacraments, i.e. means of grace instituted by Christ and effective in the Holy Ghost. If the sacraments are means of grace instituted by Christ, I cannot argue that they can be understood also a little differently. In this respect, I can only go to Holy Communion if I myself am in the state of grace and if am also in accordance with this community, the Catholic Church – with the full profession of faith and with my own way of life.”
The church is accused by the critics who believe in progress of getting entangled in clerical structures instead of opening itself to modernism and adopting democratic structures. Cardinal Müller states on this:
The Church is not a political event, and therefore the state models do not fit, they cannot be transferred to the Church,” clarifies Müller, “If the Church were a kind of state enterprise, where it is about a worldly rule, one could demand democracy, starting from popular sovereignty. But the Church is the People of God, and the sovereign in the Church is God Himself. The hierarchy, i.e. the bishops and the Pope, exists so that the teaching and pastoral ministry of the Church can be exercised in the name of God. In the episcopal and priestly ordination it is God Who enables us to proclaim His Word with authority and to exercise pastoral care as pastors, that is, to lead people to God. Neither the bishops nor the laity can say that they want to give themselves a new ecclesiastical constitution. The Church is not our property.
The call for democratic structures is accompanied by the call to accept women as equal partners in pastoral care and to admit them to the ordained ministries. But the prelate also opposes this reform project.
“The church leadership,” according to the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “is formed by the bishops. Women cannot become priests because this is excluded by the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. It is just not simply a ministry that one can aspire to. Nor can a man simply say that he has a right to become a priest. One is called to the priesthood, and Jesus called to Him those He wanted. He appointed the twelve disciples as his Apostles. Throughout the history of the Church, this has always been understood as normative and as a truth contained in Revelation, not a habit subject to change.”
“The problem is that many who want to be priestesses understand the Church and the ministry in a political sense or in the context of social prestige. The priesthood is not, however, as many secular vocations were once, a kind of 'male domain' to be cracked under the sign of women's emancipation. Men and women who think this way are very angry with anyone who says that for theological reasons this request cannot be fulfilled. They accuse him of motivations that are absurd in themselves, and think that the bishop is one who has the power to decide on faith and morals according to his own discretion. And, as a woman, one would also like to have so much power and prestige as to demonstrate that one is equal to men in human dignity and as children of God, which would be an evil heresy to deny.”
Follow Maike Dr. Maike Hickson was born and raised in Germany. She holds a PhD from the University of Hannover, Germany, after having written in Switzerland her doctoral dissertation on the history of Swiss intellectuals before and during World War II. She now lives in the U.S. and is married to Dr. Robert Hickson, and they have been blessed with two beautiful children. She is a happy housewife who likes to write articles when time permits. Dr. Hickson published in 2014 a Festschrift, a collection of some thirty essays written by thoughtful authors in honor of her husband upon his 70th birthday, which is entitled A Catholic Witness in Our Time. Hickson has closely followed the papacy of Pope Francis and the developments in the Catholic Church in Germany, and she has been writing articles on religion and politics for U.S. and European publications and websites such as LifeSiteNews, OnePeterFive, The Wanderer, Rorate Caeli, Catholicism.org, Catholic Family News, Christian Order, Notizie Pro-Vita, Corrispondenza Romana, Katholisches.info, Der Dreizehnte, Zeit-Fragen, and Westfalen-Blatt.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-14--New pro-Planned Parenthood film sympathetically portrays 17-year-old’s decision to kill her preborn

New pro-Planned Parenthood film sympathetically portrays 17-year-old’s decision to kill her preborn baby

April 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Every couple of years , the release of a new abortion film is heralded by the media as a paradigm-shifting contribution to America ’ s fiercest culture war .
Back in 2014 , Hollywood took a stab at the “ abortion comedy ” with Obvious Child , which was an enormous flop due to the fact that not even pro-choice viewers could quite persuade themselves that abortion is funny .
Eliza Hittman ’ s Never Rarely Sometimes Always , on the other hand , is something very different .
Hittman ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s abortion odyssey .
When Autumn finds herself pregnant , she soon discovers that due to parental consent laws , she can not get an abortion in Pennsylvania without seeking permission from her kindly mother or loutish , drunken stepdad .
Her cousin Skylar , who works with her at a local grocery store in their rural town , travels with her by bus to New York to get an abortion .
The title is derived from the questionnaire that a kind Planned Parenthood employee reads to Autumn , with the multiple-choice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; or always .
The film , predictably , is being hailed as a triumph .
The New Republic headlined their review by observing that “ Planned Parenthood is the real hero of Never Rarely Sometimes Always.
” In their estimation , the film is “ almost closer to the genre of polemical documentary than fiction ” because of Pennsylvania ’ s apparently cruel abortion laws , and “ its delicate cinematography is inevitably overshadowed by the towering political issues at play.
” In short : “ One leaves the movie shattered with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who work there , and disoriented with rage toward almost everybody else.
” The New York Times , which featured the movie as its “ critic ’ s pick , ” concurred : “ At its most obvious , it follows a 17-year-old as she tries to terminate her pregnancy .
It ’ s a seemingly simple objective that proves ( no surprise given the battles over abortion ) logistically difficult , forcing her to marshal her modest resources and navigate perilous twists and turns .
Here , a woman ’ s right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new and radical heroic journey.
” It is true that Hittman ’ s film is an incredibly well-made piece of propaganda .
The visuals are powerful , and at times even breathtaking .
It is impossible not to feel empathy for Autumn , as stolid and sullen as she is throughout the story , especially as virtually every male in the film is a creep , a pervert , or a predator , from the boyfriend who got her pregnant to a leering fellow offering his help with the clear expectation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the more we find out about the way Autumn is treated by boys and men , the more we understand just how heartbreaking the consequences of the Sexual Revolution have been .
Of course , we know this is not just her experience with men—it is the story of so many other girls as well .
It is as ugly as it is real .
Hittman deftly draws the viewer into the desperation of someone who does not , as a kindly middle-aged volunteer at the crisis pregnancy center Autumn visits assures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the thomp-thomp of a baby ’ s heartbeat as “ the most magical sound you ’ ll ever hear.
” Autumn , we discover , has been in an abusive relationship , and one of the most powerful scenes is the session with the Planned Parenthood counselor where she reveals the abuse that she has undergone .
She feels cornered .
She wants an abortion , as Frederica Mathewes-Green once put it , “ as an animal , caught in a trap , wants to gnaw off its own leg.
” Before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to self-abort , swallowing handfuls of pills and punching herself in the stomach .
The sound of her fist hitting flesh is so difficult to watch that you almost instinctively shut your eyes .
And it is here that Hittman fails .
This film is advertised as—and intended to be—realistic , gritty , and unflinching .
This story is billed as an unblinking look at the stories that make up the abortion wars , with nothing left out .
And credit where credit is due : Hittman does not demonize pro-lifers .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bit bumbling , but fundamentally good-hearted , kind , and obviously motivated by a genuine love for pre-born children .
The protestors outside the abortion clinic in New York are clearly religious ( specifically , Catholic ) , but not angry , screaming fanatics .
But that said , Hittman ignores the fact that in a crisis pregnancy , there is not just one life involved in the story .
There are two—and this film expects you to essentially view events with the assumption that the other life involved is of no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , pro-lifers obviously appear stupid , if not cruel .
When Autumn first discovers she is pregnant and gets an ultrasound at the crisis pregnancy center , we see her baby on the screen—her head , arms , and legs .
We hear her heartbeat .
And then , the child moves off-screen , and the viewer is expected to forget that she exists , despite the fact that the “ heroic ” journey Autumn embarks on is for the express purpose of ridding herself of the child we were so briefly introduced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that when Autumn is punching herself in the stomach , she is trying to punch her baby .
It may seem unkind to point this out , but it is also an inescapable truth that is fundamental to this story .
This fact towers over the film , and no attempt is made to grapple with the fact that the child we have seen on the screen is going to be brutally killed .
The filmmakers are fully aware of this fact , as well .
The volunteer at the crisis pregnancy center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center for Bio-Ethical Reform titled “ Hard Truth , ” and shows long-time pro-life activist Gregg Cunningham introducing the video and explaining that abortion “ is an act of violence that kills a baby.
” ( Incidentally , I called him to let him know he was in the film , and he had no idea . )
But the film cuts away just as images of aborted babies are about to come onscreen .
Hittman obviously does not want the victims of abortion in a film about the desperate circumstances some girls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too much .
This film isn ’ t about a moral dilemma .
It is a moral defence of Planned Parenthood .
This is spelled out bluntly .
Autumn tells the Planned Parenthood counselor that she is “ just not ready to be a mom.
” The counselor , who is easily one of the most sympathetic characters , assures her that that is “ totally fine .
Whatever your decision is is totally fine as long as it ’ s yours.
” Autumn is told that she is 18 weeks pregnant , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be painful , she ’ s told it will be “ a little uncomfortable.
” For her , not for the baby , that is .
At 18 weeks , her perfectly-formed child is just starting to hear sound—and may hear the murmuring of the conversation about her demise .
When Skylar asks Autumn what it was like once the abortion has been performed , Autumn responds that “ it was kind of…whatever…It was just uncomfortable.
” It brought to mind a screenshot posted on Facebook by pro-life activist Laura Klassen last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone who had just had an abortion at 17 weeks .
The “ [ o ] nly part I remember , ” the girl wrote , “ is the pain while pulling the head out but other than that it went smoothly.
” The comment section promptly filled with friends telling her they were glad that it “ went okay.
” The baby had been successfully dismembered , the decapitated head pulled from the womb , the procedure a success .
I know it sounds extraordinarily harsh to say .
But it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bluntly it is impossible for many to understand why abortion is morally reprehensible even when the circumstances of the crisis make the desire for an abortion easier to understand .
The film ends with the two teenage girls boarding the bus to head back to Pennsylvania , the baby successfully dropped off in New York .
And what awaits them there ?
Will Autumn ’ s abortion have solved the problem of her abusive boyfriend ?
Her troubled home life ?
The fact that the men in her life appear to be , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that her world seems to be drab and depressing shades of gray ?
Of course not .
But that is not what Hittman ’ s film would have us believe .
The message of Never Rarely Sometimes Always is a simple and powerful one : Abortion solves everything .
Have an abortion , and your problems will go away .
In short : Your problem is the baby .
This film is , in many ways , a searing indictment of the Sexual Revolution .
We get an up-close glimpse of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boyfriends to make unwanted sexual demands and are unsurprised when those boys push them into things they do not want to do .
Hittman shows us the grim , depressing reality of broken homes and the children who don ’ t quite fit anywhere , fearing even to speak with their parents ( or , more often , parent ) in the face of a crisis .
She introduces us to a generation of lost boys who have been taught by a hyper-sexualized , porn-driven culture that they have a right to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ act accordingly .
The world that Autumn and Skylar live in is a real one .
It is this one .
But it is the world that Planned Parenthood and their fellow sexual revolutionaries helped to create—and one that they now profit from by killing the unwanted children of a lost generation .

April 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Every couple of years, the release of a new abortion film is heralded by the media as a paradigm-shifting contribution to America’s fiercest culture war. Back in 2014, Hollywood took a stab at the “abortion comedy” with Obvious Child, which was an enormous flop due to the fact that not even pro-choice viewers could quite persuade themselves that abortion is funny. Eliza Hittman’s Never Rarely Sometimes Always, on the other hand, is something very different.
Hittman’s film tells the story of 17-year-old Autumn’s abortion odyssey. When Autumn finds herself pregnant, she soon discovers that due to parental consent laws, she cannot get an abortion in Pennsylvania without seeking permission from her kindly mother or loutish, drunken stepdad. Her cousin Skylar, who works with her at a local grocery store in their rural town, travels with her by bus to New York to get an abortion. The title is derived from the questionnaire that a kind Planned Parenthood employee reads to Autumn, with the multiple-choice answers being never; rarely; sometimes; or always.
The film, predictably, is being hailed as a triumph. The New Republic headlined their review by observing that “Planned Parenthood is the real hero of Never Rarely Sometimes Always.” In their estimation, the film is “almost closer to the genre of polemical documentary than fiction” because of Pennsylvania’s apparently cruel abortion laws, and “its delicate cinematography is inevitably overshadowed by the towering political issues at play.” In short: “One leaves the movie shattered with gratitude toward Planned Parenthood and the people who work there, and disoriented with rage toward almost everybody else.”
The New York Times, which featured the movie as its “critic’s pick,” concurred: “At its most obvious, it follows a 17-year-old as she tries to terminate her pregnancy. It’s a seemingly simple objective that proves (no surprise given the battles over abortion) logistically difficult, forcing her to marshal her modest resources and navigate perilous twists and turns. Here, a woman’s right to self-determination has become the stuff of a new and radical heroic journey.”
It is true that Hittman’s film is an incredibly well-made piece of propaganda. The visuals are powerful, and at times even breathtaking. It is impossible not to feel empathy for Autumn, as stolid and sullen as she is throughout the story, especially as virtually every male in the film is a creep, a pervert, or a predator, from the boyfriend who got her pregnant to a leering fellow offering his help with the clear expectation of certain favors in exchange. In fact, the more we find out about the way Autumn is treated by boys and men, the more we understand just how heartbreaking the consequences of the Sexual Revolution have been. Of course, we know this is not just her experience with men—it is the story of so many other girls as well. It is as ugly as it is real.
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
Hittman deftly draws the viewer into the desperation of someone who does not, as a kindly middle-aged volunteer at the crisis pregnancy center Autumn visits assures her she will, receive the sound of the thomp-thomp of a baby’s heartbeat as “the most magical sound you’ll ever hear.” Autumn, we discover, has been in an abusive relationship, and one of the most powerful scenes is the session with the Planned Parenthood counselor where she reveals the abuse that she has undergone. She feels cornered. She wants an abortion, as Frederica Mathewes-Green once put it, “as an animal, caught in a trap, wants to gnaw off its own leg.” Before looking for out-of-state options, Autumn attempts to self-abort, swallowing handfuls of pills and punching herself in the stomach. The sound of her fist hitting flesh is so difficult to watch that you almost instinctively shut your eyes.
And it is here that Hittman fails. This film is advertised as—and intended to be—realistic, gritty, and unflinching. This story is billed as an unblinking look at the stories that make up the abortion wars, with nothing left out. And credit where credit is due: Hittman does not demonize pro-lifers. The volunteers at the crisis pregnancy center are a bit bumbling, but fundamentally good-hearted, kind, and obviously motivated by a genuine love for pre-born children. The protestors outside the abortion clinic in New York are clearly religious (specifically, Catholic), but not angry, screaming fanatics. But that said, Hittman ignores the fact that in a crisis pregnancy, there is not just one life involved in the story. There are two—and this film expects you to essentially view events with the assumption that the other life involved is of no moral consequence. Without understanding that fact, pro-lifers obviously appear stupid, if not cruel.
When Autumn first discovers she is pregnant and gets an ultrasound at the crisis pregnancy center, we see her baby on the screen—her head, arms, and legs. We hear her heartbeat. And then, the child moves off-screen, and the viewer is expected to forget that she exists, despite the fact that the “heroic” journey Autumn embarks on is for the express purpose of ridding herself of the child we were so briefly introduced to. We are expected to forget that when Autumn is punching herself in the stomach, she is trying to punch her baby. It may seem unkind to point this out, but it is also an inescapable truth that is fundamental to this story. This fact towers over the film, and no attempt is made to grapple with the fact that the child we have seen on the screen is going to be brutally killed.
The filmmakers are fully aware of this fact, as well. The volunteer at the crisis pregnancy center shows Autumn a film produced by the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform titled “Hard Truth,” and shows long-time pro-life activist Gregg Cunningham introducing the video and explaining that abortion “is an act of violence that kills a baby.” (Incidentally, I called him to let him know he was in the film, and he had no idea.) But the film cuts away just as images of aborted babies are about to come onscreen. Hittman obviously does not want the victims of abortion in a film about the desperate circumstances some girls find themselves in—that would complicate the narrative too much. This film isn’t about a moral dilemma. It is a moral defence of Planned Parenthood.
This is spelled out bluntly. Autumn tells the Planned Parenthood counselor that she is “just not ready to be a mom.” The counselor, who is easily one of the most sympathetic characters, assures her that that is “totally fine. Whatever your decision is is totally fine as long as it’s yours.” Autumn is told that she is 18 weeks pregnant, and when she asks if the abortion will be painful, she’s told it will be “a little uncomfortable.” For her, not for the baby, that is. At 18 weeks, her perfectly-formed child is just starting to hear sound—and may hear the murmuring of the conversation about her demise.
When Skylar asks Autumn what it was like once the abortion has been performed, Autumn responds that “it was kind of…whatever…It was just uncomfortable.” It brought to mind a screenshot posted on Facebook by pro-life activist Laura Klassen last week, of a message written by someone who had just had an abortion at 17 weeks. The “[o]nly part I remember,” the girl wrote, “is the pain while pulling the head out but other than that it went smoothly.” The comment section promptly filled with friends telling her they were glad that it “went okay.” The baby had been successfully dismembered, the decapitated head pulled from the womb, the procedure a success. I know it sounds extraordinarily harsh to say. But it is the truth, and without stating it bluntly it is impossible for many to understand why abortion is morally reprehensible even when the circumstances of the crisis make the desire for an abortion easier to understand.
The film ends with the two teenage girls boarding the bus to head back to Pennsylvania, the baby successfully dropped off in New York. And what awaits them there? Will Autumn’s abortion have solved the problem of her abusive boyfriend? Her troubled home life? The fact that the men in her life appear to be, without exception, moral defectives? The fact that her world seems to be drab and depressing shades of gray? Of course not.
But that is not what Hittman’s film would have us believe. The message of Never Rarely Sometimes Always is a simple and powerful one: Abortion solves everything. Have an abortion, and your problems will go away. In short: Your problem is the baby.
This film is, in many ways, a searing indictment of the Sexual Revolution. We get an up-close glimpse of a world where teenage girls expect their pornified boyfriends to make unwanted sexual demands and are unsurprised when those boys push them into things they do not want to do. Hittman shows us the grim, depressing reality of broken homes and the children who don’t quite fit anywhere, fearing even to speak with their parents (or, more often, parent) in the face of a crisis. She introduces us to a generation of lost boys who have been taught by a hyper-sexualized, porn-driven culture that they have a right to the bodies of girls and women, and act accordingly. The world that Autumn and Skylar live in is a real one. It is this one.
But it is the world that Planned Parenthood and their fellow sexual revolutionaries helped to create—and one that they now profit from by killing the unwanted children of a lost generation.
Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he speaks with David Benham, who was recently arrested while praying outside an abortion facility. Benham talks about the experience, how the government is using the COVID-19 panic to censor pro-lifers, and what we need to do to fight back. You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below:
Follow Jonathon Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States. He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-14--Disney introduces ‘gay dad’ couple to kids in reboot of DuckTales

April 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Disney has introduced a male couple as the parents of two youngsters in the reboot of its popular DuckTales .
The show previously had only hinted about Violet ’ s gay dads , but the season three opener left nothing to the imagination .
It also revealed that Violet ’ s dads have adopted her best friend , Lena .
In season three ’ s first episode , as Lena steps forward to be recognized during a Junior Woodchuck meeting , her excited sister cheers for her from the crowd , shouting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a couple misters.
” Violet is seated next to two adult males , each wearing a tee shirt proclaiming “ I ’ M WITH DAD ” and an arrow pointing to the other half of the male couple .
Here are some additional screenshots of the gay Duck Dads : In a Tumblr blog post , DuckTales co-executive producer and story editor Frank Angones seemed to express regret that gay representation on the show isn ’ t center stage because the show is rooted in 1980s characters involved in “ heteronormative romances.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ honest about this : Violet ’ s dads are present and show up but do not play a huge role in the story thus far .
As with all of our characters , we had a lot of conversations about who Violet was and what her background was and came up with this fun notion of her too enthusiastic , overly supportive dads who love being dads .
We didn ’ t really have a story built around them , but when the time came for an episode focusing on Huey and Violet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense that they would be there .
I ’ m well aware that the “ queer representation through parents and background characters ” trope is an issue , and we ’ ve sort of stumbled backwards into a lot of heteronormative romances in this show due to legacy characters with pre-existing relationships ( Scrooge and Goldie , Donald and Daisy , Fenton and Gandra ) .
Angones also lamented how difficult it is to change established Disney characters , but suggested that was “ no excuse ” not to plow ahead and seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We really have not done enough relevant LGBTQ+ rep. We do have some themes and ideas coming up that address relevant LGBTQ+ narratives .
The DuckTales co-producer concluded by promising “ there ’ s always opportunity for a lot more … I ’ m dedicated to being better and finding new opportunities for three-dimensional representation , on this show and the next and the next.
” “ They ’ re really making the freaking ducks gay , ” declared One Angry Gamer blog .
“ There ’ s no longer any denying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to inculcate kids with LGBTQIA+ content .
”

April 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Disney has introduced a male couple as the parents of two youngsters in the reboot of its popular DuckTales.
The show previously had only hinted about Violet’s gay dads, but the season three opener left nothing to the imagination. It also revealed that Violet’s dads have adopted her best friend, Lena.
In season three’s first episode, as Lena steps forward to be recognized during a Junior Woodchuck meeting, her excited sister cheers for her from the crowd, shouting, “That’s my sister from a couple misters.” Violet is seated next to two adult males, each wearing a tee shirt proclaiming “I’M WITH DAD” and an arrow pointing to the other half of the male couple.
A step in the right direction for LGBT representation… Thank you so much, #DuckTales pic.twitter.com/0wVPLLm4zP — kolbi �� (@PixieSphere) April 4, 2020
Here are some additional screenshots of the gay Duck Dads:
In a Tumblr blog post, DuckTales co-executive producer and story editor Frank Angones seemed to express regret that gay representation on the show isn’t center stage because the show is rooted in 1980s characters involved in “heteronormative romances.”
Want to be very upfront and honest about this: Violet’s dads are present and show up but do not play a huge role in the story thus far. As with all of our characters, we had a lot of conversations about who Violet was and what her background was and came up with this fun notion of her too enthusiastic, overly supportive dads who love being dads. We didn’t really have a story built around them, but when the time came for an episode focusing on Huey and Violet in a particular situation, it made sense that they would be there.
He continued:
I’m well aware that the “queer representation through parents and background characters” trope is an issue, and we’ve sort of stumbled backwards into a lot of heteronormative romances in this show due to legacy characters with pre-existing relationships (Scrooge and Goldie, Donald and Daisy, Fenton and Gandra).
Angones also lamented how difficult it is to change established Disney characters, but suggested that was “no excuse” not to plow ahead and seek to feature more gay characters and storylines.
We really have not done enough relevant LGBTQ+ rep. We do have some themes and ideas coming up that address relevant LGBTQ+ narratives.
The DuckTales co-producer concluded by promising “there’s always opportunity for a lot more … I’m dedicated to being better and finding new opportunities for three-dimensional representation, on this show and the next and the next.”
“They’re really making the freaking ducks gay,” declared One Angry Gamer blog. “There’s no longer any denying that there truly is a gay agenda to inculcate kids with LGBTQIA+ content.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-04-14--The good surprises of God and the coronavirus crisis

April 14 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – As the coronavirus situation stands , things don ’ t look good .
The virus is killing thousands of Americans ( as viruses do ) .
The economy is in free fall , hemorrhaging trillions of dollars and millions of lost jobs .
The nation is saddled with debt coming from a $ 2.3 trillion fiscal relief package .
The Fed injects an additional $ 2.3 trillion into the economy , buying bonds from state and local governments , and corporations .
More such packages with similar price tags are in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are open as “ essential ” businesses .
Churches are closed , and the Sacraments hardly administered in America—and most of the world .
All these developments point to medical , economic , and spiritual disasters .
Adding to our woes is the future .
The liberal , secular establishment has already warned that things will not return to normal .
The coronavirus crisis will “ alter forever the world order , ” threatens Henry Kissinger in The Wall Street Journal .
We are told to be prepared to embrace a chilling post-corona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of everything on the liberal agenda .
To those engaged in the fight for Christian culture , it seems that little can be done to stop this crashing disaster .
Everything seems disproportionate to the means at hand .
Only one factor stands outside this terrible spectacle .
That factor is God .
Yes , God is outside this threatening scene .
He goes unrecognized by the scientific and political establishments at the controls of this crisis management .
God does not figure into the solutions now offered by politicians and technocrats .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this crisis as Church services are largely suppressed globally .
Nevertheless , He is there .
His exclusion is not something new .
There are times in history when the cause of the Church seems lost .
All world powers are arrayed and ready to head down the road to disaster without God or the Church .
They seem content to rely upon their own resources , flaunt their pride , and push their agendas .
This crisis seems to be one of those times .
And yet all is not lost .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ has His surprises that confound the designs of secular officials , scientists , and politicians .
When least expected , their plans start to go wrong .
The unexpected happens .
What usually triggers the surprises of God are fervent souls that raise their voices to heaven , asking His aid .
Such souls are not recorded on worldly registers but weigh heavily on heavenly scales .
By all accounts , America should no longer have these fervent souls .
As the nation on the cutting edge of modernity and the sexual revolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long ago .
Kissinger would have us embrace our secular , post-corona future enthusiastically without God .
However , despite everything , America remains a religious nation .
And in this time of tribulation caused by the coronavirus crisis , many Americans are turning to God .
Recent polls claim that almost half of all Americans ( 44 % ) see the coronavirus as a “ wake-up call ” to return to God or even as a sign of the last days .
More than half of the population ( 55 % ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the crisis .
Such movements toward God express an ever greater uneasiness with a situation that worsens daily .
People are losing faith in the ability of politicians and technocrats to dominate the virus .
They are confused by the media that create panic and alarm around the issue to the point that it becomes almost impossible to understand correctly and prioritize intelligently .
The shutting down of the economy threatens to make the “ cure worse than the disease.
” Above all , the shuttering of the churches has led many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” God .
Most people have not converted .
They are not yet asking for His aid with great fervor .
However , they are looking in God ’ s direction .
With each passing day , more wonder if the solution might come from Him .
Preparing for the surprises of God When enough people change , the surprises of God can occur .
God hears the cries of His people and can respond for their better good .
God writes straight with crooked lines .
Thus , His action may not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since suffering often brings out the best in people and unites them to God .
His solutions might be different from what we imagine—and they are always much better .
God hears our prayers and answers them for His greater glory and our good .
Much depends upon us in this complex scenario .
We have to call upon God with sufficient zeal and sincerity .
If we do our part , God will not abandon us .
Indeed , God acts in history , especially in times like these .
He moves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ might be clear that it was He who acted and changed the situation .
Thus , we are invited to confide more in Him .
However , God can also surprise us by asking us for a great gift and sacrifice .
Our love for Him must take us to the point that we convert and amend our lives , the Blessed Mother requested at Fatima .
Our pleas for aid can not take us to a return to the “ normal ” pre-corona gravely sinful world .
We must desire a culture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law .
As the coronavirus crisis stands , things look bleak .
Let us confide in the surprises of God .
John Horvat II is a scholar , researcher , educator , international speaker , and author of the book Return to Order , as well as the author of hundreds of published articles .
He lives in Spring Grove , Pennsylvania where he is the vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition , Family and Property .

Urgent appeal to the bishops of the world: Feed your flock Sign the petition here.
April 14, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – As the coronavirus situation stands, things don’t look good. The virus is killing thousands of Americans (as viruses do). The economy is in free fall, hemorrhaging trillions of dollars and millions of lost jobs. The nation is saddled with debt coming from a $2.3 trillion fiscal relief package. The Fed injects an additional $2.3 trillion into the economy, buying bonds from state and local governments, and corporations. More such packages with similar price tags are in the pipeline.
Abortion clinics and marijuana dispensaries are open as “essential” businesses. Churches are closed, and the Sacraments hardly administered in America—and most of the world. All these developments point to medical, economic, and spiritual disasters.
Adding to our woes is the future. The liberal, secular establishment has already warned that things will not return to normal. The coronavirus crisis will “alter forever the world order,” threatens Henry Kissinger in The Wall Street Journal. We are told to be prepared to embrace a chilling post-corona future, which reads like a wish-list of everything on the liberal agenda.
To those engaged in the fight for Christian culture, it seems that little can be done to stop this crashing disaster. Everything seems disproportionate to the means at hand. Only one factor stands outside this terrible spectacle. That factor is God.
The God factor
Yes, God is outside this threatening scene. He goes unrecognized by the scientific and political establishments at the controls of this crisis management. God does not figure into the solutions now offered by politicians and technocrats. He is told to stay out of this crisis as Church services are largely suppressed globally. Nevertheless, He is there.
His exclusion is not something new. There are times in history when the cause of the Church seems lost. All world powers are arrayed and ready to head down the road to disaster without God or the Church. They seem content to rely upon their own resources, flaunt their pride, and push their agendas.
This crisis seems to be one of those times.
The surprises of God
And yet all is not lost.
In times like these, God sometimes has His surprises that confound the designs of secular officials, scientists, and politicians. When least expected, their plans start to go wrong. The unexpected happens.
What usually triggers the surprises of God are fervent souls that raise their voices to heaven, asking His aid. Such souls are not recorded on worldly registers but weigh heavily on heavenly scales.
By all accounts, America should no longer have these fervent souls. As the nation on the cutting edge of modernity and the sexual revolution, they should have been wiped out long ago. Kissinger would have us embrace our secular, post-corona future enthusiastically without God.
However, despite everything, America remains a religious nation. And in this time of tribulation caused by the coronavirus crisis, many Americans are turning to God. Recent polls claim that almost half of all Americans (44%) see the coronavirus as a “wake-up call” to return to God or even as a sign of the last days. More than half of the population (55%) has prayed to God for an end to the crisis.
An ever greater uneasiness
Such movements toward God express an ever greater uneasiness with a situation that worsens daily. People are losing faith in the ability of politicians and technocrats to dominate the virus. They are confused by the media that create panic and alarm around the issue to the point that it becomes almost impossible to understand correctly and prioritize intelligently.
The shutting down of the economy threatens to make the “cure worse than the disease.” Above all, the shuttering of the churches has led many to question why are officials “quarantining” God.
Most people have not converted. They are not yet asking for His aid with great fervor. However, they are looking in God’s direction. With each passing day, more wonder if the solution might come from Him.
Preparing for the surprises of God
When enough people change, the surprises of God can occur. God hears the cries of His people and can respond for their better good. God writes straight with crooked lines. Thus, His action may not be the instant resolution of the problem since suffering often brings out the best in people and unites them to God. His solutions might be different from what we imagine—and they are always much better. God hears our prayers and answers them for His greater glory and our good.
Much depends upon us in this complex scenario. We have to call upon God with sufficient zeal and sincerity. If we do our part, God will not abandon us. Indeed, God acts in history, especially in times like these. He moves when people appear helpless so that it might be clear that it was He who acted and changed the situation. Thus, we are invited to confide more in Him.
However, God can also surprise us by asking us for a great gift and sacrifice. Our love for Him must take us to the point that we convert and amend our lives, the Blessed Mother requested at Fatima. Our pleas for aid cannot take us to a return to the “normal” pre-corona gravely sinful world. We must desire a culture and society that follow God’s law.
As the coronavirus crisis stands, things look bleak. Let us confide in the surprises of God.
John Horvat II is a scholar, researcher, educator, international speaker, and author of the book Return to Order, as well as the author of hundreds of published articles. He lives in Spring Grove, Pennsylvania where he is the vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property.
Share