lifesitenews--2020-09-25--US bishop: Are COVID lockdowns morally obligatory? ‘I would say no’

PETITION : President Trump , nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court !
Sign the petition here .
SPRINGFIELD , Illinois , September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Bishop Thomas Paprocki published a philosophical analysis of the coronavirus lockdowns , arguing there is no “ moral obligation to shut down our society , require people to stay at home , put employees out of work , send businesses into bankruptcy , impair the food supply chain , and prevent worshippers from going to church.
” In his essay for the September issue of Ethics & Medics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ distinguished between extraordinary means to save life and ordinary ones .
“ While some people may voluntarily adopt [ extraordinary ] means , only ordinary means that are not unduly burdensome are morally required to preserve life , both on the part of individuals as well as society as a whole , ” he explained .
Paprocki applied the moral principles commonly used in clinical decision-making to society as a whole .
“ First , while we recognize that our human life is one of our greatest gifts , it is not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the eternal life of our immortal soul , ” he wrote .
While life needs to be treated “ with respect and reverence , ” there are higher goods , as can be seen in “ things like martyrdom , or attempting to save the life of another.
” “ Second , recognizing that our human life is passing , there are circumstances when it is just to decline medical treatments because they would be considered extraordinary to the situation , ” Paprocki continued , mentioning the expenses connected to a treatment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forgo such treatments is in no way a refusal of life , but is rather a recognition that even life is passing.
” “ Third , medical professionals work with those in competent authority over others — in some cases family members with medical power of attorney for those who can not make the decision themselves — to make prudent decisions regarding which treatments to utilize or to decline , ” he wrote .
Finally , he listed the principle that “ medical science and government leaders are called to act in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population.
” Turning his attention to society as a whole , Paprocki argued , “ If we have a moral obligation to use every possible means , even extraordinary means , to preserve life , then we should not even get into our cars , since there is a risk that we could be killed , given the fact that over thirty-five thousand people have died nationwide in auto accidents every year since 1951.
” Instead of simply proscribing driving , society has implemented certain safety features to make a crash less risky @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Similarly in the face of a pandemic , do we have a moral obligation to shut down our society , require people to stay at home , put employees out of work , send businesses into bankruptcy , impair the food supply chain , and prevent worshippers from going to church ?
” the bishop asked .
“ I would say no.
” “ That would be imposing unduly burdensome and extraordinary means , ” he explained .
“ While some people may voluntarily adopt such means , only ordinary means @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required to preserve life , both on the part of individuals as well as society as a whole.
” While Paprocki argued that society is required to impose only ordinary means on itself , he didn ’ t directly explore the question whether it ’ s morally acceptable for the government to impose those extraordinary means .
On the flip side , he also didn ’ t address whether individuals could refuse to comply with extraordinary means .
Nevertheless , he wrote that “ the US Supreme Court got it wrong ” when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Newsom could enforce the order “ that discriminated against houses of worship in placing numerical restrictions on public gatherings.
” “ Physical health is important , but the highest good is eternal life , ” Paprocki emphasized in conclusion .
“ The free exercise of religion and access to the means of salvation established by Christ through the Church must have priority in the moral and legal order.
” The bishop referred to the Gospel of Matthew , where Christ says , “ And do not fear those who kill the body but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
” Thomas Paprocki is one of the most outspoken faithful bishops in the United States .
Recently , he told the faithful of his diocese that abortion is “ the pre-eminent issue of our time ” while also calling out Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden by name for being pro-abortion .
He explicitly contrasted the pro-abortion platform of the Democratic Party and its candidate for president with the pro-life platform of the Republican Party and President Donald Trump .
“ The 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unequivocally that every woman should be able to ‘ access safe and legal abortion , ’ ” Paprocki explained .
“ They also pledge to ‘ restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood , ’ the largest single provider of abortions in the U.S. , and repeal the Hyde Amendment , which since 1976 has prohibited federal funds to pay for abortions except in rare cases to save the life of the mother , or if the pregnancy arises from incest or rape.
” On the other hand , Republicans “ oppose the use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortion or to fund organizations , like Planned Parenthood , so long as they provide or refer for elective abortions or sell fetal body parts rather than provide health care , ” and “ support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life .
”

PETITION: President Trump, nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court! Sign the petition here.
SPRINGFIELD, Illinois, September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Bishop Thomas Paprocki published a philosophical analysis of the coronavirus lockdowns, arguing there is no “moral obligation to shut down our society, require people to stay at home, put employees out of work, send businesses into bankruptcy, impair the food supply chain, and prevent worshippers from going to church.”
In his essay for the September issue of Ethics & Medics, the bishop of Springfield, Illinois distinguished between extraordinary means to save life and ordinary ones.
“While some people may voluntarily adopt [extraordinary] means, only ordinary means that are not unduly burdensome are morally required to preserve life, both on the part of individuals as well as society as a whole,” he explained.
Paprocki applied the moral principles commonly used in clinical decision-making to society as a whole.
“First, while we recognize that our human life is one of our greatest gifts, it is not a moral absolute and in fact is secondary to the eternal life of our immortal soul,” he wrote. While life needs to be treated “with respect and reverence,” there are higher goods, as can be seen in “things like martyrdom, or attempting to save the life of another.”
“Second, recognizing that our human life is passing, there are circumstances when it is just to decline medical treatments because they would be considered extraordinary to the situation,” Paprocki continued, mentioning the expenses connected to a treatment as an example. “Deciding to forgo such treatments is in no way a refusal of life, but is rather a recognition that even life is passing.”
“Third, medical professionals work with those in competent authority over others — in some cases family members with medical power of attorney for those who cannot make the decision themselves — to make prudent decisions regarding which treatments to utilize or to decline,” he wrote.
Finally, he listed the principle that “medical science and government leaders are called to act in a way that protects the health of our population.”
Turning his attention to society as a whole, Paprocki argued, “If we have a moral obligation to use every possible means, even extraordinary means, to preserve life, then we should not even get into our cars, since there is a risk that we could be killed, given the fact that over thirty-five thousand people have died nationwide in auto accidents every year since 1951.”
Instead of simply proscribing driving, society has implemented certain safety features to make a crash less risky, including seat belts and air bags.
“Similarly in the face of a pandemic, do we have a moral obligation to shut down our society, require people to stay at home, put employees out of work, send businesses into bankruptcy, impair the food supply chain, and prevent worshippers from going to church?” the bishop asked. “I would say no.”
“That would be imposing unduly burdensome and extraordinary means,” he explained. “While some people may voluntarily adopt such means, only ordinary means that are not unduly burdensome are morally required to preserve life, both on the part of individuals as well as society as a whole.”
While Paprocki argued that society is required to impose only ordinary means on itself, he didn’t directly explore the question whether it’s morally acceptable for the government to impose those extraordinary means. On the flip side, he also didn’t address whether individuals could refuse to comply with extraordinary means.
Nevertheless, he wrote that “the US Supreme Court got it wrong” when it ruled that Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom could enforce the order “that discriminated against houses of worship in placing numerical restrictions on public gatherings.”
“Physical health is important, but the highest good is eternal life,” Paprocki emphasized in conclusion. “The free exercise of religion and access to the means of salvation established by Christ through the Church must have priority in the moral and legal order.”
The bishop referred to the Gospel of Matthew, where Christ says, “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”
Thomas Paprocki is one of the most outspoken faithful bishops in the United States. Recently, he told the faithful of his diocese that abortion is “the pre-eminent issue of our time” while also calling out Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden by name for being pro-abortion.
He explicitly contrasted the pro-abortion platform of the Democratic Party and its candidate for president with the pro-life platform of the Republican Party and President Donald Trump.
“The 2020 Democratic Party platform states that Democrats believe unequivocally that every woman should be able to ‘access safe and legal abortion,’” Paprocki explained. “They also pledge to ‘restore federal funding for Planned Parenthood,’ the largest single provider of abortions in the U.S., and repeal the Hyde Amendment, which since 1976 has prohibited federal funds to pay for abortions except in rare cases to save the life of the mother, or if the pregnancy arises from incest or rape.”
On the other hand, Republicans “oppose the use of public funds to perform or promote abortion or to fund organizations, like Planned Parenthood, so long as they provide or refer for elective abortions or sell fetal body parts rather than provide health care,” and “support the appointment of judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-25--Former NY Times journalist tells Tucker Carlson real purpose of masks in COVID crisis

PETITION : No to radical mandatory mask mandates !
Sign the petition here .
WASHINGTON , D.C. , September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — A former New York Times journalist who has become one of the nation ’ s leading voices critical of heavy-handed tactics being exercised by the government during the pandemic explained that there is no scientific evidence to justify wearing masks in public spaces .
In an interview with Tucker Carlson , Alex Berenson , author of Unreported Truths about COVIS-19 and Lockdowns , Part 2 , said masks “ are at best marginally useful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence that people have tried to drum up in the last six months to suggest otherwise is almost embarrassingly weak.
” After viewing a video of a woman sitting alone with her family at her son ’ s high school football game being tasered and handcuffed by police because she wasn ’ t wearing a mask , Berenson asserted that there was no justification for her arrest .
The smattering of studies being cited by authorities for mandating masks is “ a joke , ” said Berenson .
Berenson said the best scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ masks became politicized beginning in March of this year — “ suggested that masks were broadly useless in the general population.
” “ To the extent they were useful , it would be for people who were actively infected and coughing , and to the extent that made any difference , it was probably just as a signaling mechanism to show people , ‘ step away from me , I ’ m sick , ’ ” he said .
“ So the evidence here is just beyond weak , ” he added .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” explained Berenson , something that we use to show that we ’ re taking the coronavirus seriously .
A talisman is an object believed to possess magic powers , conferring on its bearer or wearer supernatural protection .
“ We can ’ t do lockdowns anymore — even the Democratic governors have dropped lockdowns because they ’ re so economically devastating — so they have to tell the people to do something , and they tell them to wear masks and the social pressure , ” he continued .
Berenson shared his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressures that one might now face in public spaces : A few weeks ago I was in Walmart with my son who is 4 .
A 4 year-old is essentially at 0.0000 risk of anything happening with coronavirus .
Little kids don ’ t spread coronavirus .
He was not wearing a mask .
I don ’ t like him to wear a mask , although he has unfortunately had to wear one now that he goes to school .
A woman came up to me and she said , ‘ Your son @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ and I said , ‘ I know , he doesn ’ t like them , ’ and she said , ‘ I ’ m going to go get a police officer , ’ and she did .
So what do I do ?
I don ’ t argue with the police .
I tell my son to put on a mask , and he puts it on .
This is the sort of social pressure that we ’ re engaged in right now , and it has real consequences .
“ There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ masks coming , ” predicted Berenson .
“ There are vaccines , there are ‘ Test ’ and ‘ Trace , ’ and how aggressively we ’ re going to isolate people and quarantine them.
” “ There are hundreds of thousands of college students right now at no risk , ” he stressed , “ being forced to not leave their dorms , for no reason , ” noted Berenson .
Carlson reacted : “ So a society that can behave this irrationally about masks , you ’ re suggesting , could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that.
” “ What ’ s interesting , it ’ s actually the anglophone [ English-speaking ] countries — the U.K. , it ’ s the U.S. , it ’ s Canada and Australia and New Zealand — that have taken the most irrational steps , ” said Berenson .
“ Right now in Europe , they ’ re done with lockdowns , ” he said .
“ It ’ s funny : the countries that we view as more ‘ bureaucratic ’ and ‘ statist ’ are the ones that are pushing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than we are.
” “ The Anglo world has gone insane , ” concluded Carlson .
“ It clearly has .
”

Alex Berensen said masks have become for the general population a 'talisman,' an object believed to possess magic powers, while being mostly 'useless.'
PETITION: No to radical mandatory mask mandates! Sign the petition here.
WASHINGTON, D.C., September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — A former New York Times journalist who has become one of the nation’s leading voices critical of heavy-handed tactics being exercised by the government during the pandemic explained that there is no scientific evidence to justify wearing masks in public spaces.
In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Alex Berenson, author of Unreported Truths about COVIS-19 and Lockdowns, Part 2, said masks “are at best marginally useful indoors in crowded settings. And the evidence that people have tried to drum up in the last six months to suggest otherwise is almost embarrassingly weak.”
After viewing a video of a woman sitting alone with her family at her son’s high school football game being tasered and handcuffed by police because she wasn’t wearing a mask, Berenson asserted that there was no justification for her arrest.
The smattering of studies being cited by authorities for mandating masks is “a joke,” said Berenson.
Berenson said the best scientific evidence available — before the science concerning masks became politicized beginning in March of this year — “suggested that masks were broadly useless in the general population.”
Masks are a “talisman”
“To the extent they were useful, it would be for people who were actively infected and coughing, and to the extent that made any difference, it was probably just as a signaling mechanism to show people, ‘step away from me, I’m sick,’” he said.
“So the evidence here is just beyond weak,” he added.
“Masks have become a talisman,” explained Berenson, something that we use to show that we’re taking the coronavirus seriously.
A talisman is an object believed to possess magic powers, conferring on its bearer or wearer supernatural protection.
“We can’t do lockdowns anymore — even the Democratic governors have dropped lockdowns because they’re so economically devastating — so they have to tell the people to do something, and they tell them to wear masks and the social pressure,” he continued.
Berenson shared his personal experience to illustrate the irrational societal pressures that one might now face in public spaces:
A few weeks ago I was in Walmart with my son who is 4. A 4 year-old is essentially at 0.0000 risk of anything happening with coronavirus. Little kids don’t spread coronavirus. He was not wearing a mask. I don’t like him to wear a mask, although he has unfortunately had to wear one now that he goes to school. A woman came up to me and she said, ‘Your son’s not wearing a mask,’ and I said, ‘I know, he doesn’t like them,’ and she said, ‘I’m going to go get a police officer,’ and she did. So what do I do? I don’t argue with the police. I tell my son to put on a mask, and he puts it on. This is the sort of social pressure that we’re engaged in right now, and it has real consequences.
Worse heavy-handed government irrationality on the horizon
“There are other even more serious issues than masks coming,” predicted Berenson. “There are vaccines, there are ‘Test’ and ‘Trace,’ and how aggressively we’re going to isolate people and quarantine them.”
“There are hundreds of thousands of college students right now at no risk,” he stressed, “being forced to not leave their dorms, for no reason,” noted Berenson.
Carlson reacted: “So a society that can behave this irrationally about masks, you’re suggesting, could do things that are much worse than that.”
“What’s interesting, it’s actually the anglophone [English-speaking] countries — the U.K., it’s the U.S., it’s Canada and Australia and New Zealand — that have taken the most irrational steps,” said Berenson.
“Right now in Europe, they’re done with lockdowns,” he said. “It’s funny: the countries that we view as more ‘bureaucratic’ and ‘statist’ are the ones that are pushing back more and making more rational decisions than we are.”
“The Anglo world has gone insane,” concluded Carlson. “It clearly has.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-25--Tennessee prosecutor refuses to enforce abortion pill reversal law

URGENT PETITION : Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade !
Sign the petition here .
NASHVILLE , Tennessee , September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – At least one prosecutor in Tennessee is refusing to enforce the state ’ s duly-enacted law requiring that women seeking abortion pills be given information on how to reverse them should they change their mind .
Among other provisions , the pro-life omnibus law enacted this summer requires anyone dispensing abortion pills to inform women about the technique of Abortion Pill Reversal ( APR ) , as well as post @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any facility that commits more than 50 abortions per year .
Failure to comply could result in a $ 10,000 civil penalty as well as a felony charge .
Pro-abortion groups have already challenged the law in court , and now Davidson County District Attorney Glenn Funk has filed documents in federal court declaring his refusal to carry it out , News Channel 5 in Nashville reported .
“ The criminal law must not be used by the state to exercise control over a woman 's body , ” Funk said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ District Attorney for the 20th Judicial District , I will not prosecute any woman who chooses to have a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy or any medical doctor who performs this procedure at the request of their patient .
Further , I will not prosecute or sanction an abortion provider who states , verbally and/or in writing , disagreement with the disclosures required by the Legislature which are subject to this lawsuit.
” “ We are disappointed that General Funk is failing to uphold his elected duty to prosecute violations of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Life responded in a statement .
“ Women deserve to know every option available to them and , if abortionists are violating the law by not informing their patients of the abortion pill reversal method , then district attorneys across the state should be ready and willing to enforce this law and prosecute those providers .
After all , pro-choice should mean getting a choice in the first place.
” The abortion pill mifepristone ( better known as RU-486 ) works by blocking the natural hormone progesterone that developing babies require to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ progesterone to counteract mifepristone ’ s effects , ideally within 24 hours of taking the abortion pill .
Detractors argue that APR is harmful and unproven , but as pro-life OB/GYN Dr. William Lile has explained , the technique is based on principles that are well understood from progesterone ’ s common , FDA-approved use in a variety of other pregnancy-related situations .
APR has helped more than 1,000 women save their babies since 2007 , according to Heartbeat International .
The pro-life law , which Tennessee Republican Gov .
Bill Lee has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in court ” to defend and uphold , also bans abortion if a fetal heartbeat can be detected , or if the abortion is specifically sought due to a child ’ s race , sex , or prenatal diagnosis of a disability such as Down syndrome .

District Attorney Glenn Funk defiantly declared that he will not prosecute an abortionist who fails to inform the patient of the reversal option.
URGENT PETITION: Tell the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade! Sign the petition here.
NASHVILLE, Tennessee, September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – At least one prosecutor in Tennessee is refusing to enforce the state’s duly-enacted law requiring that women seeking abortion pills be given information on how to reverse them should they change their mind.
Among other provisions, the pro-life omnibus law enacted this summer requires anyone dispensing abortion pills to inform women about the technique of Abortion Pill Reversal (APR), as well as post the information in the waiting areas of any facility that commits more than 50 abortions per year. Failure to comply could result in a $10,000 civil penalty as well as a felony charge.
Pro-abortion groups have already challenged the law in court, and now Davidson County District Attorney Glenn Funk has filed documents in federal court declaring his refusal to carry it out, News Channel 5 in Nashville reported.
“The criminal law must not be used by the state to exercise control over a woman's body,” Funk said. “As long as I am the elected District Attorney for the 20th Judicial District, I will not prosecute any woman who chooses to have a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy or any medical doctor who performs this procedure at the request of their patient. Further, I will not prosecute or sanction an abortion provider who states, verbally and/or in writing, disagreement with the disclosures required by the Legislature which are subject to this lawsuit.”
“We are disappointed that General Funk is failing to uphold his elected duty to prosecute violations of the laws of Tennessee,” Tennessee Right to Life responded in a statement. “Women deserve to know every option available to them and, if abortionists are violating the law by not informing their patients of the abortion pill reversal method, then district attorneys across the state should be ready and willing to enforce this law and prosecute those providers. After all, pro-choice should mean getting a choice in the first place.”
The abortion pill mifepristone (better known as RU-486) works by blocking the natural hormone progesterone that developing babies require to survive. APR consists of administering extra progesterone to counteract mifepristone’s effects, ideally within 24 hours of taking the abortion pill.
Detractors argue that APR is harmful and unproven, but as pro-life OB/GYN Dr. William Lile has explained, the technique is based on principles that are well understood from progesterone’s common, FDA-approved use in a variety of other pregnancy-related situations. APR has helped more than 1,000 women save their babies since 2007, according to Heartbeat International.
The pro-life law, which Tennessee Republican Gov. Bill Lee has vowed to do “whatever it takes in court” to defend and uphold, also bans abortion if a fetal heartbeat can be detected, or if the abortion is specifically sought due to a child’s race, sex, or prenatal diagnosis of a disability such as Down syndrome.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-25--US bishops tell Catholic voters abortion is ‘preeminent issue’ in 2020 election

BALTIMORE , Maryland , September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — With the U.S. presidential election just 39 days away , America ’ s Catholic bishops are reiterating the Church ’ s longstanding teaching that abortion is the “ preeminent ” social justice issue when it comes to voting .
“ The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life itself , because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family , and because of the number of lives destroyed , ” stated Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City , Kansas in a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Polls.
” Naumann , the chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops ( USCCB ) committee on pro-life activities , was quoting directly from the September 2019 introductory letter to the bishops ’ 2015 document “ Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.
” Although in their 2019 letter the bishops “ did warn us not to ‘ dismiss or ignore other serious threats to human life and dignity such as racism , the environmental crisis , poverty , and the death penalty , ’ they did give priority to upholding and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most basic right—to live , ” stated Naumann .
“ Abortion is an intrinsic evil , meaning that it is never permitted or morally justified , regardless of individual circumstances or intentions , ” he added .
Moreover , the “ enormous number of human lives destroyed by abortion is one factor that elevates its importance .
The most recent available data indicates over 2,000 children per day die from abortion in the United States .
Since abortion was legalized in 1973 , over 61 million children have been killed—and untold numbers of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Naumann emphasized that the “ tragedy of abortion ” is “ distinct ” from other social ills because the child in the womb has no legal protection .
“ It is currently legal to directly and intentionally take the life of an innocent human being .
Current laws in our country fail to protect the lives of unborn children , ” he stated .
“ Our highest Court does children in their mothers ’ wombs as persons and claims that abortion is a constitutional right .
Further , many political leaders work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some falsely describe it as health care and even as a basic human right.
” Cath O ’ Neill , current executive director of Catholics for Trump tweeted her gratitude to the USCCB for speaking up at a critical juncture : Indeed , the lead-up to the November 3 election has underscored the bitter divide in the American Catholic Church over this fundamental issue .
As Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden plays up his Catholic faith despite his extreme pro-abortion policies and support for homosexual “ marriage , ” and proponents of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notably the dissident group “ Catholics for Biden ” — argue that the killing of an unborn child is but one of many issues Catholics should consider at the ballot box , public support runs high for Wisconsin priest Fr .
James Altman , who is facing possible canonical penalties for asserting “ you can not be a Catholic and a Democrat.
” And as Bishops Joseph Strickland of Tyler , Texas , Bishop Rick Stika of Knoxville , Tennessee , and Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield , Illinois , denounced Biden for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Newark , New Jersey , issued a de facto endorsement of Biden and Bishop John Stowe of Lexington , Kentucky , suggested that the preeminent issue for Catholic voters to consider is not abortion but the environment .
“ They are both critical issues , ” Stowe said during a webinar hosted by Catholic Climate Covenant .
“ I think an argument could be made that … creation is the preeminent issue , because without the environment to sustain human life , you can ’ t have human life.
” Stowe was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bishop Robert W. McElroy of San Diego and Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago , who during last year ’ s USCCB meeting argued in favor of downplaying abortion as a social justice priority , with the latter two citing Pope Francis ’ s encyclical Gaudete et Exsultate as a reason for doing so .
The majority of bishops disagreed , but the vote was 3 to 1 .
Stowe , Cupich , McElroy , and Tobin are all recognized as liberal forces within the USCCB who have publicly endorsed the work of Fr @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeks to normalize homosexuality within the Catholic Church .
Martin , who gave a virutal blessing at the Democratic National Convention , recently scolded his fellow priests for stating that to vote for Biden is a “ mortal sin , ” and told them they should care as much about homosexual and transgender persons , the poor , and the homeless as they do about abortion .
He also advised them to read the USCCB document Naumann referenced .
In his statement , Naumann urged Catholics to vigorously oppose the evil of abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boldly stand up against this intrinsic evil , especially when it is occurring on a massive scale , implemented in law and funded , in some instances , by the government , ” he said .
“ As believers and citizens inspired by the Gospel and guided by the shepherds of our Church , we must do what we can to end violence in the womb , ensure that unborn children are fully recognized and protected by our laws , and to support mothers and fathers in embracing life.
” In 2006 Pope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not negotiable ” in politics .
He first mentioned the “ protection of life in all its stages , from the first moment of conception until natural death.
” Also , he referenced the “ recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family – as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage – and its defense from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its destabilization , obscuring its particular character and its @ @ @ @ @

‘Abortion is an intrinsic evil, meaning that it is never permitted or morally justified, regardless of individual circumstances or intentions’
PETITION: Urge Catholic bishops to refuse Holy Communion to pro-abortion Biden! Sign the petition here.
BALTIMORE, Maryland, September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — With the U.S. presidential election just 39 days away, America’s Catholic bishops are reiterating the Church’s longstanding teaching that abortion is the “preeminent” social justice issue when it comes to voting.
“The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life itself, because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family, and because of the number of lives destroyed,” stated Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas in a statement released this week titled “Priorities at the Polls.”
Naumann, the chair of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) committee on pro-life activities, was quoting directly from the September 2019 introductory letter to the bishops’ 2015 document “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship.”
Although in their 2019 letter the bishops “did warn us not to ‘dismiss or ignore other serious threats to human life and dignity such as racism, the environmental crisis, poverty, and the death penalty,’ they did give priority to upholding and defending our brothers’ and sisters’ most basic right—to live,” stated Naumann.
“Abortion is an intrinsic evil, meaning that it is never permitted or morally justified, regardless of individual circumstances or intentions,” he added.
Moreover, the “enormous number of human lives destroyed by abortion is one factor that elevates its importance. The most recent available data indicates over 2,000 children per day die from abortion in the United States. Since abortion was legalized in 1973, over 61 million children have been killed—and untold numbers of women and men suffer in the aftermath.”
Naumann emphasized that the “tragedy of abortion” is “distinct” from other social ills because the child in the womb has no legal protection.
“It is currently legal to directly and intentionally take the life of an innocent human being. Current laws in our country fail to protect the lives of unborn children,” he stated.
“Our highest Court does children in their mothers’ wombs as persons and claims that abortion is a constitutional right. Further, many political leaders work actively to increase access to abortion. Some falsely describe it as health care and even as a basic human right.”
Cath O’Neill, current executive director of Catholics for Trump tweeted her gratitude to the USCCB for speaking up at a critical juncture:
Indeed, the lead-up to the November 3 election has underscored the bitter divide in the American Catholic Church over this fundamental issue.
As Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden plays up his Catholic faith despite his extreme pro-abortion policies and support for homosexual “marriage,” and proponents of the so-called “seamless garment” theory — notably the dissident group “Catholics for Biden” — argue that the killing of an unborn child is but one of many issues Catholics should consider at the ballot box, public support runs high for Wisconsin priest Fr. James Altman, who is facing possible canonical penalties for asserting “you cannot be a Catholic and a Democrat.”
And as Bishops Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, Bishop Rick Stika of Knoxville, Tennessee, and Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Illinois, denounced Biden for his pro-abortion stance, Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, New Jersey, issued a de facto endorsement of Biden and Bishop John Stowe of Lexington, Kentucky, suggested that the preeminent issue for Catholic voters to consider is not abortion but the environment.
“They are both critical issues,” Stowe said during a webinar hosted by Catholic Climate Covenant. “I think an argument could be made that … creation is the preeminent issue, because without the environment to sustain human life, you can’t have human life.”
Stowe was one of the prelates, along with Bishop Robert W. McElroy of San Diego and Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago, who during last year’s USCCB meeting argued in favor of downplaying abortion as a social justice priority, with the latter two citing Pope Francis’s encyclical Gaudete et Exsultate as a reason for doing so. The majority of bishops disagreed, but the vote was 3 to 1.
Stowe, Cupich, McElroy, and Tobin are all recognized as liberal forces within the USCCB who have publicly endorsed the work of Fr. James Martin, SJ, who seeks to normalize homosexuality within the Catholic Church.
Martin, who gave a virutal blessing at the Democratic National Convention, recently scolded his fellow priests for stating that to vote for Biden is a “mortal sin,” and told them they should care as much about homosexual and transgender persons, the poor, and the homeless as they do about abortion.
He also advised them to read the USCCB document Naumann referenced.
In his statement, Naumann urged Catholics to vigorously oppose the evil of abortion.
“People of good will must boldly stand up against this intrinsic evil, especially when it is occurring on a massive scale, implemented in law and funded, in some instances, by the government,” he said.
“As believers and citizens inspired by the Gospel and guided by the shepherds of our Church, we must do what we can to end violence in the womb, ensure that unborn children are fully recognized and protected by our laws, and to support mothers and fathers in embracing life.”
In 2006 Pope Benedict XVI identified three “principles which are not negotiable” in politics. He first mentioned the “protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death.”
Also, he referenced the “recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family – as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage – and its defense from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its destabilization, obscuring its particular character and its irreplaceable social role.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-25--Why more and more Catholics are fleeing the Democratic party

September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The Catholic vote is a key demographic that will decide the 2020 elections .
Both parties know this and are making special efforts to reach out to Catholic voters .
However , getting the Catholic vote is more difficult than in the past .
A charismatic figure like John F. Kennedy is no longer enough to secure Catholic sympathy .
Single issues attractive to Catholics are morphing into more profound debates .
The election is less about who will govern and more about how Americans will live and worship .
In polarized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the personality of the candidates .
While Catholics do not vote as a monolithic bloc , the more active and devoted sectors influence the whole beyond their numbers .
A growing number lean right after losing their home in the Democratic Party in the late sixties .
Over the years , abortion has become a decisive Catholic issue that weighs heavily upon the vote .
The Church ’ s consistent teaching on the matter makes it the logical home for pro-life Americans .
Activists who take the issue seriously often end up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ almost a natural consequence of their concern for lives and souls .
While abortion remains a central issue for the Catholic voter , it is no longer a single issue .
It opens a Pandora ’ s box of moral issues that secular liberal politicians would prefer not to address and connect .
Thus , there used to be pro-life “ blue-dog ” Democrats who resisted the official party line of support for abortion .
As long as abortion was a single issue disconnected from any other , such resistance was tolerated within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the radicalization of the Democratic Party .
With every successive election , the Democratic platform doubles down and hardens its position , allowing no opposition and endorsing ever more radical forms of abortion even until birth and including infanticide .
Now , many Catholic voters realize there is something much more sinister behind the Democrats ’ refusal to make the least concession to the pro-life cause .
They see that abortion is not a single issue but is connected to everything else in the Culture of Death : euthanasia , assisted suicide , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which sees in procured abortion a sacrament ) .
The radicalized left no longer hides its anti-Catholic moral program .
Rather , it proclaims it .
These Catholics are further alarmed because they see that these anti-life positions will not be optional .
Paying for procured abortion and contraception will force them to act against their consciences , as the pro-death forces grow ever bolder .
Catholics sense that their freedom to worship the One True God will be threatened should this mentality prevail .
Radical ideologies endanger the education and innocence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ communism are not far behind to force this agenda on an unwilling Catholic sector , still stinging from the lockdown/shutdown of their churches during the COVID crisis .
Opposition to procured abortion unites all those who favor a Christian moral order .
Abortion has the advantage of being the dividing issue because there can be no compromise .
Its evil is evident .
There is no such thing as half an abortion .
It is always deadly .
It necessarily gives rise to a Culture of Death .
Thus , abortion serves as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other sinister threats lurking in the darkness .
The issue also unites all those who wish to destroy the moral order , yet it reveals those leftist connections that they would prefer remained hidden .
That is why the left hates the abortion issue so much .
It forces leftists to radicalize to energize their bases and thus show its true face .
When the two sides engage in this fight , the debate becomes a dramatic clash of worldviews .
Catholic pro-life activists do well to make the election about procured abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ connect the dots with all the other moral issues , the left must play defense .
Catholics need to grill liberal “ Catholic ” candidates about their pro-abortion irrationality .
However , they must go beyond abortion and attack the late Cardinal Bernardin ’ s “ seamless garment ” lie and how it provides an umbrella for liberal , socialist , and now even communist issues that buttress the pro-abortion position .
In this way , abortion can serve as a catalyst for the rejection of an evil worldview .
The massive polarization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the point that nothing seems exempt from the fray .
The cause of this polarization is the clash of worldviews .
One exposed flank of this fight is the brutal killing of the innocent , allowing voters to see the radicalized left ’ s full program .
The stakes in this election should not be centered on the candidates ’ personalities but the irreversible implementation of a leftist program that wants the destruction of the Christian moral order .
Thinking beyond abortion also means starting to imagine a Christian worldview that embraces the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the role of the family , community and the Church .
It means bringing God and His Blessed Mother into the equation for this fight , which is now far beyond any human solution .
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 @ @ @

PETITION: Urge Catholic bishops to refuse Holy Communion to pro-abortion Biden! Sign the petition here.
September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Catholic vote is a key demographic that will decide the 2020 elections. Both parties know this and are making special efforts to reach out to Catholic voters.
However, getting the Catholic vote is more difficult than in the past. A charismatic figure like John F. Kennedy is no longer enough to secure Catholic sympathy. Single issues attractive to Catholics are morphing into more profound debates. The election is less about who will govern and more about how Americans will live and worship. In polarized America, existential questions mean much more than the personality of the candidates.
While Catholics do not vote as a monolithic bloc, the more active and devoted sectors influence the whole beyond their numbers. A growing number lean right after losing their home in the Democratic Party in the late sixties.
Abortion as a Catholic Issue
Over the years, abortion has become a decisive Catholic issue that weighs heavily upon the vote. The Church’s consistent teaching on the matter makes it the logical home for pro-life Americans. Activists who take the issue seriously often end up embracing the Catholic Faith. It is almost a natural consequence of their concern for lives and souls.
While abortion remains a central issue for the Catholic voter, it is no longer a single issue. It opens a Pandora’s box of moral issues that secular liberal politicians would prefer not to address and connect.
Thus, there used to be pro-life “blue-dog” Democrats who resisted the official party line of support for abortion. As long as abortion was a single issue disconnected from any other, such resistance was tolerated within the ranks. That ambiguity ended with the radicalization of the Democratic Party. With every successive election, the Democratic platform doubles down and hardens its position, allowing no opposition and endorsing ever more radical forms of abortion even until birth and including infanticide.
Making Connections with Other Moral Issues
Now, many Catholic voters realize there is something much more sinister behind the Democrats’ refusal to make the least concession to the pro-life cause. They see that abortion is not a single issue but is connected to everything else in the Culture of Death: euthanasia, assisted suicide, homosexuality, transgenderism and even Satanism (which sees in procured abortion a sacrament). The radicalized left no longer hides its anti-Catholic moral program. Rather, it proclaims it.
These Catholics are further alarmed because they see that these anti-life positions will not be optional. Paying for procured abortion and contraception will force them to act against their consciences, as the pro-death forces grow ever bolder. Catholics sense that their freedom to worship the One True God will be threatened should this mentality prevail. Radical ideologies endanger the education and innocence of their children. Big government socialism and communism are not far behind to force this agenda on an unwilling Catholic sector, still stinging from the lockdown/shutdown of their churches during the COVID crisis.
A Dramatic Clash of Worldviews
Opposition to procured abortion unites all those who favor a Christian moral order. Abortion has the advantage of being the dividing issue because there can be no compromise. Its evil is evident. There is no such thing as half an abortion. It is always deadly. It necessarily gives rise to a Culture of Death. Thus, abortion serves as the flash of lightning that instantly illuminates other sinister threats lurking in the darkness.
The issue also unites all those who wish to destroy the moral order, yet it reveals those leftist connections that they would prefer remained hidden. That is why the left hates the abortion issue so much. It forces leftists to radicalize to energize their bases and thus show its true face. When the two sides engage in this fight, the debate becomes a dramatic clash of worldviews.
The Real Debate
Catholic pro-life activists do well to make the election about procured abortion and beyond. To the degree they connect the dots with all the other moral issues, the left must play defense. Catholics need to grill liberal “Catholic” candidates about their pro-abortion irrationality. However, they must go beyond abortion and attack the late Cardinal Bernardin’s “seamless garment” lie and how it provides an umbrella for liberal, socialist, and now even communist issues that buttress the pro-abortion position.
In this way, abortion can serve as a catalyst for the rejection of an evil worldview. The massive polarization has weaponized every aspect of life to the point that nothing seems exempt from the fray. The cause of this polarization is the clash of worldviews. One exposed flank of this fight is the brutal killing of the innocent, allowing voters to see the radicalized left’s full program.
The stakes in this election should not be centered on the candidates’ personalities but the irreversible implementation of a leftist program that wants the destruction of the Christian moral order.
Thinking beyond abortion also means starting to imagine a Christian worldview that embraces the Church’s traditional social teachings about the role of the family, community and the Church. It means bringing God and His Blessed Mother into the equation for this fight, which is now far beyond any human solution.
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


lifesitenews--2020-09-25--‘Great apostasy’: Cardinal analyzes why Netherlands lost Catholic faith in few short decades

September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Why are the tiny Netherlands , whose missionaries represented over 12 percent of Roman Catholic priests and religious bringing the faith to foreign countries around 1960 , today one of the most secularized countries in the world ?
Of all the questions addressed by Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk in his recent book of dialogues with Italian journalist Andrea Galli , this was the one that struck commentators most .
The Cardinal borrowed his answer from a book written in 1947 after a meeting of nine laymen and priests in his own diocese @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit Dutch Catholicism .
In Ferment in the care of souls , these concerned Catholics , he said , “ saw that the bond between Catholics and the Church was no longer based on the contents of the faith.
” “ Membership in the Church was essentially a community factor : one went to Catholic primary school , then to Catholic secondary school , and was a member of Catholic associations , especially in the sports and scouting fields .
One was Catholic for reasons of social belonging , because one grew up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basis of a lived faith , ” Cardinal Eijk remarks .
It was a faith that “ could not withstand such radical culture changes as those of the 1960 ’ s. ” That time of prosperity and growing individualism gradually led to the “ hyper-individualism ” that Cardinal Eijk has more than once pointed out as being at the root of modern-day Holland ’ s rejection of God – as in this interview with LifeSite in May 2019 , many of whose themes are present in his new book , Dio viva in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” ) .
Revealingly , the subtitle of his book is a quote from Saint Luke : “ When the Son of man comes , will He find faith on earth ?
” Prosperity and individualism , planted in a society whose faith was not profound , is certainly part of the story .
It was in the Netherlands that the “ New Catechism ” first took hold , and that a mass exodus of priests took place after 1965 – many left the priesthood to get married , while a large proportion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cardinal Eijk describes the process with striking examples : while he himself received “ an explicit Catechism about Heaven , Hell and Purgatory ” while preparing First Communion at the end of the 1950s , he witnessed how in his last years in High School , in 1967 and 1968 , “ religion class became different , losing all religious content ” – but the classes were given by priests .
“ Everything was discussed : politics , abortion , free love , and people smoked during classes , ” Cardinal Eijk recalled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to teach , and the students would simply be asked no longer to address them as “ Father ” but “ Sir ” when they came back from holidays .
At the beginning of his High School years all the students would go to church on Sundays : “ At the end there were two of us.
” Later on in the book , Cardinal Eijk notes that 385,000 Catholics – a fraction of the 5,000,000 Catholics in the Netherlands at the time – went to church every week in 2003 .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is 52 percent less ” – for 3,882,000 Catholics in total .
“ Less than 50 percent of Catholics have their children baptized.
” No wonder that when Cardinal Eijk took possession of his diocese of Utrecht in 2007 , his first concerns were with financial matters : the Catholic Church relies only on the donations of the faithful and these are dwindling .
Closing churches and parishes that are too expensive to keep up , asking salaried workers to leave , these were the issues that were at the top of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Many of the Catholics who do practice the faith regularly in Utrecht today are immigrants both from inside and outside of Europe .
Cardinal Eijk ’ s story , as his book clearly shows , is that of a seemingly failing church where a mere “ remnant ” of convinced believers is left of a once flourishing community .
In his own diocese , he was compelled to close six out of seven churches .
Sandro Magister quoted Cardinal Eijk ’ s remarks above on the meeting that led to the publication of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But he stops before this remarkable phrase : “ The group that met in Utrecht in 1947 had very clearly foreseen the collapse that would take place in the middle of the 1960s .
One of them wrote about the Catholics of the time : ‘ There are powerful armies that are preparing the great apostasy of the near future , it is a slow and unobserved process.
’ ” One would have liked the journalist of Avvenire , Andrea Galli , who penned the book with Cardinal Eijk , to ask him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far beyond the complaint and the claim that Catholicism was too “ social ” and not centered enough on personal faith in Jesus-Christ .
It suggests that the Modernism and the “ progressivism ” that the Cardinal identifies in the book — in which he affirms that “ the true crisis of the Church in the western world is a crisis of the faith ” — were in fact imposed by distinct driving forces on the Catholic population .
As a Dutch national born and raised in foreign lands to a couple of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ often heard my father describe that collective apostasy in our home country .
I was born in the beginning of the 60s , when both my parents were already over 40 , as the little one of a family of five children .
I would return to the Netherlands with them roughly every two years , and each time it would be clear that the situation had worsened : ordinary , faithful Catholics , often with large families , were going to churches where their priests preached new , un-Catholic ideas , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diminish the belief in the True Presence of Christ in the consecrated Host .
Humanae vitae was institutionally ridiculed by the hierarchy .
I remember a girl cousin , ten years older than myself , coming home to my aunt ’ s house from a parish youth meeting saying that the priest said that it was all right to sleep around .
At eight , I had no idea what she meant , but I realized it was something that was not good , and her words stuck with me until I was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember my father ’ s anger , and his frequent pleading with priests and family to open their eyes to the revolution to which they were blindly submitting .
If truth be told , it seems to me with hindsight that , while perhaps being mere “ social ” Catholics who had but a mechanical knowledge of the faith , many of the Dutch people we knew at the time were so used to following and believing the clergy that they swallowed all the innovations presented by priests who had been revolutionized first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ innovations were less demanding on the moral plane .
Perhaps the new ideas fell on the soil of badly instructed Catholics , of a new generation that had already not been properly catechized – and whose parents were unable to keep them from joining the collective march towards apostasy .
Most of my ( innumerable ) cousins were ten to fifteen years older than myself : it was this set of young adults who were swallowing the poison of heterodoxy , but the poison was distilled by unfaithful priests .
Cardinal Eijk speaks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought about in the Church at the time of , or because of Vatican II ; nor of the liturgical revolution that ransacked our common treasure of worship that was still filling churches when my own parents were young before World War Two , and that sent thousands of Dutch ( and Flemish ) priests and religious to the ends of the earth as missionaries until the 60s .
These remarks by Cardinal Eijk deserve a mention , however : “ One of the intentions of the Vatican Council II was for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which it did , but society for its part has not opened up to the Church .
On the contrary , it has expelled it from public life .
The Church then fell into one of the deepest faith crises in its history and today is not in the best position to transmit the faith to society .
Many lay people and pastors are confused about the contents of the faith .
Only after putting its own house in order will the Church once again be truly capable of evangelizing the world.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such a flourishing Christendom with its generous vocations was a special target for Modernism , a hunting ground for the Devil who wanted to strike hard where he could cause most damage ?
Wim Eijk , born to a Catholic mother and a Baptist father in 1953 , appears not to have been hit by this crisis of the faith .
His touching story of his youth and his fight to defend his faith and even more his priestly vocation within his own family gives rise to beautiful passages in his talks with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies before he finally entered the seminary – the “ classical ” seminary of Rolduc in the Catholic southern province of Limburg – Eijk was ordained a priest in 1983 , after the worst of the Modernist and liturgical revolution had been fought .
He shows how he is a member of a new , more traditional generation of priests , and how he was lucky to have one of the rare traditional parish priests in his hometown when he was young .
It is his serene and steadfast faith , especially in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ core of his priestly life , that stands out most in the pages of Dio vive in Olanda .
Cardinal Eijk describes with passion his love of the Church ’ s daily prayer of the Psalms , that give words to all man ’ s joys , sorrows and interrogations in his relation to God , and that God the Son Himself , Jesus-Christ , prayed when walking on the Holy Land .
Another striking aspect of his book is his knowledge of bioethics and the culture of death .
Cardinal Eijk was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good university career before he entered the seminary , and already he was confronted with euthanasia and abortion requests that he consistently rejected .
He later specialized in bioethics and has fought to defend the Church ’ s stance on abortion and euthanasia , founded on the commandment : “ Thou shalt not kill.
” He also tells how he upheld the Church ’ s teachings against contraception and artificial procreation , even when married couples only use their own reproductive cells .
To Cardinal Eijk , it is clear that today , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical professions – face a kind of “ persecution ” when countering euthanasia and abortion , having to be careful “ not to lose their jobs , ” and he also laments that both these practices have become very widely accepted by doctors of every persuasion .
Cardinal Eijk has closely followed the euthanasia debate that in the Netherlands , dates back to the end of the 1960s , and he is very aware of the “ slippery slope ” that was engaged upon .
But he also shows how in politics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can put a brake on this regressive evolution .
“ The Netherlands now has a government consisting of a right-wing liberal party , a left-wing liberal party — advocate of the 2002 euthanasia law and the legalization of so-called same-sex marriage in 2001 — and also the CDA and the CU .
These last two Christian parties stood in the way of the previous government ’ s plan to pass a law on so-called `` complete life , '' to allow assisted suicide for people who say they are suffering unbearably and without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ causes like loneliness , bereavement , advanced age .
[ … ] Although the liberals in government said they were in favor of approving this legislative proposal , the two Christian parties were able to block it , ” Cardinal Eijk wrote in a passage quoted by Sandro Magister .
He went further , explaining the profound unacceptability of euthanasia : “ Putting an end to life by our own initiative means refusing this most precious gift and is therefore a sign of ingratitude .
Certainly we can and must give our life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very different manner , by imitating Jesus who accepted suffering and death on the Cross .
We can give our life back to God by uniting ourselves to the sacrifice of Jesus.
” This is “ realized most highly in the celebration of the Eucharist , with the sacrifice of the Cross that renews itself in an unbloody but real way , ” he recalled , using the traditional language of the Church regarding the Holy Mass .
Interestingly , when speaking of the Neogothic church of Saint Willibrord that was closed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Saint Pius Xth , Cardinal Eijk said he had “ good relations ” with its clergy .
“ We should not have too high expectations regarding the timing , but I think that at a certain point full and visible union with the Fraternity of Saint Pius Xth will be arrived at , ” he said .
In the same way that he pleads for courageous witness to the truth , even to difficult truths – something “ even some bishops and some priests back away from ” – Cardinal Eijk steadfastly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself embraced primarily as a “ sign of the Kingdom of Heaven ” where there will be no marriage .
As a conclusion to these dialogues , Galli asked Cardinal Eijk whether he thought there is not enough mention of eternal life today .
The Cardinal had already said , regarding the COVID-19 pandemic : “ At the beginning of the Coronavirus crisis I wrote in a message to the community that we were obliged to face an illness for which we had no therapy and no vaccine : the opportunity to realize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is in the hands of God , of Divine Providence .
Let us hope that many will have been able to think about the main questions of life and that they have started to pray again.
” Answering the question about the “ last things , ” Cardinal Eijk was even more explicit .
Recognizing that the theme tends to cause “ a certain embarrassment , ” he added : “ In our sermons , in our catechesis , we must talk about Paradise , about our destiny of glory , of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saved .
Seeing God face to face .
On the other hand , there is Purgatory , and also Hell where one is separated from God – a source of infinite suffering .
“ Our duty is to do everything so that people may not end up in Hell , ” Cardinal Eijk said .
His book is not one of despair despite the many difficulties facing the Church and in particular the Church in the Netherlands where so many have abandoned the faith .
Eijk makes clear that in the younger generation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all her traditional teachings and have a real prayer life : ” Many speak of the danger of a schism , but I think not .
I rather think that what has already happened with us in Holland will happen in many parts of the world .
There has been a silent healing through the turnover of generations .
[ … ] Because who will ultimately remain in the Church ?
The priests and laity of '68 , of those years of disarray , with ultra-progressive ideas , are almost gone .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who pray , who have a personal relationship with Christ.
” But what will be the fate of those who have fallen away ?

Revealingly, the subtitle of his book is a quote from Saint Luke: 'When the Son of man comes, will He find faith on earth?'
September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Why are the tiny Netherlands, whose missionaries represented over 12 percent of Roman Catholic priests and religious bringing the faith to foreign countries around 1960, today one of the most secularized countries in the world? Of all the questions addressed by Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk in his recent book of dialogues with Italian journalist Andrea Galli, this was the one that struck commentators most.
The Cardinal borrowed his answer from a book written in 1947 after a meeting of nine laymen and priests in his own diocese of Utrecht years before a major crisis hit Dutch Catholicism. In the 1947 book Ferment in the care of souls, these concerned Catholics, he said, “saw that the bond between Catholics and the Church was no longer based on the contents of the faith.”
“Membership in the Church was essentially a community factor: one went to Catholic primary school, then to Catholic secondary school, and was a member of Catholic associations, especially in the sports and scouting fields. One was Catholic for reasons of social belonging, because one grew up in Catholic structures, not on the basis of a lived faith,” Cardinal Eijk remarks. It was a faith that “could not withstand such radical culture changes as those of the 1960’s.”
That time of prosperity and growing individualism gradually led to the “hyper-individualism” that Cardinal Eijk has more than once pointed out as being at the root of modern-day Holland’s rejection of God – as in this interview with LifeSite in May 2019, many of whose themes are present in his new book, Dio viva in Olanda (“God lives in Holland”). Revealingly, the subtitle of his book is a quote from Saint Luke: “When the Son of man comes, will He find faith on earth?”
Prosperity and individualism, planted in a society whose faith was not profound, is certainly part of the story. It was in the Netherlands that the “New Catechism” first took hold, and that a mass exodus of priests took place after 1965 – many left the priesthood to get married, while a large proportion of the remaining priests embraced Modernism. Cardinal Eijk describes the process with striking examples: while he himself received “an explicit Catechism about Heaven, Hell and Purgatory” while preparing First Communion at the end of the 1950s, he witnessed how in his last years in High School, in 1967 and 1968, “religion class became different, losing all religious content” – but the classes were given by priests.
“Everything was discussed: politics, abortion, free love, and people smoked during classes,” Cardinal Eijk recalled. Professors left the priesthood but continued to teach, and the students would simply be asked no longer to address them as “Father” but “Sir” when they came back from holidays. At the beginning of his High School years all the students would go to church on Sundays: “At the end there were two of us.”
Later on in the book, Cardinal Eijk notes that 385,000 Catholics – a fraction of the 5,000,000 Catholics in the Netherlands at the time – went to church every week in 2003. “In 2015 there were 186,000, that is 52 percent less” – for 3,882,000 Catholics in total. “Less than 50 percent of Catholics have their children baptized.”
No wonder that when Cardinal Eijk took possession of his diocese of Utrecht in 2007, his first concerns were with financial matters: the Catholic Church relies only on the donations of the faithful and these are dwindling. Closing churches and parishes that are too expensive to keep up, asking salaried workers to leave, these were the issues that were at the top of his agenda in order to avoid bankruptcy. Many of the Catholics who do practice the faith regularly in Utrecht today are immigrants both from inside and outside of Europe. Cardinal Eijk’s story, as his book clearly shows, is that of a seemingly failing church where a mere “remnant” of convinced believers is left of a once flourishing community. In his own diocese, he was compelled to close six out of seven churches.
Sandro Magister quoted Cardinal Eijk’s remarks above on the meeting that led to the publication of Ferment in the care of souls. But he stops before this remarkable phrase:
“The group that met in Utrecht in 1947 had very clearly foreseen the collapse that would take place in the middle of the 1960s. One of them wrote about the Catholics of the time: ‘There are powerful armies that are preparing the great apostasy of the near future, it is a slow and unobserved process.’”
One would have liked the journalist of Avvenire, Andrea Galli, who penned the book with Cardinal Eijk, to ask him to expand on this. It goes far beyond the complaint and the claim that Catholicism was too “social” and not centered enough on personal faith in Jesus-Christ. It suggests that the Modernism and the “progressivism” that the Cardinal identifies in the book — in which he affirms that “the true crisis of the Church in the western world is a crisis of the faith” — were in fact imposed by distinct driving forces on the Catholic population.
As a Dutch national born and raised in foreign lands to a couple of convinced, profoundly faithful Catholics, I often heard my father describe that collective apostasy in our home country. I was born in the beginning of the 60s, when both my parents were already over 40, as the little one of a family of five children. I would return to the Netherlands with them roughly every two years, and each time it would be clear that the situation had worsened: ordinary, faithful Catholics, often with large families, were going to churches where their priests preached new, un-Catholic ideas, and introduced novel liturgical practices that could but diminish the belief in the True Presence of Christ in the consecrated Host. Humanae vitae was institutionally ridiculed by the hierarchy. I remember a girl cousin, ten years older than myself, coming home to my aunt’s house from a parish youth meeting saying that the priest said that it was all right to sleep around. At eight, I had no idea what she meant, but I realized it was something that was not good, and her words stuck with me until I was able to understand them. I also remember my father’s anger, and his frequent pleading with priests and family to open their eyes to the revolution to which they were blindly submitting.
If truth be told, it seems to me with hindsight that, while perhaps being mere “social” Catholics who had but a mechanical knowledge of the faith, many of the Dutch people we knew at the time were so used to following and believing the clergy that they swallowed all the innovations presented by priests who had been revolutionized first – all the more easily that the innovations were less demanding on the moral plane. Perhaps the new ideas fell on the soil of badly instructed Catholics, of a new generation that had already not been properly catechized – and whose parents were unable to keep them from joining the collective march towards apostasy. Most of my (innumerable) cousins were ten to fifteen years older than myself: it was this set of young adults who were swallowing the poison of heterodoxy, but the poison was distilled by unfaithful priests.
Cardinal Eijk speaks little in his book of the revolution brought about in the Church at the time of, or because of Vatican II; nor of the liturgical revolution that ransacked our common treasure of worship that was still filling churches when my own parents were young before World War Two, and that sent thousands of Dutch (and Flemish) priests and religious to the ends of the earth as missionaries until the 60s.
These remarks by Cardinal Eijk deserve a mention, however: “One of the intentions of the Vatican Council II was for the Church to open up to society, which it did, but society for its part has not opened up to the Church. On the contrary, it has expelled it from public life. The Church then fell into one of the deepest faith crises in its history and today is not in the best position to transmit the faith to society. Many lay people and pastors are confused about the contents of the faith. Only after putting its own house in order will the Church once again be truly capable of evangelizing the world.”
But is it absurd to think that such a flourishing Christendom with its generous vocations was a special target for Modernism, a hunting ground for the Devil who wanted to strike hard where he could cause most damage?
Wim Eijk, born to a Catholic mother and a Baptist father in 1953, appears not to have been hit by this crisis of the faith. His touching story of his youth and his fight to defend his faith and even more his priestly vocation within his own family gives rise to beautiful passages in his talks with Galli. Having first embarked in medical studies before he finally entered the seminary – the “classical” seminary of Rolduc in the Catholic southern province of Limburg – Eijk was ordained a priest in 1983, after the worst of the Modernist and liturgical revolution had been fought. He shows how he is a member of a new, more traditional generation of priests, and how he was lucky to have one of the rare traditional parish priests in his hometown when he was young.
It is his serene and steadfast faith, especially in the Eucharist that is clearly at the core of his priestly life, that stands out most in the pages of Dio vive in Olanda. Cardinal Eijk describes with passion his love of the Church’s daily prayer of the Psalms, that give words to all man’s joys, sorrows and interrogations in his relation to God, and that God the Son Himself, Jesus-Christ, prayed when walking on the Holy Land.
Another striking aspect of his book is his knowledge of bioethics and the culture of death. Cardinal Eijk was a doctor with the promise of a good university career before he entered the seminary, and already he was confronted with euthanasia and abortion requests that he consistently rejected. He later specialized in bioethics and has fought to defend the Church’s stance on abortion and euthanasia, founded on the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.” He also tells how he upheld the Church’s teachings against contraception and artificial procreation, even when married couples only use their own reproductive cells. To Cardinal Eijk, it is clear that today, Catholics – especially in the realm of medical professions – face a kind of “persecution” when countering euthanasia and abortion, having to be careful “not to lose their jobs,” and he also laments that both these practices have become very widely accepted by doctors of every persuasion.
Cardinal Eijk has closely followed the euthanasia debate that in the Netherlands, dates back to the end of the 1960s, and he is very aware of the “slippery slope” that was engaged upon. But he also shows how in politics, collaboration of Catholics with certain traditionally-minded Protestants can put a brake on this regressive evolution.
“The Netherlands now has a government consisting of a right-wing liberal party, a left-wing liberal party — advocate of the 2002 euthanasia law and the legalization of so-called same-sex marriage in 2001 — and also the CDA and the CU. These last two Christian parties stood in the way of the previous government’s plan to pass a law on so-called “complete life,” to allow assisted suicide for people who say they are suffering unbearably and without hope of improvement on account of non-medical causes like loneliness, bereavement, advanced age. […] Although the liberals in government said they were in favor of approving this legislative proposal, the two Christian parties were able to block it,” Cardinal Eijk wrote in a passage quoted by Sandro Magister.
He went further, explaining the profound unacceptability of euthanasia: “Putting an end to life by our own initiative means refusing this most precious gift and is therefore a sign of ingratitude. Certainly we can and must give our life back to God, but in a very different manner, by imitating Jesus who accepted suffering and death on the Cross. We can give our life back to God by uniting ourselves to the sacrifice of Jesus.” This is “realized most highly in the celebration of the Eucharist, with the sacrifice of the Cross that renews itself in an unbloody but real way,” he recalled, using the traditional language of the Church regarding the Holy Mass.
Interestingly, when speaking of the Neogothic church of Saint Willibrord that was closed in Utrecht and later bought by the Fraternity of Saint Pius Xth, Cardinal Eijk said he had “good relations” with its clergy. “We should not have too high expectations regarding the timing, but I think that at a certain point full and visible union with the Fraternity of Saint Pius Xth will be arrived at,” he said.
In the same way that he pleads for courageous witness to the truth, even to difficult truths – something “even some bishops and some priests back away from” – Cardinal Eijk steadfastly speaks for priestly celibacy, which he himself embraced primarily as a “sign of the Kingdom of Heaven” where there will be no marriage.
As a conclusion to these dialogues, Galli asked Cardinal Eijk whether he thought there is not enough mention of eternal life today.
The Cardinal had already said, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic:
“At the beginning of the Coronavirus crisis I wrote in a message to the community that we were obliged to face an illness for which we had no therapy and no vaccine: the opportunity to realize once again the fact that our life is in the hands of God, of Divine Providence. Let us hope that many will have been able to think about the main questions of life and that they have started to pray again.”
Answering the question about the “last things,” Cardinal Eijk was even more explicit. Recognizing that the theme tends to cause “a certain embarrassment,” he added:
“In our sermons, in our catechesis, we must talk about Paradise, about our destiny of glory, of the beatific vision that awaits those who are saved. Seeing God face to face. On the other hand, there is Purgatory, and also Hell where one is separated from God – a source of infinite suffering.
“Our duty is to do everything so that people may not end up in Hell,” Cardinal Eijk said.
His book is not one of despair despite the many difficulties facing the Church and in particular the Church in the Netherlands where so many have abandoned the faith. Eijk makes clear that in the younger generation, those who come to Church accept all her traditional teachings and have a real prayer life: “Many speak of the danger of a schism, but I think not. I rather think that what has already happened with us in Holland will happen in many parts of the world. There has been a silent healing through the turnover of generations. […] Because who will ultimately remain in the Church? The priests and laity of '68, of those years of disarray, with ultra-progressive ideas, are almost gone. In Holland there are still those who believe, who pray, who have a personal relationship with Christ.”
But what will be the fate of those who have fallen away?
Follow Jeanne Jeanne Smits has worked as a journalist in France since 1987 after obtaining a Master of Arts in Law. She formerly directed the French daily Présent and was editor-in-chief of an all-internet French-speaking news site called reinformation.tv. She writes regularly for a number of Catholic journals (Monde & vie, L’Homme nouveau, Reconquête…) and runs a personal pro-life blog. In addition, she is often invited to radio and TV shows on alternative media. She is vice-president of the Christian and French defense association “AGRIF.” She is the French translator of The Dictator Pope by Henry Sire and Christus Vincit by Bishop Schneider, and recently contributed to the Bref examen critique de la communion dans la main about Communion in the hand. She is married and has three children, and lives near Paris.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-09-25--Airport uses dogs to sniff out COVID-infected passengers

Finland September 25 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The Scandinavian country of Finland is using dogs which they claim can detect COVID-19 “ with almost 100 % certainty ” to screen passengers arriving at Helsinki ’ s airport .
According to a press release from Finavia , which is a Finnish airport operator , the coronavirus-sniffing dogs will only be used to detect the virus voluntarily and can deliver results “ within 10 seconds.
” “ Detecting covid-19 is easy for dogs and results have been encouraging .
According to preliminary tests conducted by a research group at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , dogs are able to smell the virus with almost 100 % certainty , ” says the press release from Finavia .
“ They can also identify the virus days before the symptoms have even started .
This is something that laboratory tests fail to do.
” The pilot program was launched this past Wednesday and will see those who “ voluntarily ” agree to a COVID-19 test from a dog take a swab on their necks to produce a sample of sweat .
Those agreeing to a test will have no direct @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then be passed on to a dog via a small opening so the animal can have a smell .
“ Service is voluntary and primarily targeted for passengers arriving from abroad , ” said the Helsinki Airport on Twitter Wednesday .
A pilot study on scent dogs identifying samples from COVID-19 patients , published in BMC Infectious Diseases in July , found that the dogs achieved an overall average detection rate of about 94 percent .
Reaction to the Helsinki Airport tweet was mixed , with one Twitter user asking why dogs have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ airports .
“ It took covid-19 to start trials like these - meanwhile , some people have been traveling around NOT KNOWING they had CANCER for years when similar detection trials could 've been implemented , ” wrote the Twitter user @ naudmad .
Should a dog detect the virus in an individual , the person will be “ encouraged ” to take a polymerase chain reaction ( PCR ) COVID-19 test , as a test by a dog has not yet been approved by the Finnish government as an official method to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ airport sniffing canines are trained by Wise Nose .
Nose Academy , with four dogs working per shift , and a total of 10 dogs being trained .
The use of dogs to detect disease is not new , as canines are used to detect cancer and other bacterial diseases in many circumstances .
Other nations such as Germany and the United Arab Emirates used dogs to detect the coronavirus at airports .
A trial in Dubai over the summer found that dogs could detect with 91 percent accuracy COVID-19 through people ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have begun to test arriving passengers for COVID-19 .
In June , a US company rolled out ‘ health pass ’ app to block ‘ unhealthy ’ users from airports and the workplace .

Finland is using dogs at its nation’s largest airport to see who has COVID-19
PETITION: No to radical mandatory mask mandates! Sign the petition here.
Finland September 25, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The Scandinavian country of Finland is using dogs which they claim can detect COVID-19 “with almost 100% certainty” to screen passengers arriving at Helsinki’s airport.
According to a press release from Finavia, which is a Finnish airport operator, the coronavirus-sniffing dogs will only be used to detect the virus voluntarily and can deliver results “within 10 seconds.”
“Detecting covid-19 is easy for dogs and results have been encouraging. According to preliminary tests conducted by a research group at the Veterinary Faculty of the University of Helsinki, dogs are able to smell the virus with almost 100% certainty,” says the press release from Finavia.
“They can also identify the virus days before the symptoms have even started. This is something that laboratory tests fail to do.”
The pilot program was launched this past Wednesday and will see those who “voluntarily” agree to a COVID-19 test from a dog take a swab on their necks to produce a sample of sweat. Those agreeing to a test will have no direct contact with dogs.
This sample will then be passed on to a dog via a small opening so the animal can have a smell.
“Service is voluntary and primarily targeted for passengers arriving from abroad,” said the Helsinki Airport on Twitter Wednesday.
A pilot study on scent dogs identifying samples from COVID-19 patients, published in BMC Infectious Diseases in July, found that the dogs achieved an overall average detection rate of about 94 percent.
Reaction to the Helsinki Airport tweet was mixed, with one Twitter user asking why dogs have not been used to detect cancer at airports.
“It took covid-19 to start trials like these – meanwhile, some people have been traveling around NOT KNOWING they had CANCER for years when similar detection trials could've been implemented,” wrote the Twitter user @naudmad.
Should a dog detect the virus in an individual, the person will be “encouraged” to take a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) COVID-19 test, as a test by a dog has not yet been approved by the Finnish government as an official method to detect the virus.
The Finnish COVID-19 airport sniffing canines are trained by Wise Nose. Nose Academy, with four dogs working per shift, and a total of 10 dogs being trained.
The use of dogs to detect disease is not new, as canines are used to detect cancer and other bacterial diseases in many circumstances.
Other nations such as Germany and the United Arab Emirates used dogs to detect the coronavirus at airports.
A trial in Dubai over the summer found that dogs could detect with 91 percent accuracy COVID-19 through people’s sweat samples.
Many airports globally have begun to test arriving passengers for COVID-19.
In June, a US company rolled out ‘health pass’ app to block ‘unhealthy’ users from airports and the workplace.
Share