| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 282 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 280 Guest(s)
Bing, Google
|
| Latest Threads |
Our Lady of Good Remedy -...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Today, 08:21 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 47
|
Oratory of the Sorrowful ...
Forum: Contact Information for Fr. Hewko
Last Post: Stone
Today, 07:29 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 76
|
Infanticide is real, Cath...
Forum: Against the Children
Last Post: Stone
Today, 06:39 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 47
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Twen...
Forum: October 2024
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 08:51 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 187
|
Our Fr. Hewko's Sermons:...
Forum: October 2024
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 12:47 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 76
|
New Cardinals: Mostly Unk...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:13 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 91
|
Please Pray for Bishop Ti...
Forum: Appeals for Prayer
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:10 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 473
|
Feast of the Holy Rosary ...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:07 AM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 16,532
|
Daily offering of the Ble...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:03 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 2,908
|
Twentieth Sunday after Pe...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:01 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 12,552
|
|
|
| Father Michael Müller: Questions and Answers on Salvation 1875 |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-18-2021, 07:53 AM - Forum: Church Doctrine & Teaching
- No Replies
|
 |
Questions and Answers on Salvation
Editor’s Note: Father Michael Müller was one of the most widely read theologians of the 19th Century. He ranks as one of the greatest defenders of the dogma “Outside the Church there is no salvation” in modern times. Father Müller always submitted his works to two Redemptorist theologians and to his religious superiors before publication, thus we are sure of the doctrinal soundness of his teachings. This article, first published in 1875, is one of the finest treatments of the doctrinal truth that Our Lord founded one true Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation. Father Muller’s firm writings are desperately needed in our time when this doctrine is denied by those who are the most influential members of our Holy Church. We publish Father Müller’s excellent little Catechism as an antidote to the prevalent religious indifferentism — an indifferentism that is the direct result of what Blessed Pius IX denounced as “Liberal Catholicism”.
1. Do all admit that the Catholic Church is the first and the oldest Church, and, consequently the Church established by Jesus Christ?
That the Catholic Church is the first and oldest and consequently the Church established by Jesus Christ, is and must be admitted by all, because it is a fact clearly proven by Scripture and by history.
2. Who bear witness to this fact?
The Jews and the Gentiles bear witness to it, and even Protestants themselves acknowledge it, because, if asked why they call themselves Protestants, they answer: “Because we protest against the Catholic Church.”
3. What follows from this answer?
That the Catholic Church is older than Protestantism; otherwise they could not have protested against her.
4. If we go still further back and ask the Greek Church how they came into existence, what will be their answer?
The Greek Church must answer: “We began by separating from the Catholic Church in the 9th Century.”
5. What follows from this?
That the Catholic Church existed for eight hundred years before the Greek Church began, and consequently, it is older than the Greek Church.
6. If we thus go back to the very days of the Apostles, what do we find everywhere in regard to the manner in which religious sects arose?
If we go back to the days of the Apostles, we find that every sect separated from the Catholic Church, and therefore we see Calvinists, Kilhamites, Quakers, Shakers, Panters, Seekers, Jumpers, Reformed Methodists, German Methodists, Wesleyan Methodists, Baptists, Particular Baptists, Hardshell Baptists, Softshell Baptists, Forty- Gallon Baptists, Sixty- Gallon Baptists, Mennonites, Millerites, Universalists, Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Mormons, Christian Perfectionists, etc., etc., etc.
7. Is it not all the same to God whatever religion a person professes?
If it were all the same to God whatever religion a person professes, God would not have forbidden, in the First Commandment, to worship Him in any other than in the true religion. Nor would Christ have solemnly declared: “He who will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican.” (Matt. 18:17)
8. Who, then, will be saved?
Christ has solemnly declared that only those will be saved who have done God’s will on earth as explained, not by private interpretation, but by the infallible teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. “Not everyone,” says Christ, “who saith to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven; but he that doth the will of My Father Who is in Heaven, he shall enter the kingdom of Heaven.” (Matt. 7:21) The will of the heavenly Father is that all men hear and believe His Son, Jesus Christ. “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him.” (Luke 9:35)
Now Jesus Christ said to His Apostles and to all their lawful successors: “He that heareth you heareth Me, and he that despiseth you despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him, the heavenly Father, that sent Me.” Hence all those who do not listen to Jesus Christ speaking to them through Saint Peter and the Apostles in their lawful successors, despise God the Father. They do not do His will, and therefore Heaven will never be theirs.
9. Must, then, all who wish to be saved, die united to the Catholic Church?
All those who wish to be saved, must die united to the Catholic Church. For out of her there is no salvation, because only she teaches what Jesus Christ requires of everyone to be saved, and because only to her did Christ leave the means to obtain all the graces necessary for salvation. Hence Jesus said to His Apostles and to all their lawful successors: “Go and teach all nations: teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. He that believeth not all these things shall be condemned.”
Our Divine Savior says: “No one can come to the Father, except through Me.” If we then wish to enter Heaven, we must be united to Christ — to His [Mystical] Body, which is the Church, as Saint Paul says. Therefore, outside the Church there is no salvation.
Again, Jesus Christ says: “Whoever will not hear the Church, look upon him as a heathen and a publican,” a great sinner. Therefore outside the Church there is no salvation.
Holy Scripture says: “The Lord added daily to the Church such as should be saved.” (Acts 2:47) Therefore the Apostles believed and the Holy Scriptures teach that there is no salvation out of the Church.
10. What did Saint Augustine and the other bishops of Africa, at the Council of Zirta, in 412, say about the salvation of those who die outside the Roman Catholic Church?
“Whosoever,” they said, “is separated from the Catholic Church, however commendable in his own opinion his life may be, he shall for the very reason that he is separated from the union of Christ not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.” (John 3:36)
11. What does Saint Cyprian say about the salvation of those who die outside of the Roman Catholic Church?
Saint Cyprian says: “He who has not the Church for his mother cannot have God for his Father.” And with him the Fathers of the Church in general say that, “as all those who were not in the ark of Noah perished in the waters of the deluge, so shall perish all who are out of the true Church.”
12. Who are out of the pale of the Roman Catholic Church?
Out of the pale of the Roman Catholic Church are all unbaptized and all excommunicated persons, all apostates, unbelievers, and heretics.
Infidels and Apostates
13. How do we know that unbaptized persons are not saved?
That unbaptized persons are not saved, we know from Christ, Who said: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5.) For God cannot unite Himself to such souls in Heaven on account of Original Sin, with which they are defiled.
14. How do we know that persons justly excommunicated, who are unwilling to do what is required of them before they are absolved, are not saved?
Persons justly excommunicated, who are not willing to do what is required of them before they are absolved, are not saved, because the sin of great scandal, for which they were as dead members expelled from the communion of the Church, excludes them from the kingdom of Heaven.
15. Which Catholics are excommunicated?
All those Catholics are excommunicated, who are members of secret societies, which have been excommunicated [condemned] by the Church, such as Freemasonry, and other societies affiliated with it under various names.
16. Why have several Popes solemnly excommunicated all Freemasonry?
All Freemasons have been solemnly excommunicated by several Popes on account of the main object and spirit of Freemasonry, to establish heathenism or the Church of Satan all over the world:
a) By upsetting governments to obtain for themselves the power of governing and making impious laws for their subjects;
b) By trying to overthrow the Catholic Church, which teaches and maintains the rights and laws of God and civil society;
c) By spreading immoral and impious principles through the infidel press and other satanic means;
d) By establishing public schools for the infidel education of youth.
17. Is this main object and spirit known to all Freemasons?
This satanic object and spirit is known only to the members of the highest grades of Freemasonry. But it is sufficiently known to all from the works and speeches of Freemasons, and therefore every member, even of the lowest grade, is guilty of the foul deeds of this satanic society.
18. How do we know that apostates are not saved?
Apostates from the Catholic Faith are not saved, because to fall away from the Faith is a great sin, which makes one lose the kingdom of Heaven.1
19. How many kinds of infidels or unbelievers are there?
There are three kinds of infidels or unbelievers: (a) Those who are guilty of the sin of infidelity; (b) those who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity, but commit other great sins; and © those who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity, and live up to the dictates of their conscience.
20. What kind of infidels are guilty of the sin of infidelity?
All those unbaptized persons are guilty, who do not embrace the true religion, although the truths thereof have been sufficiently made known to them — like many of the Jews of whom our Lord said that they had no excuse for their sins, because He had spoken to them.
All those unbaptized persons are guilty, who have received sufficient light to know the truth, or at least to understand the danger of their position, and the obligation of making diligent inquiries to ascertain and embrace the truth, but neglect to do so.
And all those are guilty of the sin of infidelity, who willfully deny the truth and obstinately resist it.
21. Why is it that positive infidels are not saved?
Positive infidels are not saved because, “positive infidelity, being willful obstinacy, palpable contradiction, and public contempt of divine revelation and of the precepts of the Gospel, is one of the most grievous sins in the sight of God and of His Holy Church,” says Saint Thomas Aquinas.
22. Explain the grievousness of the sin of infidelity.
Mortal sin is a deviation from virtue and divine law. The most heinous sin, therefore, is that which separates man from God more than any other. Now, no sin causes a greater separation from God than that of positive infidelity. When the intellect is in error and abandons the knowledge of God, the will follows it and increases in malice in proportion as the intellect turns away from the path of truth, justice, and charity. Each step that such a man takes in the darkness of infidelity, increases the distance that separates him from God. A return from that dangerous course is very difficult, for when the intellect is in error and the will is filled with malice and depravity, all the bonds capable of uniting man to God are torn asunder.
If such men die in this disposition of mind they are infallibly lost, says Saint Thomas. “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” (Heb. 11:6)
23. Which kind of infidels are not guilty of the sin of infidelity, but commit other grievous sins?
Those who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity, but commit other grievous sins, are all those unbaptized persons who never had an opportunity of knowing the true religion, or of becoming aware of the obligation of seeking and embracing it, but who do not live up to the dictates of their conscience.
24. Will this class of infidels be lost?
This class of infidels will be lost, not on account of their infidelity, which was no sin for them, but on account of other grievous sins which they committed against their conscience. “For whosoever have sinned without the law,” says Saint Paul, “shall perish without the law.” (Romans 2:12)
25. Will those infidels be lost, who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity and live up to their conscience?
Of those infidels who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity and are faithful in obeying the voice of their conscience, Saint Thomas Aquinas says: “If anyone was brought up in the wilderness or among brute beasts, and if he followed the law of nature to desire what is good, and to avoid what is wicked, we should certainly believe that God, by an inward inspiration, would reveal to him what he should believe, or would send someone to preach the Faith to him, as He sent Peter to Cornelius.”
Heresy Explained
26. What is the meaning of the word “heretic”?
The word “heretic” is derived from the Greek, and means “a chooser.”
27. What is a heretic?
A heretic is any baptized person, professing Christianity, and choosing for himself what to believe and what not to believe as he pleases, in obstinate opposition to any particular truth which he knows is taught by the Catholic Church as a truth revealed by God.
28. How many things, then, are required to make a person guilty of the sin of heresy?
To make a person guilty of the sin of heresy, three things are required:
a) He must be baptized and profess Christianity. This distinguishes him from a Jew and idolater;
b) He must refuse to believe a truth revealed by God, and taught by the Church as so revealed;
c) He must obstinately adhere to error, preferring his own private judgment in matters of faith and morals to the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church.
29. How many kinds of heretics (Protestants) are there?
There are three kinds of heretics:
a) Those who are guilty of the sin of heresy;
b) Those who are not guilty of the sin of heresy, but commit other grievous sins;
c) Those who are not guilty of the sin of heresy and live up to the dictates of their conscience.
30. Who are guilty of the sin of heresy?
Of the sin of heresy are guilty:
a) All those baptized persons, who profess Christianity and obstinately reject a truth revealed by God and taught by the Church as so revealed;
b) Those who embrace an opinion contrary to Faith, maintain it obstinately, and refuse to submit to the authority of the Catholic Church;
c) Those who willfully doubt the truth of an article of Faith, for by such willful doubt they actually question God’s knowledge and truth, and to do this is to be guilty of heresy;
d) Those who know the Catholic Church to be the only true Church, but do not embrace her faith;
e) Those who could know the Church, if they would candidly search, but who, through indifference and other culpable motives, neglect to do so;
f) Those who, like the Anglicans, think that they approach very near the Catholic Church, because their prayers and ceremonies are like many prayers and ceremonies of the Catholic Church, and because their Creed is the Apostles’ Creed. These are heretics in principle, for, “The real character of rank heresy,” says St. Thomas Aquinas, “consists in want of submission to the divine teaching authority in the Head of the Church.”
31. Why are true heretics lost?
True heretics are lost because by rejecting the divine teacher — the Catholic Church — they reject all divine teaching, to do which is one of the greatest sins. Hence Pope Pius IX spoke of Protestantism in all its forms as “the great revolt against God,” it being an attempt to substitute a human for a divine authority, and a declaration of the creature’s independence from the Creator. For this reason Holy Scripture condemns heresy in the strongest terms. “A man,” says St. Paul, “that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid; knowing that he who is such a one is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgment.” (Tit. 3:10-11) And again he says: “Though we, or an angel from Heaven, preach a Gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema,” that is, “accursed”. (Gal. 1:8)
Heretics are lost because they have no divine Faith. “To reject but one article of Faith taught by the Church,” says St. Thomas Aquinas, “is enough to destroy Faith, as one mortal sin is enough to destroy Charity. For the virtue of Faith does not consist merely in adhering to the Holy Scriptures, and in revering them as the Word of God; it consists principally in submitting our intellect and will to the divine authority of the true Church charged by Jesus Christ to expound them. “I would not believe the Holy Scriptures,” says St. Augustine, “were it not for the divine authority of the Church.” He, therefore, who despises and rejects this authority, cannot have true Faith. If he admits some supernatural truths, they are but simple opinions, as he makes those truths depend on his private judgment.
And as divine Faith is the beginning of salvation, the foundation and source of justification, and is found only in the true Church, it is clear that there is no salvation for one as long as he is a heretic.
Heresy Denies All Faith
32. Have heretics faith in Jesus Christ?
Saint Thomas Aquinas says: “It is absurd for a heretic to say that he believes in Jesus Christ. To believe in a person is to give our full consent to His word and to all He teaches. True Faith, therefore, is absolute belief in Jesus Christ and in all He taught. Hence, he who does not adhere to all that Jesus Christ has prescribed for our salvation, has no more the doctrine of Jesus Christ and of His Church, than the pagans, Jews, and Turks have.” “He is,” says Jesus Christ, “but a heathen and a publican”; and therefore he will be condemned to hell.
33. Show how Protestants have no absolute faith in Christ.
Jesus Christ says: “Hear the Church.” “No,” say Luther and all Protestants, “do not hear the Church; protest against her with all your might.”
Jesus Christ says: “If anyone will not hear the Church, look upon him as a heathen and a publican.” “No,” says Protestantism, “if anyone does not hear the Church, look upon him as an apostle, an ambassador of God.”
Jesus Christ says: “The gates of hell shall not prevail against My Church.” “No,” says Protestantism. “ ’Tis false, the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church for a thousand years and more.”
Jesus Christ has declared Saint Peter and every successor to Saint Peter — the Pope — to be His Vicar on earth. “No,” says Protestantism, “the Pope is anti- Christ”.
Jesus Christ says: “My yoke is sweet, and My burden light.” (Matt. 11:30) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “it is impossible to keep the Commandments.”
Jesus Christ says: “if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” (Matt. 19:17) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “faith alone, without good works, is sufficient to enter into life everlasting.”
Jesus Christ says: “Unless you do penance, you shall all likewise perish.” (cf. Luke 13:3) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “fasting and other works of penance are not necessary in satisfaction for sin.”
Jesus Christ says: “This is My Body.” “No,” said Calvin, “this is only the figure of Christ’s Body; it will become His Body as soon as you receive It.”
Jesus Christ says: “I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.” (Matt. 19:9) “No,” say Luther and all Protestants, to a married man, “you may put away your wife, get a divorce, and marry another.”
Jesus Christ says to every man: “Thou shalt not steal.” “No,” said Luther to secular princes, “I give you the right to appropriate to yourselves the property of the Roman Catholic Church.”
34. Do heretics speak in this manner also of the Holy Ghost and the Apostles?
They do. The Holy Ghost says in Holy Scripture: “Man knoweth not whether he be worthy of love or hatred.” (Eccles. 9:1) “Who can say: My heart is clean, I am pure from sin?” (Prov. 20:9) And, “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philip. 2:12) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “but whosoever believes in Jesus Christ, is in the state of grace.”
Saint Paul says: “If I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.” (1 Cor. 13:2) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “faith alone is sufficient to save us.”
Saint Peter says that in the Epistles of Saint Paul there are many things “hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as also the other Scriptures, to their own perdition.” (2 Pet. 3:16) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “the Scriptures are very plain, and easy to be understood.”
Saint James says: “Is anyone sick among you? Let him bring in the priests of the Church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil, in the name of the Lord.” (Chapter 5, verse 14) “No,” said Luther and Calvin, “that is a vain and useless ceremony.”
35. Now, do you think God the Father will admit into Heaven those who thus contradict His Son Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, and the Apostles?
No, He will let them have their portion with Lucifer in hell, who first rebelled against Christ, and who is the father of liars.
36. Can a Christian be saved, who has left the true Church of Christ, the Holy Catholic Church?
No, because the Church of Christ is the kingdom of God on earth, and he who leaves that kingdom, shuts himself out from the kingdom of Christ in Heaven.
37. Have Protestants left the true Church of Christ?
Protestants left the true Church of Christ in their founders, who left the Catholic Church either through pride or through the passion of lust and covetousness.
38. What will be the punishment of those who willfully rebel against the Holy Catholic Church?
Those who willfully rebel against the Holy Catholic Church, will, like Lucifer and the other rebellious angels, be cast into the everlasting flames of hell. “He who will not hear the Church,” says Christ, “let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.” (Matt. 18:17)
39. But if a Protestant should say: “I have nothing to do with Luther or Calvin or Henry VIII or John Knox, I go by the Bible,” what would you answer him?
In that case, you adopt, and go by, the principles and spirit of the authors of heresies, and you change the written Word of God into the word of man, because you interpret Holy Scripture in your own private manner, giving it that meaning which you choose to give it, and thus, instead of believing the Word of God, you believe rather your own private interpretation of it, which is but the word of man. Hence, Saint Augustine says: “You who believe what you please, and reject what you please, believe yourselves or your own fancy rather than the Gospel.”
Inculpable Ignorance
40. Which Protestants are not guilty of the sin of heresy, but commit other great sins?
Those who are Protestants without their fault and who never had an opportunity of knowing better, are not guilty of the sin of heresy; but if they do not live up to the dictates of their conscience, they will be lost, not on account of their heresy, which for them was no sin, but on account of other grievous sins which they committed.
41. Will those heretics be saved, who are not guilty of the sin of heresy, and are faithful in living up to the dictates of their conscience?
Inculpable ignorance of the true religion excuses a heathen from the sin of infidelity, and a Protestant from the sin of heresy. But such ignorance has never been the means of salvation. From the fact that a person who lives up to the dictates of his conscience, and who cannot sin against the true religion on account of being ignorant of it, many have drawn the false conclusion that such a person is saved, or, in other words, is in the state of sanctifying grace, thus making ignorance a means of salvation or justification.
If we sincerely wish not to make great mistakes in explaining the great revealed truth, “Out of the Church there is no salvation,” we must remember:
a) That there are four great truths2 of salvation, which everyone must know and believe in order to be saved;
b) That no one can go to Heaven unless he is in the state of sanctifying grace;
c) That, in order to receive sanctifying grace, the soul must be prepared for it by divine Faith, Hope, Charity, true sorrow for sin with the firm purpose of doing all that God requires the soul to believe and to do, in order to be saved;
d) That this preparation of the soul cannot be brought by inculpable ignorance. And if such ignorance cannot even dispose the soul for receiving the grace of justification, it can much less give this grace to the soul. Inculpable ignorance has never been a means of grace or salvation, not even for the inculpably ignorant people that live up to their conscience. But of this class of ignorant persons we say, with Saint Thomas Aquinas, that God in His mercy will lead these souls to the knowledge of the necessary truths of salvation, even send them an angel, if necessary, to instruct them, rather than let them perish without their fault. If they accept this grace, they will be saved as Catholics.
Other Questions
42. But is it not a very uncharitable doctrine to say that no one can be saved out of the Church?
On the contrary, it is a very great act of charity to assert most emphatically, that out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation possible; for Jesus Christ and His Apostles have taught this doctrine in very plain language. He who sincerely seeks the truth is glad to hear it, and embrace it, in order to be saved.
43. But is it not said in Holy Scripture: “He that feareth God, and worketh justice, is acceptable to Him?”
This is true. But we must remember that he who fears God, will also believe all the truths that God has revealed, as Cornelius did. (Acts, Chapter 10) He believes Jesus Christ when He speaks to us through the pastors of His Church. But he who does not believe all the truths that God has revealed, but instead believes and rejects whatever he chooses, does not fear God, and cannot work justice. “He that believeth not the Son of God” — Jesus Christ — “maketh Him a liar,” says Saint John (1 John 5:10); and will, on this account, be condemned to hell.
44. But are there not many who would lose the affections of their friends, their comfortable homes, their temporal goods, and prospects in business, were they to become Catholics? Would not Jesus Christ excuse them, under such circumstances, from becoming Catholics?
As to the affection of friends, Jesus Christ has solemnly declared: “He who loveth father or mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy of Me.” (Matt. 10:37) And as to the loss of temporal gain He has answered: “What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his soul?” (Mark 8:36)
45. But would it not be enough for such a one to be a Catholic in heart only, without professing his religion publicly?
No, for Jesus Christ has solemnly declared that, “He who shall be ashamed of Me and My words, of him the Son of Man shall be ashamed when He shall come in His majesty, and that of His Father, and of the holy angels.” (Luke 9:26)
46. But might not such a one safely put off being received into the Church till the hour of death?
To put off being received into the Church till the hour of death is to abuse the mercy of God, and to expose oneself to the danger of losing the light and grace of Faith, and die a reprobate.
47. What else keeps many from becoming Catholics?
Many know very well that, if they become Catholics, they must lead honest and sober lives, be pure, and check their sinful passions, and this they are unwilling to do. “Men love darkness rather than light,” says Jesus Christ, “because their deeds are evil.” There are none so deaf as those that will not hear.
48. What follows from the fact that salvation can be found only in the Roman Catholic Church?
It follows that it is very impious for anyone to think and to say that it matters little what a man believes provided he be an honest man.
49. What answer can you give to a man who speaks thus?
A man who says, “it matters little what a man believes, provided he be an honest man,” I would ask whether or not he believed that his honesty and justice were so great as that of the Scribes and Pharisees in the Gospel. They were constant in prayer; they paid tithes according to the law, gave great alms, fasted twice a week, and compassed the sea and land to make a convert and bring him to the knowledge of the true God.
50. What did Jesus Christ say of this justice of the Pharisees?
He says: “Unless your justice shall exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” (Matt. 5:20)
51. Was, then, the righteousness of the Pharisees very defective in the sight of God?
The righteousness of the Pharisees was most undoubtedly very defective. Their righteousness was all outward show and ostentation. They did good only to be praised and admired by men; but within their souls they were full of impurity and malice. They were lewd hypocrites, who concealed great vices under the beautiful appearance of love for God, charity to the poor, and severity to themselves. Their devotion consisted in exterior acts, and they despised all who did not live as they did. They were strict in the religious observances of human traditions, but scrupled not to violate the Commandments of God.
52. What are we then to think of those who say: “It matters little what a man believes, provided he be honest?”
Of those who say this, we think that their exterior honesty, like that of the Pharisees, may be sufficient to keep them out of prison, but not out of hell.
Pius IX Answers
53. But did not Pope Pius IX say that all men, however alienated from Catholic union they remain, are alike in the way of salvation and may obtain life everlasting?
To this calumnious report of certain newspapers, Pope Pius IX replied: “in our times, many of the enemies of the Catholic Faith direct their efforts towards placing every monstrous opinion on the same level with the doctrine of Christ, or confounding it therewith; and so they try more and more to propagate that impious system of the indifference of religions. But quite recently — we shudder to say — certain men have not hesitated to slander us by saying that we share in their folly, favor that most wicked system, and think so benevolently of every class of mankind as to suppose that not only the sons of the Church, but that the rest also, however alienated from Catholic unity they may remain, are alike in the way of salvation, and may arrive at everlasting life. We are at a loss, from horror, to find words to express our detestation of this new and atrocious injustice that is done us.
“We love, indeed, all mankind with the inmost affection of our heart, yet not otherwise than in the love of God and our Lord Jesus Christ, Who came to seek and to save that which had perished, Who died for all, Who wills all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth; Who, therefore, sent His disciples into the whole world to preach the Gospel to every creature, proclaiming that those who should believe and be baptized should be saved, but that those who should not believe should be condemned.
“Let those, therefore, who wish to be saved, come to the pillar and the ground of Faith, which is the Church; let them come to the true Church of Christ, which, in her bishops and in the Roman Pontiff, the chief head of all, has the succession of apostolical authority which has never been interrupted, which has never counted anything of greater importance than to preach, and by all means to keep and defend the doctrine proclaimed by the Apostles at Christ’s command.” (Allocution to the Cardinals held on December 17, 1847)
54. What conclusion, therefore, should every non-Catholic draw from this conviction?
From this conviction, every non-Catholic should draw the practical conclusion to become a Catholic. For when there is a question about eternal salvation and eternal damnation, a sensible man will take the surest way to Heaven.
Notes:
1) Apostasy, or the falling away from the true Faith, is a kind of infidelity. As the virtue of true faith unites us with God, so the sin of apostasy separates us from Him. As the real loss of faith is a total separation from God and His Holy Church, it is called apostasy of perfidy. Whoever is guilty of this kind of apostasy, is deprived of grace and of all other means of salvation, for, “Faith is the life of the soul: the just man lives by faith.” (Rom. 1: 17) “When the soul, the life of the body,” says Saint Thomas Aquinas, “has left the body, all its natural powers and physical organization begin to be dissolved. In like manner, when true faith, the life of the soul is totally destroyed, a mortal disorder, a spiritual contagion, pervades all the members and faculties of the body, which are the instruments of the soul.” Hence it is, that the apostate uses every faculty of his soul and body to pervert others, by inducing them to renounce the Faith which he himself has renounced to his own perdition. “It had been better for them (heretics and apostates) not to have known the way of justice than, after having known it, to turn away from it.” (2 Peter 2: 21) “Woe to you ungodly men,” says Holy Writ, “woe to you who have forsaken the law of the Most High Lord! If you be born, you shall be born in malediction, and if you die, in malediction shall be your position. The ungodly shall pass from malediction to destruction; the name of the ungodly shall be blotted out.” (Eccles. 61:11-14 )
2) Editor’s Note: Father Muller is most likely referring to these four truths: 1) that God is, 2) that He is Remunerator (Rewarder), 3) the Blessed Trinity, 4) the Incarnation.
• • •
Ex Cathedra: "The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire ‘which was prepared for the devil and his angels,’(Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." - Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Feb. 4, 1442.
"We must mention and condemn again that most pernicious error which has been imbibed by certain Catholics who are of the opinion that those people who live in error and have not the true faith and are separated from Catholic unity, may obtain life everlasting. Now this opinion is most contrary to the Catholic faith, as is evident from the plain words of Our Lord, (Matt 18:17; Mark 16:16; Luke 10:16; John 3:18) as also from the words of Saint Paul (2 Tit. 52:11) and of Saint Peter (2 Peter 2:1) To entertain opinions contrary to this Catholic faith is to be an impious wretch." - Blessed Pope Pius IX
|
|
|
| Second Sunday after Easter [Good Shepherd Sunday] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-18-2021, 06:44 AM - Forum: Easter
- Replies (6)
|
|
INSTRUCTION ON THE SECOND SUNDAY AFTER EASTER. [GOOD SHEPARD SUNDAY]
Taken from Fr. Leonard Goffine's Explanations of the Epistles and Gospels for the Sundays, Holydays, and Festivals throughout the Ecclesiastical Year 36th edition, 1880
BECAUSE of the joyous Resurrection of Christ, and the graces flowing to us on account of it, the Church sings at the Introit of the Mass: The earth is full of the mercy of the Lord, alleluia; by the word of the Lord the heavens were established, alleluia, alleluia. Rejoice in the Lord, ye just: praise becometh the upright. (Ps. xxii.) Glory be to the Father, &c.
PRAYER OF THE CHURCH. O God, who in the humility of Thy Son hast raised up a fallen world; grant to Thy faithful a perpetual joyfulness; that whereas Thou hast rescued them from the perils of eternal death, Thou mayest bring them to the fruition of everlasting joy. Through.
EPISTLE. (i Pet. ii. 21 — 25.) Dearly beloved, Christ suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow his steps. Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. Who, when he was reviled, did not revile; when he suffered, he threatened not; but delivered himself to him that judged him unjustly; who his own self bore our sins in his body upon the tree, that we being dead to sins, should live to justice: by whose stripes you were healed. For you were as sheep going astray: but you are now converted to the shepherd and bishop of your souls.
Quote:EXPLANATION. St. Peter teaches the Christians patience in misery and afflictions, even in unjust persecution, and for this purpose places before them the example of Christ who, though most innocent, suffered most terribly and most patiently. Are we true sheep of the good Shepherd if at the smallest cross, at every word, we become angry and impatient?
ASPIRATION. O Lord Jesus! grant me the grace to follow Thee, my good Shepherd, and not to complain and make threats whenever I am reprimanded, reviled or persecuted for justice' sake.
GOSPEL. [John x. n — 16.) At that time, Jesus said to the Pharisees: I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd giveth his life for his sheep. But the hireling, and he that is not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and flieth; and the wolf catcheth and scattereth the sheep: and the hireling flieth, because he is a hireling, and he hath no care for the sheep. I am the good shepherd, and I know mine, and mine know me. As the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for my sheep. And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.
How has Christ proved Himself a good Shepherd?
By sacrificing His life even for His enemies, for those who did not yet love Him, (i John iv. 10; Rom. v. 8.) and could not reward Him. He has besides given Himself to us for our food.
How are we to know if we are among the sheep of Christ, that is, His chosen ones?
If we listen willingly to the voice of the Shepherd in sermons and instructions, in spiritual books and conversations; are obedient to it, and especially give ear and follow the rules of the Church through which the Good Shepherd speaks to us, (Luke x. 16.) "for he," says St. Augustine, "who has not the Church for his mother, will not have God for his father;" if we gladly receive the food of the Good Shepherd, that is, His sacred Body and Blood in holy Communion; if we are patient and meek as a lamb, freely forgiving our enemies; if we love all men from our heart, do good to them, and seek to bring them to Jesus.
Who are the other sheep of Christ?
The Gentiles who were not of the fold of Israel, whom Christ sought to bring by His disciples, and now by their successors, into His fold. — To these sheep we also belonged by our ancestors. O how grateful we should be to God, that He has brought us into the fold of His Church, and how diligently should we conduct ourselves as good sheep!
When will there be but one fold and one shepherd?
When, by the prayers of the Church and by her missionaries, all nations shall be converted to the only saving Church, constituting then one Church under one head. Let us pray that this may soon come to pass.
PRAYER. O Lord Jesus! Thou Good Shepherd who on the cross didst give Thy life for Thy sheep, grant us, we beseech Thee, by Thy death, the grace to be faithful to Thy voice and teachings like obedient lambs that we maybe one day numbered among Thy chosen ones in heaven.
INSTRUCTION ON HOPE.
I lay down my life for my sheep. (John. x. 15.)
What has Christ obtained for us by His death?
THE remission of our sins, the grace to lead a life pleasing to God in this world, and eternal happiness in the next, for which we now firmly hope, with secure confidence may now expect, and most assuredly will obtain, if we do not fail on our part.
In what does eternal happiness consist?
In the beatific vision of God, which includes the most perfect love of Him, by which those who are saved become, as it were, one with Him, possessing in this union every- thing that they can possibly desire.
What are the necessary means of obtaining eternal happiness?
The grace of God, that is, His continual assistance; the practice of the three divine virtues: Faith, Hope and Charity the keeping of God's commandments; the frequent use of the holy Sacraments, and constant prayer. These means must be diligently employed, “For as God who," as St. Augustine says, "created us without us, will not save us without us," that is, without our cooperation.
What may especially enable us to hope for eternal happiness?
The infinite mercy and goodness of God, who from all eternity has loved us more than an earthly mother, and because of this love did not even spare His only-begotten Son, but gave Him up, for our sake, to the most bitter death. Will He then deny us heaven, He who in giving us His Son, has given us more than heaven itself? The fidelity of God: He has so often promised us eternal happiness, and in so many texts of Scripture so clearly explained that He wishes us to be saved, that He must keep His promise, for He is eternal truth and cannot deceive. (Heb. vi. 18.) He says not yes today, and no tomorrow, there is no change in Him, nor shadow of alteration. (James i. 17.) The omnipotence of God, who can do all that He pleases, whom no one can oppose or prevent from doing what He will; if we have confidence in a rich and honest man who assures us he will assist us in need, how much more should we hope in the goodness, fidelity, and omnipotence of God!
When should we make an act of Hope?
As soon as we come to the use of reason and are sufficiently instructed concerning this virtue and its motives; in time of trouble or of severe temptation against this virtue; when receiving the holy Sacraments; every morning and evening, and especially at the hour of death.
The same thing is to be observed in regard to acts of Faith and Love.
|
|
|
|
| Ontario to enforce some of the strictest lockdown measures yet |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-18-2021, 06:36 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- Replies (1)
|
|
Ontario police can stop you just for being outside: Inside the 'strictest' COVID-19 measures in North America
The new orders, which carry a $750 fine for a first offence, effectively confine Ontario's 14 million people to their home, save for a handful of permitted activities
[Canadian] National Post | Apr 16, 2021
Citing rising COVID-19 case numbers, on Friday the Province of Ontario enacted one of the strictest lockdowns yet seen in the Western world, including empowering police to stop and question any person seen outside their home.
“Moving forward, police will have the authority to require any individual who is not in a place of residence to, first, provide their purpose for not being at home, and provide their home address,” said Ontario Solicitor General Sylvia Jones in a livestreamed Friday news conference. She added, “police will also have the authority to stop a vehicle to inquire about an individual’s reason for leaving their residence.”
In a question and answer session following the news conference, Jones clarified that anybody who refused to answer police questions about why they were outside were “breaking the law” and could be fined $750 for a first offence.
The new orders effectively confine Ontario’s 14 million people to their home, save for a handful of permitted activities. “It is imperative that everyone limit their trips outside of the home to permitted purposes only, such as going to the grocery store or pharmacy, medical appointments, outdoor exercise, or for work that cannot be done remotely,” said Jones.
It’s also a departure from January, when Jones’ office had specifically assured the public that police would not be stopping Ontarians simply for being outside. “On its own, being outside is not sufficient evidence of a failure to comply with the stay-at-home order,” a spokesman had said at the time.
Although the new measures would not pass Charter of Rights muster under any conventional circumstances, they are made possible thanks to wide-reaching provisions contained in the Canadian Quarantine Act. The 2005 act specifically empowers warrantless arrests, and allows peace officers to detain anyone they “believe has refused to be isolated or refuses to comply with a measure.”
Accompanying the expansion of law enforcement powers was what Ontario Premier Doug Ford called the “strictest measures in all of North America.” This included a full shutdown of outdoor amenities, including golf courses, basketball courts and playgrounds. Under the prior provisions of the Reopening Ontario Act, anyone caught on a jungle gym until the lifting of the measure can face fines of $750, to an individual maximum of $100,000 and up to a year in jail.
While Ontario had previously allowed outdoor gatherings of up to five people, that has now been limited to “members of one’s own household.”
Jones also announced the partial closure of Ontario’s borders with the rest of Canada. Starting at midnight on Monday, roadblocks at the Manitoba and Quebec borders will now turn away any traveller who can’t prove they are travelling for work, medical care or the exercise of Indigenous treaty rights. “Should an individual not have a valid reason to enter Ontario, they will be turned back,” said Jones.
Although this marks the most consequential intranational border closure since the arrival of COVID-19 to Canada, it is not without precedent. The territory of Nunavut has imposed strict restrictions on the arrival of non-residents during the pandemic. As well, the “Atlantic Bubble,” a travel-restricted area enacted by Canada’s Atlantic provinces, was enforced in part by peace officers stationed on land crossings from Quebec.
The enforced stay-at-home orders are indeed the broadest COVID-19 restrictions yet observed in the Western hemisphere, although they do echo the hard lockdowns observed by New Zealand in the first weeks of the pandemic. Italy has also returned to strict lockdowns following a rise in cases and hospitalizations, and have mobilized 70,000 additional police to enforce it.
|
|
|
|
| The Recusant: What Is Uniformitarianism? |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-17-2021, 06:53 PM - Forum: General Commentary
- Replies (2)
|
|
What Is Uniformitarianism?
Let us turn to the anti-creationist ‘hostile witnesses’ Wikipedia and National Geographic for our evidence, in the hope that it will be less easily dismissed (emphases ours throughout).
Quote:“ ‘Theory of the Earth’ was a publication by James Hutton which laid the foundations for geology. In it he showed [!?] that the Earth is the product of natural forces. What could be seen happening today, over long periods of time, could produce what we see in the rocks. It also hypothesized that the age of the Earth was much older than what biblical literalists claim. This idea, uniformitarianism, was used by Charles Lyell in his work, and Lyell’s textbook was an important influence on Charles Darwin.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_Earth)
Quote:“ ‘Principles of Geology: being an attempt to explain the former changes of the Earth's surface, by reference to causes now in operation’ is a book by the Scottish geologist Charles Lyell that was first published in 3 volumes from 1830 - 1833 … The book established Lyell’s credentials as an important geological theorist and popularized the doctrine of uniformitarianism (first suggested by James Hutton in ‘Theory of the Earth’ published in 1795).
The book is notable for being one of the first to use the term ‘evolution’ in the context of biological speciation. In Lyell’s work, he described the three rules he believes to cause the steady change of the Earth. The first rule is that geologic change comes from slow and continual procedures that have been happening over a long period of time. This rule is the basic ideal of Uniformitarianism […] Lyell’s interpretation of geologic change as the steady accumulation of minute changes over enormously long spans of time, a central theme in the Principles, influenced the 22-year-old Charles Darwin, who was given the first volume of the first edition by Robert FitzRoy, captain of HMS Beagle, just before they set out (December 1831) on the ship’s second voyage. […]
Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology was met with a lot of criticism when it was first published. The main argument against Lyell is that he took an a priori approach in his work. This means that Lyell was pulling from a theoretical idea instead of pulling from empirical evidence to explain what was occurring in the geological world. One opponent of Principles of Geology [on] this point was Adam Sedgwick [who argued] that the evidence of geologic events points to a catastrophic event.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_Geology)
Quote:“The principle of uniformitarianism is essential to understanding Earth’s history. However, prior to 1830, uniformitarianism was not the prevailing theory. […] Among the scientists who agreed with Hutton was Charles Lyell. […] The combined efforts of Lyell and Hutton became the foundation of modern geology. Charles Darwin, the founder of evolutionary biology, looked at uniformitarianism as support for his theory of how new species emerge. The evolution of life, he realized, required vast amounts of time, and the science of geology now showed Earth was extremely old.”(https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyc...itarianism)
|
|
|
|
| Helpful Info For Those Being Bullied By Employer! |
|
Posted by: Scarlet - 04-17-2021, 04:20 PM - Forum: COVID Vaccines
- Replies (1)
|
 |
VERY CRUCIAL: Help If Your Employer Is Trying To Force You To Take A mRNA or JnJ Jab Against Your Will:
source: https://www.exposelockdowns.com/
Hi! A lot of people are coming to me about an employer threatening to fire them if they don’t take the Emergency Authorized inoculation. I’m not a doctor, medical advisor or legal advisor, but I have compiled these resources to help you defend yourself — at least verbally & logically — in explaining to your boss why you don’t want to be forced:
1.) These companies are not liable! The government isn’t liable. The employer trying to force you to take it will most likely not be liable. So who will be liable? No one. You! If you want it, do your thing! But if they’re trying to force you against your will, present them this article & it does a fantastic way of explaining it.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html
2.) So far, they are NOT FDA Approved. It has emergency authorization, but they specifically say it “has not undergone the same type of review as an FDA-approved or cleared product.” Research & feel free to present this to your employer:
Moderna Fact Sheet For Recipients & Caregivers: https://www.fda.gov/media/144638/download
Pfizer-BioNTech Fact Sheet For Recipients & Caregivers: https://www.fda.gov/media/144414/download
The Janssen (J&J) Fact Sheet For Recipients & Caregivers: https://www.fda.gov/media/146305/download
3.) These companies have a history your employer should know about. If your employer is trying to force you, guilt you or financially control you into injecting one against your will — while taking NO LIABILITY for an injection that isn’t FDA Approved, ask them if they’ve heard of this:
REUTERS: “J&J knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder” https://www.reuters.com/investigates/spe...on-cancer/
REUTERS: “Johnson & Johnson sets aside almost $4 billion for talc verdict, filing shows”: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-johns...SKBN2AN07W
CNN (2011): Johnson & Johnson settles U.S. Bribery Charges: https://money.cnn.com/2011/04/08/news/co.../index.htm
Department of Justice (2013): “Johnson & Johnson to Pay More Than $2.2 Billion to Resolve Criminal and Civil Investigations https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/johnson-j...stigations
REUTERS (2012) Pfizer settles foreign bribery case with US government: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pfize...WM20120807
Does your employer want to be liable if they force you to take the jab? These companies aren’t going to be liable.
I believe in freedom & personal choice when it comes to this inoculation. If you want to get it, do your thing! Good luck & God Bless. But this is a resource for those being bullied, pressured or financially forced by their workplace against their will. Please let people know to follow me on Telegram or point a friend/family member to this if they need articles, resources, facts, proof & a sound three step explanation to stand their ground.
|
|
|
|
| Biden-Harris Administration to Ramp Up Experiments Using Aborted Baby Body Parts |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-17-2021, 11:43 AM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Biden-Harris Administration to Ramp Up Experiments Using Aborted Baby Body Parts
In this photo taken Tuesday, Sept. 8, 2015, Cate Dyer, chief executive officer and founder of StemExpress, poses at the company's office in Placerville, Calif.
StemExpress is a broker in human tissue, which includes the fetal tissue that is at the heart of the Planned Parenthood video controversy.
Breitbart | 16 Apr 20210
The Biden-Harris administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced it is reversing the Trump administration’s decision to end taxpayer funding for experimental research that uses fetal tissue derived from aborted babies.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH), an agency under the authority of HHS, announced Friday an “Update on Changes to NIH Requirements Regarding Proposed Human Fetal Tissue Research”:
Quote:On June 5, 2019, HHS announced that NIH intramural research that requires new acquisition of human fetal tissue from elective abortions will not be conducted. Simultaneously, HHS announced new requirements for documentation and review by an Ethics Advisory Board of extramural research applications for NIH grants, cooperative agreements, and R&D contracts proposing the use of human fetal tissue obtained from elective abortions.
…
This notice informs the extramural research community that HHS is reversing its 2019 decision that all research applications for NIH grants and contracts proposing the use of human fetal tissue from elective abortions will be reviewed by an Ethics Advisory Board. Accordingly, HHS/NIH will not convene another NIH Human Fetal Tissue Research Ethics Advisory Board.
The announcement refers to the fact that, in addition to ending internal research with fetal tissue from elective abortions, the Trump administration applied a rigorous ethics review protocol in considering funding for research outside of its department – both of which the Biden-Harris HHS is overturning.
According to the Hill, on Thursday Planned Parenthood ally Xavier Becerra, HHS secretary, indicated during a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing the announcement of the reversal of the Trump administration policy would be forthcoming.
“We believe that we have to do the research that it takes to make sure that we’re incorporating innovation and getting all of those types of treatments and therapies out there to the American people,” Becerra said.
The announcement comes on the heels of a letter this week from abortion industry allies and Democrat lawmakers Reps. Suzan DelBene (WA), Jan Schakowsky (IL), and Mark Pocan (WI), who urged Becerra to “immediately revoke the Trump Administration’s policies restricting fetal tissue use in biomedical research.”
“Fetal tissue is an irreplaceable resource for research that has led to numerous scientific and medical advances and contributed to the development of new therapies for many devastating diseases, including COVID-19,” the pro-abortion members of Congress wrote, adding the Trump administration’s bans on taxpayer-funded research using the body parts of aborted babies “continue to threaten scientific and medical advances.”
“The Trump Administration’s policy was politically motivated and unnecessary,” the lawmakers said, claiming as well that tissue from aborted babies is required to create treatments for “Zika, HIV, and COVID-19,” as well as “Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), spinal cord injury, and Parkinson’s disease.”
As AFP reported, in March 2020, Becerra, the former attorney general of California, organized a coalition of attorneys general from 14 other states to lift the Trump administration’s ban on taxpayer-funded fetal tissue research under the guise tissue from aborted babies would be required to develop vaccines for the coronavirus.
National pro-life researchers and leaders have long warned of the co-dependent relationship between abortion industry leaders such as Planned Parenthood and Democrat politicians.
Dr. Tara Sander Lee, senior fellow and director of life sciences at the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, said in a statement the Biden-Harris administration’s “decision to resume experiments using the body parts of aborted children defies both the best ethics and most promising science.”
Lee asserted the claims of Democrats that tissue from the bodies of aborted babies is essential to develop essential drugs are false:
Quote:Exploiting the bodies of these young human beings is unnecessary and grotesque. Fetal tissue was not, and has never been, used for polio or any other vaccine, nor to produce or manufacture any pharmaceutical. There are superior and ethical alternatives available such as adult stem cell models being used by countless scientists worldwide to develop and produce advanced medicines treating patients now, without exploitation of any innocent life. All scientists should reject the administration’s attempts to prey on fears related to the pandemic to advance the practice of harvesting fetal tissue.
Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser also said in the statement that Biden and Harris are “working hand-in-glove with radical appointees like Xavier Becerra” and are “moving rapidly to pay back their abortion industry allies and wipe out pro-life progress made under the Trump-Pence administration.” Dannenfelser added:
Quote:From day one they have sought to expand abortion on demand, funded by taxpayers, against the will of the strong majority of Americans. Now they would force Americans to be complicit in barbaric experiments using body parts harvested from innocent children killed in abortions, with no limits of any kind.
Last week, legal watchdog organization Judicial Watch provided a nearly 600-page report that included uncovered emails of conversations between Food and Drug Administration (FDA) employees and the California-based biomedical company Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR). The emails revealed the U.S. government had been buying and trafficking “fresh” aborted baby body parts.
According to the report, the FDA purchased the body parts, which were derived from babies aborted at up to 24-weeks’ gestation, in order to engineer humanized mice and perform experimental drug research.
The Federalist reported on the Judicial Watch revelation:
Quote:Emails between FDA officials and ABR employees reveal disturbing conversations as they collaborate to buy and sell aborted fetuses. Records indicate ABR was paid $12,000 upfront per baby, some survivable out of the womb, between the gestational age of 16-24 weeks. Most purchases are for intact thymuses and livers shipped “Fresh; on wet ice.”
With the callousness of picking a cut of meat from a butcher shop, an FDA doctor requests tissue samples be procured from a baby boy, as they claim “It is strongly preferred to have a male fetus if at all possible … [but] undetermined sex or female is better than no tissue.”
In August 2018, a report at CNSNews.com noted FDA signed a contract with ABR a month earlier and paid the company $15,900 for the fetal tissue from abortions, according to a General Services Administration contract.
The report followed several years of congressional investigation into the abortion industry’s alleged complicit relationship with biomedical companies, such as ABR, that purchase the body parts of aborted babies.
The U.S. Department of Justice was supposed to have launched an investigation into Planned Parenthood’s practices with regard to the sale of fetal body parts last December 2017, but further information about the investigation never materialized.
In December 2016, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley wrote in a letter to Obama-era Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former FBI director James Comey, informing them he was referring “the paid fetal tissue practices of the following organizations…to the FBI and the Department of Justice for investigation and potential prosecution.”
ABR was among the organizations named:- StemExpress, LLC;
- Advanced Bioscience Resources, Inc.
- Novogenix Laboratories, LLC
- Planned Parenthood Mar Monte
- Planned Parenthood Los Angeles
- Planned Parenthood Northern California
- Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest
Grassley said in a statement at the time:
Quote:I don’t take lightly making a criminal referral. But, the seeming disregard for the law by these entities has been fueled by decades of utter failure by the Justice Department to enforce it. And, unless there is a renewed commitment by everyone involved against commercializing the trade in aborted fetal body parts for profit, then the problem is likely to continue.
The Center for Medical Progress (CMP), with project lead David Daleiden, conducted an undercover investigation exposing the alleged illegal practices of Planned Parenthood and its partners in the fetal tissue procurement industry.
“This type of experimental research is a gross violation of human dignity and is not where the majority of Americans want their tax dollars being spent,” said Tom McClusky, president of March for Life Action. “The government has no business creating a marketplace for aborted baby body parts.”
Family Research Council President Tony Perkins also said:
Quote:As expected, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, a fanatical advocate for abortion, announced the Biden administration will now force American taxpayers to pay for barbaric experiments using the body parts of aborted babies. Instead of using ethical and effective alternatives, Biden is choosing to reinstate a policy that traffics in the grizzly remains of what would have been our next generation.
“The fact is that the remains of aborted babies have not been used to create the cure of a single disease,” Perkins added. “It’s clear that the NIH under President Biden means to do the opposite of ‘follow the science.’”
|
|
|
|
| Argentinian pro-abortion leader dies during abortion procedure |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-17-2021, 11:31 AM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Argentinian pro-abortion leader dies during abortion procedure
After Argentina legalized abortion, the abortion activist's death is the first recorded since the pro-abortion law was passed at the end of 2020.
rmx.news | April 15, 2021
Spanish language media reported last Sunday that radical pro-abortion supporter Maria de Valle Gonzalez Lopez died during what she labeled her “dream” abortion operation. She was 23 years old and was the leader of the Radical Youth in the La Paz municipality in the province of Mendoza. Her death has sparked a fierce debate about abortion in Argentina and led for calls for women to know that the procedure can sometimes carry serious risks.
On April 11, the woman underwent a legal abortion procedure in a local hospital. The operation turned out to be fatal for her. This fact came as a shock to the public as this was the first recorded death following the approval of the country's controversial pro-abortion bill passed on December 30, 2020, which legalized abortion in some cases. Previously, abortion was illegal in the predominately Catholic country.
Dr. Luis Durand, an Argentinian surgeon, told ACI Prensa journalists that “while some believe that the death of the young woman could’ve occurred due to some misconduct, in reality abortion is not a medical practice. Just a few months ago, it was a crime under Argentinian law. In the case of abortion, the death of the child is always brutal. It is burned through injecting substances into the uterus, or it is removed through dismemberment, or it is subjected to extreme uterus spasms which asphyxiate it.”
Durand added that an infection or sepsis may appear in women who take the drug Misoprostol when doctors fail to complete extract the child and his or her remains linger in the woman's uterus.
“This is why it is false premise to believe that such a procedure is truly safe,” he said.
Walter Sanchez Silva, the author of the ACI Prensa article, wrote that the silence of feminists surrounding Maria del Valle Gonzalez Lopez’s death is striking.
Some are pointing to what they believe is a double-standard in the case. Pro-life leader Guadalupe Batallan posted the following entry on her Twitter account on Monday, writing, “If Maria had died as a result of an abortion carried out in the abortion underground, the feminists would’ve razed the town. But since Maria died as a result of a legal abortion, her death has been erased.”
There is no such thing as a safe abortion for women.
Despite what women may believe, the pro-life leader says there is no such thing as a safe abortion.
Argentina's pro-abortion movement has offered inspiration to Poland's pro-abortion movement, with activists drawing parallels to the fact that both countries are very Catholic yet Argentina's movement was able to end the country's restrictions on abortion.
The slogan of a left-wing Polish group known as Manifa was: “Argentinian women are giving us an example of how we can prevail”.
Meanwhile, the manifesto of the Polish Abortion Dream-Team was, “We should be victorious like Argentinians!”
Those in the Polish pro-life movement indicate that any such "victory" always amounts to the death of a child, sometimes deep trauma for the woman, and in rare cases, can even lead to the death of both individuals.
|
|
|
|
| New study puts COVID infection fatality rate at only 0.15 percent |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-17-2021, 11:29 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
New study puts COVID infection fatality rate at only 0.15 percent
The evaluations in the report find their basis in seroprevalence studies, that is detecting the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 in the blood serum of a population.
STANFORD, California, April 16, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A new study released by Professor John P. A. Ioannidis of Stanford University, California, has found that the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 is significantly lower than previous studies indicated. According to Ioannidis, a medicine and epidemiology professor, the virus is less deadly than once thought, registering at a mere 0.15% fatality rate.
Ioannidis’ research, published in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, considered data collected from six “systematic evaluations” of global infection with the novel coronavirus, each one taking account of between 10 and 338 individual studies from 9 to 50 countries around the world. The evaluations in Ioannidis’ report find their basis in seroprevalence studies, that is detecting the presence of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 (the virus which causes COVID-19) in the blood serum of a population.
Seroprevalence studies differ from typical national statistics of PCR-based “confirmed cases” of the virus inasmuch as they do not simply detect active traces of SARS-CoV-2, but rather the presence of COVID antibodies, thus counting those individuals infected with the pathogen at some point but who may or may not have active viral material in their body at the time of testing.
As such, individuals who would not have been counted by PCR testing as a positive case — the discredited method used in the daily COVID infection count by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as well as many international government health agencies — will be picked up by seroprevalence analysis, which identifies the spread of the virus in such cases, painting a clearer picture of viral spread within a population.
In producing his own estimate of the infection rates and related IFR of COVID-19, Ioannidis highlighted the importance of an overview of the relevant estimates globally, given that such estimates “feed into projections that influence decision-making,” including public policy. In order to avoid the “uncertainty and unclear generalizability” arising from single studies, Ioannidis took six large-scale evaluations, spanning numerous countries and including many hundreds of studies.
Aggregating the six systematic evaluations, Ioannidis found that all “seroprevalence data converge that SARS-CoV-2 infection has been very widely spread globally,” resulting in a global IFR of “approximately 0.15% with 1.5-2.0 billion infections as of February 2021.” The IFR calculated in Ioannidis’ latest research is a revision of his previous findings, which concluded that COVID-19 had a 0.23% IFR, making COVID-19 around 1.5 times less deadly than previously thought. In concrete terms, the revised IFR puts COVID-19 a bit higher in fatality rate than Influenza, which generally sits at 0.1% IFR.
Ioannidis did admit, however, that despite garnering data from over 50 countries, the studies lacked an even global reach overall, with 72% to 91% of seroprevalence data originating in Europe and North America. A disproportionately small pool of data was collected from Africa and Asia.
According to Ioannidis, the majority of the evaluations used in his report reached “congruent estimates of global pandemic spread.” These estimates show around 600 million people were already infected with the virus before the end of November 2020, not taking account of infections in the bulk of Africa and Asia. Adjusted to include national statistics of viral infection from these regions, Ioannidis concluded that around 1 billion people worldwide had come into contact with SARS-CoV-2 before the end of November.
“By extrapolation, one may cautiously estimate [approximately] 1.5 – 2.0 billion infections as of 21 February 2021 (compared with 112 million documented cases),” Ioannidis said. “This corresponds to global IFR [of approximately] 0.15%,” a figure, he noted, that is “open to adjustment for any over- and under-counting of COVID-19 deaths.”
Although Ioannidis provided a generalized estimate, he noted that large discrepancies exist in the actual IFR in localized areas, such as specific countries, and even inside regions within a nation’s borders. As an example, he pointed to the disparity in fatality rates related to COVID-19 between disadvantaged New Orleans districts and the affluent Silicon Valley.
“Differences are driven by population age structure, nursing home populations, effective sheltering of vulnerable people, medical care, use of effective or detrimental treatments,” he explained. “IFR will depend on settings and populations involved. For example, even ‘common cold’ coronaviruses have IFR [of approximately] 10% in nursing home outbreaks,” almost 67 times greater than the average global IFR of COVID-19, per Ioannidis’ study.
Among his findings, Ioannidis flagged a “problematic” reliance on “[c]orrection of COVID‐19 death counts through excess deaths” to show COVID as causing widespread mortality. Ioannidis noted that excess deaths reflect “both COVID‐19 deaths and deaths from measures taken,” to wit, the deadly impact caused by lockdown measures.
Ioannidis went on to explain that “[y]ear‐to‐year variability [in excess deaths] is substantial,” especially when adjusted for age categorizations. On account of the widely varying death toll, such comparisons with the multiple average year-to-year fatality rates “is naïve, worse in countries with substantial demographic changes,” Ioannidis claimed.
As an example, the eminent professor pointed to Germany, which recorded an excess of 8,071 deaths in the first wave of COVID-19, from week 10 to week 23 last year. This excess, when adjusted for demographic changes, “became a deficit of 4926 deaths.” In other words, the death rate dropped far below what might otherwise have been expected.
RELATED
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/john-h...death-rate
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/study-...deral-laws
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/most-u...cdc-admits
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/hospit...ief-admits
|
|
|
|
| Federal Government Caught Buying ‘Fresh’ Flesh Of Aborted Babies Who Could Have Survived As Preemies |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-16-2021, 05:07 PM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Federal Government Caught Buying ‘Fresh’ Flesh Of Aborted Babies Who Could Have Survived As Preemies
Americans should be outraged their government participates in the wide-scale human trafficking operation that created a market for harvesting the organs of murdered infants.
The Federalist | April 15, 2021
This article contains disturbing information about human dismemberment.
Last week, legal accountability group Judicial Watch dropped a bombshell: a nearly 600-page report proving the U.S. government has been buying and trafficking “fresh” aborted baby body parts. These body parts, purchased by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to “humanize” mice and test biologic drugs in scientific experiments, came from babies up to 24-weeks-old gestation, just weeks from being born.
While Americans may be used to hearing pro-lifers beat the warning drum on abortion groups harvesting baby bodies and selling them for research, (who hasn’t heard of the lawsuit against David Daleiden, who exposed Planned Parenthood haggling over baby lungs and livers at dinner parties?) this time, the U.S. government was the one trafficking baby parts.
Recent emails uncovered by Judicial Watch between FDA employees and the California-based Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) prove the agency spent tens of thousands of dollars buying aborted babies for unethical scientific experiments between 2012 and 2018. In 2018, the Trump administration terminated the contract, halting government fetal tissue research due to concerns the contracts were unlawful. Judicial Watch’s new FOIA Request adds 575 pages of records to its existing 2019 lawsuit against the agency.
Caught Red-Handed
This is not the first time ABR has been in the spotlight, as the company was under congressional investigation for its long-standing involvement in fetal tissue trafficking. One of the oldest fetal tissue procurement firms, the company makes millions every year by harvesting organs like lungs, livers, eyeballs, and brains from aborted babies and re-selling them at a profit.
Emails between FDA officials and ABR employees reveal disturbing conversations as they collaborate to buy and sell aborted fetuses. Records indicate ABR was paid $12,000 upfront per baby, some survivable out of the womb, between the gestational age of 16-24 weeks. Most purchases are for intact thymuses and livers shipped “Fresh; on wet ice.”
With the callousness of picking a cut of meat from a butcher shop, an FDA doctor requests tissue samples be procured from a baby boy, as they claim “It is strongly preferred to have a male fetus if at all possible … [but] undetermined sex or female is better than no tissue.”
Even more appalling is an ABR employee complaining about the difficulty of identifying the sex of aborted babies. “We only check external genitalia and if it’s not there … we have no way of telling.” The fact techs are unable to identify the sex of aborted babies is no surprise to those familiar with the barbaric nature of abortion procedures, which require clinic staff to piece together mangled remains of babies after their limbs and organs are torn apart.
As if these casual orders weren’t horrific enough, more emails confirm that the FDA bought organs of babies who were aborted well after 20 weeks gestation, after the time a baby usually can survive outside the womb. If nothing else, this confirms the reality of late-term abortions in the United States, which pro-abortion cheerleaders have denied for decades.
When an ABR employee reassured the FDA they were working with doctors who performed late-term abortions, he admitted some tissue was unusable from a procedure that injects a poison called digoxin into the baby, destroying its cells and tissues. Once the chemical has done its work, an intact, dead baby is delivered. This method makes fetal tissue specimens unusable in experiments; with digoxin off the table, the likelihood partial-birth abortions were used is sickeningly high.
These conversations should shock even those who are pro-abortion, most of whom believe in significant term restrictions. Babies at this level of development possess all characteristics necessary for surviving life outside the womb and premature children born as young as 21 weeks go on to lead healthy, thriving lives.
An Atrocity Against Human Dignity
These gruesome excerpts are just a sample of records substantiating the 2019 lawsuit Judicial Watch filed against HHS, which houses the FDA. In March this year, a federal court ordered the agency to release records it withheld about purchasing organs of aborted babies, saying it found “reason to question” the transactions violated federal law.
The court’s decision found that the U.S. government bought second-trimester livers, thymuses, brains, eyes, and lungs for hundreds of dollars apiece from ABR, stating ABR could collect “over $2,000 on a single fetus it purchased … for $60” and “the federal government participated in this potentially illicit trade for years.”
Americans should be outraged their government participates in the wide-scale human trafficking operation that created a market for harvesting the organs of murdered infants. In no humane society could such a violation of the human body and dignity occur, in which babies’ eyes are “harvested immediately upon death,” organs marketed based on sex, and personhood attributed to mice but not children.
Until demanded otherwise, our society is complicit in the unchecked abuse and commodification of preborn children. Moral urgency is incumbent on us to condemn these atrocities sanctioned by the federal government’s lead medical researchers and fight to stop them. We may lose more battles before we win, but we cannot say we never knew.
|
|
|
|
| Garcia Moreno |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-16-2021, 12:54 PM - Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
- Replies (1)
|
|
Gabriel García Moreno
Ecuadorean patriot and statesman; b. at Guayaquil, 24 December, 1821; assassinated at Quito, 6 August, 1875.
His father, Gabriel García Gomez, a native of Villaverde, in Old Castile, had been engaged in commerce at Callao before removing to Guayaquil, where he married Dona Mercedes Moreno, the mother of the future Ecuadorean martyr president. Gabriel García Gomez died while his son was still young, and the boy's education was left to the care of his mother, who appears to have been a woman of unusual ability for her task; she was, moreover, fortunate in securing as her son's tutor Fray José Betancourt, the famous Mercedarian, under whose tuition young García Moreno made rapid progress. A great part of his father's fortune having been lost, it was not without some considerable sacrifices that the youth was able to attend the university course at Quito. These material obstacles once overcome, he passed brilliantly through the schools, distancing all his contemporaries, and on 26 October, 1844, received his degree in the faculty of law (Doctor en Jurisprudencia) from the University of Quito.
In less than a year after his graduation young García Moreno had begun to take an active part in Ecuadorean politics, joining in the revolutionary movement which eventually replaced the Flores administration by that of Roca (1846). He soon distinguished himself as a political satirist by contributions to "El Zurriago", but what more truly presaged the achievements of his riper life was his good and useful work as a member of the municipal council of Quito. At the same time he was studying legal practice, and on 30 March, 1848, was admitted advocate. Immediately after this the deposed Flores, supported by the Spanish government, made an attempt to regain the presidency of Ecuador; García Moreno unhesitatingly came forward in support of the Roca administration, and when that administration fell, in 1849, he entered upon his first period of exile.
After some months spent in Europe he returned to his native republic in the employ of a mercantile concern, and it was then that he took the first decisive step which marked him conspicuously for the enmity of the anti-Catholics, or, as they preferred to call themselves, the Liberals. At Panama he had fallen in with a party of Jesuits who had been expelled from the Republic of New Granada and wished to find asylum in Ecuador. García Moreno constituted himself the protector of these religious, and they sailed with him for Guayaquil; but on the same vessel that carried the Jesuits and their champion, an envoy from New Granada also took passage for the express purpose of bringing diplomatic influence to bear with the dictator, Diego Noboa, to secure their exclusion from Ecuadorean territory.
No sooner had the vessel entered the harbour of Guayaquil than García Moreno, slipping into a shore boat, succeeded in landing some time before the New Granadan envoy; the necessary permission was acquired from the Ecuadorean government, and the Jesuits obtained a foothold in that country. How soon the report of this exploit spread among the anti-Catholics of South America was evidenced by the fact that within a year Jacobo Sánchez, a New Granadan, had attacked García Moreno in the pamphlet "Don Felix Frias en Paris y los Jesuitas en el Ecuador", to which García Moreno's reply was an able "Defensa de los Jesuitas".
In 1853 he began to publish "La Nación", a periodical which, according to its prospectus, was intended to combat the then existing tendency of the government to exploit the masses for the material benefit of those who happened to be in power. At the same time García Moreno's programme aimed distinctly and professedly to defend the religion of the people. He was already known as a friend of the Jesuits; he now assumed the role of friend of the common people, to which he adhered sincerely and consistently to the day of his death. The Urbina faction, then in power, were quick to recognize the importance of "La Nación", which was suppressed before the appearance of its third number, and its proprietor was exiled, for the second time.
Having been, meanwhile, elected senator by his native province of Guayaquil, he was prevented from taking his seat, on the ground that he had returned to Quito without a passport. After a sojourn at Paita, García Moreno once more visited Europe. He was now thirty-three years of age, and his experience of political life in Ecuador had deeply convinced him of his people's need of enlightenment. It was undoubtedly with this conviction as his guide and incentive that he spent a year or more in Paris, foregoing every form of pleasure, a severe, indefatigable student not only of political science, but also of the higher mathematics, of chemistry, and of the French public school system.
On his return home, under a general amnesty in 1850, he became rector of the central University of Quito; a position of which he availed himself to commence lectures of his own in physical science. Next year he was active in the senate in opposition to the Masonic party, which had gained control of the government, while at the same time he persistently and forcibly, though unsuccessfully, struggled for the passage of a law establishing a system of public education modelled on that of France. In 1858 he once more established a paper, "La Union Naciónal", which became obnoxious to the government by its fearless exposure of corruption and its opposition to the arbitrary employment of authority; and once more a political crisis ensued.
García Moreno was on principle an advocate of orderly processes of government, and that his professions in this regard were sincere his subsequent career fairly demonstrated, but at this juncture he was obliged to realize that his country was in the grip of a corrupt oligarchy, bent upon the suppression of the Church to which the whole mass of his fellow countrymen were devoted, and disposed to keep the masses in ignorance so as to sway them the more easily to its own ends. He had, years before, attacked "the revolutionary industry", a phrase probably first used by him, in the prospectus of "La Nación"; it now became necessary for him to descend to revolutionary methods.
Besides, the little Republic of Ecuador was at this time menaced by its more powerful neighbour on the south, Peru. García Moreno, if he was sure of opposition at the hands of the soi-disant Liberals, was also, by this time, recognized by the masses as a leader loyal to both their common Faith and their common country, and thus he was able to organize the revolution which made him head of a provisional government established at Quito. The republic was now divided, General Franco being at the head of a rival government established at Guayaquil.
In vain did García Moreno offer to share his authority with his rival for the sake of national unity. As a defensive measure against the threat of Peruvian invasion, García Moreno entered into negotiations with the French envoy with a view to securing the protection of France, a political mistake of which his enemies knew how to avail themselves to the utmost. He was now obliged to assume the character of a military leader, for which he possessed at least the qualifications of personal courage and decisive quickness of resolution. While García Moreno inflicted one defeat after another upon the partisans of Franco, the latter, as representing Ecuador, had concluded with Peru the treaty of Mapasingue. The people of Ecuador rose in indignation at the concessions made in this treaty, and Franco, even his own followers being alienated, was defeated at Babahoya (7 August, 1860) and again at Salado River, where he was driven to take refuge on a Peruvian vessel.
When his adversary had been forcibly driven from the country, García Moreno showed his magnanimity in the proclamation in which he sought to heal as quickly as possible the scars of this civil war: "The republic should regard itself as one family; the old demarcations of districts must be so obliterated as to render sectional ambitions impossible". In the reorganization of the Constituent Assembly, which was summoned to meet in January, 1861, he insisted that the suffrage should not be territorial, but "direct and universal, under the necessary guarantees of intelligence and morality, and the number of representatives should correspond (proportionally) to that of the electors represented". The Convention, which met on 10 January, elected García Moreno president; he delivered his inaugural address on the 2d of April following. Then began that series of reforms among which were the restitution of the rights of the Church and a radical reconstruction of the fiscal system. In the immediate present he had to deal with the machinations of his old adversary Urbina, who, from his retirement in Peru, kept up incessant intrigues with the opposition at home, and still more with the governments of neighbouring republics. García Moreno soon came to a sensible and honourable understanding with the Peruvian government.
A violation of Ecuadorean territory by New Granada, though it led to a hostile collision in which García Moreno himself took part, had no serious consequences until the Arboledo administration gave place to that of General Mosquera, whose ambition it was to make New Granada the nucleus of a great "Colombian Confederation", in which Ecuador was to be included. Urbina was not above writing encouraging letters to the New Granadan or Colombian dictator who was scheming against the independence of Ecuador. An invitation to García Moreno to confer with Mosquera elicited a very plain intimation that, so far as the national obliteration of Ecuador was concerned, there was nothing to confer about. But in the meantime the Republic of Ecuador had ratified a concordat with Pope Pius IX (1862), and the discontent of the Regalista party at home with the provisions of that instrument gave Mosquera an excellent pretext for encroaching upon his neighbour's rights.
The Regalistas were, without knowing it, a kind of Erastians, who claimed the appointment to ecclesiastical benefices as an inalienable right of the civil power. The President of Ecuador was charged with "casting Colombia, manacled, at the feet of Rome"; Urbina issued "manifestos" from Peru in the sense of "South America for the South Americans"; while the proclamation of President Mosquera recited, with others which seem to have been introduced merely for the sake of appearances, his three really significant grounds of complaint against García Moreno: that the latter had ratified the concordat; that he maintained a representative of the Holy See at Quito; that he had brought Jesuits into Ecuador. It may be remarked here, in passing, that if Mosquera had added to this catalogue of offences those of insisting upon free primary education for the masses, upon strict auditing of the public accounts, and a considerable bona fide outlay upon roads and other public utilities, his proclamation might have served adequately as the indictment upon which García Moreno was condemned and eventually put to death by those whom Pius IX ironically called "the valiant sectaries".
Mosquera was determined to have war, and all the efforts of the Ecuadorean government were of no avail to prevent it. At the battle of Cuaspud all but two battalions of the forces of Ecuador fled ignominiously. It is a matter for wonder, considering the grounds upon which he had declared war, that Mosquera, in the Peace of Pinsaquí, which followed this victory, should have left the Concordat of 1862, the delegate Apostolic, and the Jesuits just as they were. In March,1863, García Moreno tendered his resignation to the National Assembly, who insisted upon his remaining in office until the expiration of his term. Nevertheless he had to face, during the next two years, repeated seditions and filibustering raids. After sparing the lives of the leaders in one of these movements, though they had by all law and custom incurred the penalty of death, he was severely criticized for ordering the execution of another such when it had become evident that an example was necessary for the peace of the republic. In a naval battle at Jambelí (27 June, 1865) at which García Moreno was personally present, the defeat of the Urbina forces was complete, and tranquillity reigned until the presidential term expired on the 27th of the following August.
In the following year began what may be considered as a connected series of attempts which terminated, nine years later, in the assassination of García Moreno. The dispute between Spain and Peru over the Chinchas Islands had led to a war in which, following García Moreno's advice, his successor Jeronimo Carrión had cast in the lot of Ecuador with that of the sister republic and its then ally, Chile. The ex-president was sent as minister plenipotentiary to Chile, with a commission to transact business with President Prado of Peru on his way. On his arrival at Lima an attempt was made to assassinate him, but it ended in the death of his assailant. His diplomatic mission resulted excellently for the friendly relations between Ecuador and its neighbours; the sojourn at Santiago also inspired García Moreno with a high admiration for Chile, and he even made up his mind to attempt a change of the Ecuadorean constitution so as to make it more like that of Chile, a project which he carried into effect in the National Convention of 1869. On his return to Ecuador he found himself a second time in the uncongenial position of leader of a revolution. To anticipate a plot which the Liberals, led by one of Urbina's relations, were known to be forming, the conservatives of Ecuador had risen, declared Carrión deposed, and made García Moreno head of the provisional government. The justice of the grounds on which this extreme action was taken was established by the attempt of Veintemilla, at Guayaquil, only two months later, in March, 1869.
Having been duly confirmed as president ad interim by the National Convention of May, 1869, García Moreno resumed his work for the enlightenment, as well as the religious well-being, of his people. It was in these last years of his life that he did so much for the teaching of physical sciences in the university by introducing there the German Fathers of the Society of Jesus. The medical schools and hospitals of the capital benefited vastly by his intelligent and zealous efforts. In September, 1870, the troops of Victor Emmanuel occupied Rome; and on 18 January, 1871, García Moreno, alone of all the rulers of the world, addressed a protest to the King of Italy on the spoliation of the Holy See. The pope marked his appreciation of this outburst of loyalty by conferring on the President of Ecuador the decoration of the First Class of the Order of Pius IX, with a Brief of commendation dated, 27 March, 1871. It was, on the other hand, notorious that certain lodges had formally decreed the death of García Moreno, who, in a letter to the pope, used about this time the following almost prophetic words: "What riches for me, Most Holy Father, to be hated and calumniated for my love for our Divine Redeemer! What happiness if your benediction should obtain for me from Heaven the grace of shedding my blood for Him, who being God, was willing to shed His blood for us upon the Cross!" The object of numberless plots against his life, García Moreno pursued his way with unruffled confidence in the future — his own and his country's. "The enemies of God and the Church can kill me", he once said, "but God does not die" (Dios no muere).
He had been re-elected president, and would soon have entered upon another term of office, when, towards the end of July, 1875, the police of Quito were apprised that a party of assassins had begun to dog García Moreno's footsteps. When, however, the chief of police warned the intended victim, the latter so discouraged all attempts to hedge him about with precautions, as to almost excuse the carelessness of his official guardians. It came out in evidence that within the fortnight preceding the finally successful attempt, the same assassins had at least twice been foiled by the president's failing to appear on occasions when he had been expected. Finally, on the evening of 6 August, the assassins found their prey unprotected, leaving the house of some very dear friends; they followed him until he had reached the Treasury, and there Faustino Rayo, the leader of the band, suddenly attacked him with a machete, inflicting six or seven wounds, while the other three assisted in the work with their revolvers. On hearing of the death of García Moreno, Pope Pius IX ordered a solemn Mass of Requiem to be celebrated in the Church of Santa Maria in Trastevere. The same sovereign pontiff erected to his memory, in the Collegio Pio-Latino, at Rome, a monument on which García Moreno is designated:
Religionis integerrimus custos
Auctor studiorum optimorum
Obsequentissimus in Petri sedem
Justitiae cultor; scelerum vindex.
|
|
|
|
| Pope St. Pius V: Regnans in Excelsis - Excommunicating Elizabeth I of England |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-16-2021, 06:56 AM - Forum: Papal Documents and Bulls
- No Replies
|
|
Regnans in Excelsis
Excommunicating Elizabeth I of England
Pius Bishop, servant of the servants of God, in lasting memory of the matter.
He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and earth, has committed one holy Catholic and apostolic Church, outside of which there is no salvation, to one alone upon earth, namely to Peter, the first of the apostles, and to Peter’s successor, the pope of Rome, to be by him governed in fullness of power. Him alone He has made ruler over all peoples and kingdoms, to pull up, destroy, scatter, disperse, plant and build, so that he may preserve His faithful people (knit together with the girdle of charity) in the unity of the Spirit and present them safe and spotless to their Saviour.
1. In obedience to which duty, we (who by God’s goodness are called to the aforesaid government of the Church) spare no pains and labour with all our might that unity and the Catholic religion (which their Author, for the trial of His children’s faith and our correction, has suffered to be afflicted with such great troubles) may be preserved entire. But the number of the ungodly has so much grown in power that there is no place left in the world which they have not tried to corrupt with their most wicked doctrines; and among others, Elizabeth, the pretended queen of England and the servant of crime, has assisted in this, with whom as in a sanctuary the most pernicious of all have found refuge. This very woman, having seized the crown and monstrously usurped the place of supreme head of the Church in all England to gather with the chief authority and jurisdiction belonging to it, has once again reduced this same kingdom- which had already been restored to the Catholic faith and to good fruits- to a miserable ruin.
2. Prohibiting with a strong hand the use of the true religion, which after its earlier overthrow by Henry VIII (a deserter therefrom) Mary, the lawful queen of famous memory, had with the help of this See restored, she has followed and embraced the errors of the heretics. She has removed the royal Council, composed of the nobility of England, and has filled it with obscure men, being heretics; oppressed the followers of the Catholic faith; instituted false preachers and ministers of impiety; abolished the sacrifice of the mass, prayers, fasts, choice of meats, celibacy, and Catholic ceremonies; and has ordered that books of manifestly heretical content be propounded to the whole realm and that impious rites and institutions after the rule of Calvin, entertained and observed by herself, be also observed by her subjects. She has dared to eject bishops, rectors of churches and other Catholic priests from their churches and benefices, to bestow these and other things ecclesiastical upon heretics, and to determine spiritual causes; has forbidden the prelates, clergy and people to acknowledge the Church of Rome or obey its precepts and canonical sanctions; has forced most of them to come to terms with her wicked laws, to abjure the authority and obedience of the pope of Rome, and to accept her, on oath, as their only lady in matters temporal and spiritual; has imposed penalties and punishments on those who would not agree to this and has exacted then of those who persevered in the unity of the faith and the aforesaid obedience; has thrown the Catholic prelates and parsons into prison where many, worn out by long languishing and sorrow, have miserably ended their lives. All these matter and manifest and notorious among all the nations; they are so well proven by the weighty witness of many men that there remains no place for excuse, defense or evasion.
3. We, seeing impieties and crimes multiplied one upon another the persecution of the faithful and afflictions of religion daily growing more severe under the guidance and by the activity of the said Elizabeth -and recognizing that her mind is so fixed and set that she has not only despised the pious prayers and admonitions with which Catholic princes have tried to cure and convert her but has not even permitted the nuncios sent to her in this matter by this See to cross into England, are compelled by necessity to take up against her the weapons of justice, though we cannot forbear to regret that we should be forced to turn, upon one whose ancestors have so well deserved of the Christian community. Therefore, resting upon the authority of Him whose pleasure it was to place us (though unequal to such a burden) upon this supreme justice-seat, we do out of the fullness of our apostolic power declare the foresaid Elizabeth to be a heretic and favourer of heretics, and her adherents in the matters aforesaid to have incurred the sentence of excommunication and to be cut off from the unity of the body of Christ.
4. And moreover (we declare) her to be deprived of her pretended title to the aforesaid crown and of all lordship, dignity and privilege whatsoever.
5. And also (declare) the nobles, subjects and people of the said realm and all others who have in any way sworn oaths to her, to be forever absolved from such an oath and from any duty arising from lordship. fealty and obedience; and we do, by authority of these presents , so absolve them and so deprive the same Elizabeth of her pretended title to the crown and all other the above said matters. We charge and command all and singular the nobles, subjects, peoples and others afore said that they do not dare obey her orders, mandates and laws. Those who shall act to the contrary we include in the like sentence of excommunication.
6. Because in truth it may prove too difficult to take these presents wheresoever it shall be necessary, we will that copies made under the hand of a notary public and sealed with the seal of a prelate of the Church or of his court shall have such force and trust in and out of judicial proceedings, in all places among the nations, as these presents would themselves have if they were exhibited or shown.
Given at St. Peter’s at Rome, on 25 February 1570 of the Incarnation; in the fifth year of our pontificate.
Pius PP.
|
|
|
|
| Elizabethan Catholics and the Mass |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-16-2021, 06:53 AM - Forum: Uncompromising Fighters for the Faith
- Replies (2)
|
|
The Angelus - October 1982
Elizabethan Catholics and the Mass
I. The Gathering Storm
by Philip Caramon, S.J.
The article which follows (and two subsequent which will follow) originally appeared in 1974. The manuscript was written and put to one side before the changes which came to the Church in the wake of the Council. It is important to note this, for those who read these moving articles will be struck by certain parallels with our own day, which are the more powerful for not having been intended; they should cause us all to pause and think. As an historian of the Elizabethan period, Father Caramon, of course, needs no introduction. It is a privilege to publish his work. Acknowledgments to Christian Order.
Queen Mary died on 17 November 1558 while Mass was being celebrated in her bed-chamber. No day had passed in her adult life without her hearing Mass. When the priest came to the words, Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, she answered distinctly Miserere nobis, dona nobis pacem; then, as he took the Host to consume it, the Queen adored it. Afterwards she closed her eyes for the last time.
Elizabeth proclaimed Queen
Between eleven and twelve o'clock the same morning Mary's half-sister, Elizabeth, was proclaimed Queen by the heralds of arms. In the afternoon the bells of all London churches were rung for joy; that night bonfires were lit and tables set out in the streets; there was plentiful eating, drinking and merry-making. The next day, Friday, being a fast day, there were no public rejoicings, but on Saturday, 19 November, the Te Deum Laudamus was sung in all the churches of the kingdom.
During her last sickness Queen Mary had sent messengers to Princess Elizabeth to examine her on her religious beliefs, for no one was certain exactly where she stood. "Surely the Queen must be persuaded that I am a Catholic, for I have protested this time and again," Elizabeth assured her. Then she swore and vowed that she was a Catholic. She said she believed in the Real Presence and would make no alteration in the principal points of religion.
Today people are free to profess whatever religion they choose; then it was different. Until Henry VIII, the father of Mary and Elizabeth, came to the throne, the only religion of Europe was the Catholic one. It was thought that anyone who did not believe in it was wilfully wrong. If he persisted or tried to propagate his beliefs, he was imprisoned as a heretic and sometimes burnt at the stake. Queen Mary had done this; earlier still the English soldiers in France had burnt Joan of Arc; she was thought to be directed by the devil, though, in fact, she was a saint. It was accepted by all that the State was bound to save the souls of its citizens from contamination by false doctrine, just as much as it was bound to protect their lives and property from murderers and highwaymen.
No one thought it possible for different religions to exist side by side in the same country. So it happened that, when Martin Luther and others started the Protestant religion and converted to it German, Swiss and other rulers, the entire area governed by them became Protestant. If any individual felt in conscience that he could not fall in with the new religion of his country, he left his home and went to another city, which adhered to his own religion.
On Mary's death the question that concerned everybody was whether the new Queen, Elizabeth, (and with her the whole of England) would remain Catholic or turn Protestant. Elizabeth was astute and did not show her hand at once. The truth is that she did not care very much about religion, but wanted to be secure on her throne, and thought she had more chance of this if eventually she declared herself a Protestant.
It so happened that, within twenty-two hours of Queen Mary's death, there died also the Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury, Cardinal Reginald Pole. And nearly at the same time, there died no less than thirteen Bishops and a great number of the clergy from Quartan fever, which was then raging like the plague. Thus, by chance, a great barrier to a change in religion was removed.
The first weeks of the new reign passed and the people were still puzzled. Elizabeth delayed at Hatfield in Hertfordshire before taking possession of London. In preparation for her entry all the streets of the city were spread with gravel. Then, finally, she came, riding a horse apparelled in purple velvet. She passed through Cripplegate and along London Wall to Bishopsgate, then up Leadenhall and Fenchurch Street, turning down Mark Lane into Tower Street and so to the Tower. There was great shooting of guns, such as had never been heard before. At certain points along the route children made speeches to her; in other places groups sang songs to the accompaniment of portable organs. However, the uncertainty about her religion continued.
First Signs of Protestantism
On 9 January 1559, just seven weeks after Mary's death, a statue of St. Thomas of Canterbury, patron of England, which had stood for centuries over the door of the chapel attached to the Mercers' Hall in London, was thrown down and broken. The offense went unpunished and some persons took this as an omen for the future.
The coronation was fixed for Sunday, 15 February 1559, in Westminster Abbey, which was decorated for the event with the most precious tapestries ever seen, representing on one side the whole of Genesis and, on the other, the Acts of the Apostles, from designs by Raphael. The rooms off the Church were hung with the history of Caesar and Pompey. On a table at the buffet were laid out a hundred and forty gold and silver drinking cups.
After making her entry into the Church the Queen ascended a lofty tribune erected between the high altar and the choir, in view of all the people, who were asked if they wished her to be crowned. When they shouted, "yes," the organs, fifes, trumpets, and drums played, and it seemed, as an eye-witness reported, that the world had come to an end.
Then the choristers began the Mass which was sung by the Dean of her chapel.
As senior prelate in England, Nicholas Heath, Archbishop of York, had been asked to crown the Queen. He had refused, for he suspected there would be innovations in the service. All the other bishops had refused also, except the Bishop of Carlisle, not because he favored the Protestant religion but for fear that, if the Queen was angered that no one would anoint her, she might be more easily moved to overthrow the Catholic faith. The rest of the bishops were present at the ceremony until the point of the Mass when the host is elevated, for adoration. This was not done, for the Queen had forbidden it.
Other changes ordered in the days following the coronation confirmed that Archbishop Heath had been right. On 25 January Elizabeth was once more at the Abbey, with all the peers of the realm, for the Mass of the Holy Ghost, before the opening of Parliament. The Benedictine Abbot John Feckenham, and all his community, each of them carrying a lighted candle in his hand, met her in procession at the West Door. When the Queen saw them, she said angrily, "Away with those torches, for we can see very well." During the service, Dr. Richard Cox, a married priest, who had been an exile during Mary's reign, preached a sermon in which, after saying many abusive things about the monks, he exhorted the Queen to destroy all the images of the saints, the monasteries and all that went with Catholic worship. He tried to prove that it was a very great impiety to endure such superstitious survivals.
Nevertheless for a time the administration of the sacraments continued in all the churches, though the litanies of the saints were no longer recited and parts of the Mass were said in English. Plays were performed in derision of the Catholic faith, but no one was persecuted: placards were posted at street corners inviting passers-by into taverns to watch them. Churches were broken into, windows shattered and chalices stolen. In March the same year rogues raided St. Mary-le-Bow's, in the middle of Cheapside, burst open the tabernacle and smashed every sacred object on which they could lay their hands.
About the same time the last public Catholic funeral was seen in London. On 12 April the corpse of Sir Rice Mansfield was brought from Clerkenwell for burial from Blackfriars Church; two heralds went behind the coffin and twenty-four priests and clerks before it, singing the Office of the Dead. The church of the friars was draped with black cloth and coats of arms. The next day the Requiem was sung and, after it, the knight's standard, coat, helmet and target were offered up at the high altar as had been done for centuries past. For it was the customary manner of a knight's funeral. London was never to see this ceremony again.
Plea from an Archbishop
Meanwhile, Nicholas Heath, the Archbishop of York (he had opposed the burning of heretics under Queen Mary and was considered the most prudent man in the kingdom), had an audience with the Queen. As soon as he was alone with her, he fell on his knees and invoked with tears the name of Jesus Christ. He begged Elizabeth, being a woman, to refrain from tampering with the sacred mysteries. He said that he had been through the English schools and universities and had attained the highest honors; he had been a bishop under her father Henry VIII, and her brother, Edward VI and Lord Chancellor under Mary, and that from his experience in the course of a long life, to say nothing of his own studies, he had learned that the State suffered great harm from frequent changes, even in the laws relating to the administration of justice. How much greater harm, he argued, would result from alterations in religion, where antiquity was held at such great account.
It was a wise and moderate speech. The Archbishop, recalling all that had recently happened, said that it was now proposed to make changes, not simply in ceremonies, but in the highest mysteries of the Faith, which (as the name implied) should be reverenced in silence rather than made the subject of popular debate. To call in question the sacraments of the Church, after such a length of time and in a kingdom which had only recently recovered from schism, would be disastrous in the extreme.
Finally, asking the Queen's pardon for his freedom of speech, the Archbishop concluded;
Quote:"But if (which God avert) the Catholic religion should unhappily be overthrown in England, I warn, I proclaim and I declare beforehand that I will not recede a nail's breadth in the least thing from the decrees of the Catholic Church, and in that quarrel I will resist every suggestion from others, and even from your Majesty, by every means in my power, to the last moment of my life."
The Queen bade him rise, comforted him with many words and ended by promising the Archbishop that she would do nothing that was not approved by her Councillors and by the whole nation assembled in Parliament. She gave him to think that in some measure she still wished to profess the Catholic Faith.
On 23 April, St. George's Day, the patronal feast of the Knights of the Garter, the Queen attended the ceremony at Westminster Abbey. During the procession not a single cross was carried. The following day Mass was sung as usual for the souls of the deceased knights, but the Queen, who was to have been present, altered her mind, and the Mass was said without the elevation of the Host.
Returned Exiles Strike
On 25 April, the feast of St. Mark and the last of the three rogation days, there were processions in the London parishes, and the citizens went with their banners through the streets, singing the litanies in Latin in the old fashion. On Ascension Day, while the parish procession of St. Paul's was going round the Cathedral precincts, a servant-lad, an apprentice to a Protestant printer, violently snatched the cross out of the hands of the bearer, struck it on the ground three times, breaking it into many small pieces. Then he took the figure from the cross and went off, saying as he showed it to some women, that he was carrying away the Devil's guts. In another London parish, on the same day, when the procession was about to come out of the church, two scoundrels with drawn swords in their hands placed themselves at the gate, swearing that ecclesiastics should not carry such an abomination, and that, if they left the church, they should never re-enter it.
This was the work of the men who had been in exile in Germany and Switzerland under Queen Mary. Now, one of their number, Richard Cox, boasted in a letter to a friend at Zurich:
"We are thundering forth in our pulpits, and especially before our Queen, Elizabeth, that the Roman Pontiff is truly antichrist and that traditions are for the most part blasphemies";
but he went on to admit that none of the clergy had changed their beliefs. "The whole body," he said, "remains unmoved"; that is, loyal to the Old Faith.
Parliament and the Mass
Meanwhile, in Parliament, a Bill laying down a new service of common prayer to replace the old Mass was debated. When it was read in the Lords for the third time all the Bishops, as before, dissented; and among the chief peers, they were supported by the Marquis of Winchester, the Earl of Shrewsbury, Viscount Montagu, and Barons Morley, Stafford, Dudley, Wharton, Rich and North.
True to his undertaking, Archbishop Heath spoke out firmly:
Quote:"The unity of the Church of Christ doth depend upon the unity of Peter's authority. Therefore, by our leaping out of Peter's ship, we must needs be overwhelmed with the waters of schism, sects and divisions which spring only from this, that men will not be obedient to the Head Bishop of God."
The Archbishop asked the Lords whether they thought the Church of Rome was not of God, but a malignant Church, and then went on:
Quote:"If you answer yes, then it will follow that we, the inhabitants of this realm, have not as yet received any benefit from Christ, for we have received no other gospel, no other doctrine, no other Faith, no other sacraments than were sent us from the Church of Rome."
Cuthbert Scot, Bishop of Chester, spoke twice. He pointed out that as God had sent one Holy Ghost to rule and govern His people inwardly, so he had appointed one governor to rule and lead them outwardly. And he asserted that no temporal prince had any authority whatsoever in or over the Church, since the keys of the heavenly kingdom had never been given to any of them, but only to Peter. Abbot Feckenham of Westminster, who also sat in the House of Lords, compared Queen Mary's days to the present. Then no churches were spoiled, he said, no altars pulled down, nor was the sacrament ever trodden blasphemously under foot and the knave of clubs hung in its place; there was no defiant eating of meat in Lent and on prohibited days. Now all things were changed and turned upside down.
But these protests were of no avail. Things got worse. At the end of May the Queen's Councillors, who were the men responsible for the alterations in religion, summoned to their presence Edmund Bonner, the Bishop of London, and gave him orders to do away with the Mass and Divine Office at St. Paul's. The Bishop answered intrepidly:
Quote:"I possess three things: soul, body, and property: of the two last you can dispose at your pleasure, but as to the soul God alone can command me."
Last Public Masses in London
A few days later, on 11 June, St. Barnabas' day, the last Mass was said at St. Paul's. By the end of the month there were no public Masses anywhere in London, except in the houses of the French and Spanish ambassadors. All the friars and monks of every order received their passports to go abroad; the Franciscan friars from Greenwich, the Blackfriars from Smithfield, the monks and nuns from Sion and Westminster. The Carthusians refused to leave until they were compelled by force, which was soon used. Under the Queen's father, Henry VIII, they had resisted the King's attempt to claim headship of the Church, and had suffered death for it, some at Tyburn by hanging, others in Newgate by starvation. John Houghton, their prior, had been the first martyr of the Reformation. His community, re-established under Mary, was proud of its fidelity to the Church, and rather than give up their religion went into exile.
New Bill of Supremacy
Now a new Bill of Supremacy, making the Queen Head of the Church, was passed in Parliament; and in the same session also a Bill of Uniformity that permitted only one form of worship, namely, the new form. Commissioners were sent out from London to visit the universities, the cathedral churches and the city parishes throughout England with the task of enforcing these measures. This was in the summer of 1559, less than a year after Elizabeth had given a solemn undertaking to her half-sister, Mary, that she would make no change in religion. There was great opposition in court to the new services and also among the clergy and people, and had it not been for the persistence of Sir William Cecil, the Queen's Chief Councillor, the reformation, as it was called, would certainly have failed.
The Queen's commissioners first visited the London churches. On their orders the rood screens and altars were pulled down. The Lord Major, returning on St. Bartholomew's Day from the fair at Clerkenwell, where he had been watching sports and wrestling, saw in Cheapside two great bonfires made of statues, missals, crosses, copes, censers, altar-cloths, banners and other ornaments from Catholic times. The same was to be seen in other parts of London.
To show greater contempt for Our Blessed Lady, the official birthday of the Queen was now kept on 7 September, the eve of the nativity of Our Blessed Lady, which was marked in the calendar in small black letters, while that of Elizabeth was in large red capitals. In St. Paul's and elsewhere the praises of Elizabeth were now sung at the end of the public prayers in the place where the antiphon of Our Lady had been sung in former days.
Catholic Bishops Removed
One by one the Catholic bishops were removed from their sees. In a last brave attempt to change the Queen's mind Bishop Tunstall of Durham, who had been excused from attending Parliament because of his great age, came riding on horseback to London to see the Queen. In spite of her prohibition he preached to the people on his way. Everywhere he exhorted them to remain constant in the Catholic Faith. When the old man was brought into the presence of the Queen, he reprimanded her severely, because she had taken on herself to meddle in religion and had removed all the bishops, whose equals, he said, were hardly to be found in the Christian world.
"I confess," the Queen said, "that I grieve for York and Ely."
"But," replied Tunstall, "how can you grieve, when you have the remedy in your hands?"
The Councillors sat with the Queen. They urged Tunstall to change his religion.
Quote:"Do you think that I, who as a priest and a bishop have taught the Catholic Faith for more than forty years, would be doing right, after so many years of study, after such practice and experience, on the very verge of the grave, to accept a rule of faith from laymen, my juniors?"
The Councillors flushed. They then demanded that he should take the oath acknowledging the supremacy of the Queen over the Church.
The old man refused, and he was deprived of his bishopric and put in charge of the new Archbishop of Canterbury, Matthew Parker, a married man. After a few weeks of imprisonment Tunstall died at Lambeth.
The Old Priests Removed
Almost all the clergy were on the side of the Catholic hierarchy. For as long as they were permitted, they spoke from the pulpits against the new form of service; they protested that it was iniquitous to do away with the Mass, the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, allegiance to the Pope and all that had been part of the English Church since the time of St. Augustine and before him. One by one, as the Commissioners went their circuits, these old priests were removed: most of them refused to be ministers of the new religion. Many continued to say Mass secretly, hear confessions, and baptize children, either in their own homes or in the houses of gentlemen.
The Country Folk Stay Loyal
For many years still the country people, particularly the shepherds and farmers, remained loyal to the old Faith. In large towns, like Norwich and Bristol, the artisans, weavers and shoemakers for the most part fell in with the new form of worship. But in the remoter parts of the kingdom, the population as a whole stayed Catholic. Hence the reformers, writing to German friends, continued for many years to talk always of their "little flock." One of them, John Jewel, now Bishop of Salisbury, complained:
Quote:"The papists (as Catholics were now called) oppose us spitefully. Thus it is to have once tasted of the Mass. He who drinks of it is mad."
For the first time in the history of England, indeed of any country, fines were imposed for non-attendance at church. This was the beginning of the persecution. In Winchester, which was strongly Catholic, the poor people who could not pay these fines were sentenced to be dragged through the streets, stripped of their clothes and cruelly whipped.
School & University
The old school there, founded by William of Wykeham, remained Catholic in sympathy. When the headmaster was imprisoned and a Protestant put in his place, the boys refused to attend public prayers and shut themselves in their dormitories. The headmaster was compelled to summon the military commander from Portsmouth, the nearest seaport, to restore order. About twelve boys took to flight; the rest, terrorized by the troops, went most unwillingly to church. As one chronicler wrote:
"In this persecution there is no order, or sex or age that has not nobly defended the Catholic Faith."
The universities, which formerly had been the training places of the clergy, did not take to the changes. Nearly all the heads of Colleges and the Fellows gave up their posts rather than subscribe to the oath of supremacy. By comparison with what it had been in the past, Oxford, particularly, was now somnolent. At New College, founded at the same time and by the same Catholic bishop as the school at Winchester, the old customs were slowly destroyed. On holidays after dinner the students no longer gathered around the fire in the hall to sing hymns. Many eminent university men crossed the sea to get a livelihood in foreign universities. Among them was Dr. William Allen, who was to become the chief adversary of the new religion.
First Arrest for Saying Mass
The first arrest of a priest for saying Mass contrary to the Queen's orders occurred in Fetter Lane, London. Treated as a traitor, the poor man was dragged violently through Holborn, Newgate Market, and Cheapside to the Counter Prison, with all his vestments on him, for he had been caught at the altar. A crowd followed him, mocking, cursing and wishing evil to him: some said he should be set in a pillory, others that he should be hanged, or hanged and quartered, or burned. All tried to pluck at him or give him a thump with their feet or spit in his face. Some shouted at him Ora pro nobis, sancta Maria, because it was the feast of Our Lady's Nativity (1562), though the day was not kept holy; they also sang mockingly Dominus vobiscum and such like phrases from the Mass.
Rosaries, Crucifixes, Statues—Out!
So things continued. Every year saw new measures of suppression. No person was permitted to carry beads or use them for prayers, to read the Book of Our Lady's Hours, or to burn candles on the Feast of the Purification. It was forbidden to pray before a crucifix or statue or picture of a saint, and it was thought superstitious to make the sign of the cross on entering a church, or to say the De profundis for the dead, or even to rest at a wayside cross while carrying a corpse to the grave: and to leave little crosses there. All altars were taken down in the churches. The places where they had stood were now paved, and the wall into which they had been set whited over. The altar stones were broken, defaced and turned to common uses.
But the people clung hard to the old customs. In some places, after the Rood had been taken away, they drew a cross in its place with chalk; and when the crosses in the graveyard were uprooted, they painted small crosses on the church walls inside and out, and on the pulpit and the new Communion tables. They still brought their primers to church and used them all the time the lessons were being read. In many churches the chalices were hidden away in readiness for the return of the Mass.
Finally, in 1570, the Pope, acting on his own counsels, issued a Bull, Regnans in Excelsis, declaring Elizabeth an heretic and excommunicate. Many Catholics at home judged this an unwise measure; for they feared it would enrage the Queen and lead her to retaliate with still severer legislation against them. However time proved the Pope correct. Now, for the first time, after eleven years of Elizabeth's reign, it was clear to all that none could practice the religion enforced by law and remain a Catholic. Henceforth if any man went to the state church he was no longer considered a Catholic; to receive communion there was a sign of submission to the new doctrines.
In reply the Queen imposed heavier fines for non-attendance at the services. Division now between Catholics and Protestants became sharper than ever before. Catholics, called Papists until this year, were now known as Recusants, for their refusal to take Communion from Protestant ministers.
In England only one man, Mr. Edward Aglionby, dared to raise his voice against the enforcement of conscience by legal penalties. In April 1571, in the House of Commons, Aglionby made a noble speech. He argued that it was not lawful for the State to compel any man's conscience, for the conscience of the individual did not concern the lawmakers: it did not fall even within the power of the greatest monarchy in the world. And he showed that neither the Jews nor Turks had ever required more than silence from their subjects, when they were unable to accept their people's religion. If the Catholics were wicked, as the law made them out to be, it was strange and against Christian practice to force them to take the new Communion; rather they should be forbidden it.
The Coming of the Sects
Meanwhile, as Archbishop Heath had warned the Queen, a large number of sects sprang up and spread throughout the kingdom. The largest of the many strange congregations was the Anabaptists, who called themselves Puritans, or Unspotted Lambs of God. Some of their adherents made mad assertions. In 1573 one Mr. Bloss was arrested for proclaiming that the Queen's late half-brother, King Edward VI, was still alive, that the Queen was married to the Earl of Leicester in 1564 and had four children by him.
The most curious of all these sects was "the family of the mount." It denied the existence of both heaven and hell, teaching that heaven existed wherever men laughed and made merry, and hell, wherever they were in sorrow, grief or pain.
The "family of essentials," a split or subdivision of the "family of love," believed that there was no such thing as sin. Their adherents used to ask, "Sin? What sin, man? There is no man sinneth at all." Their leader compared the altar to a cook's dresser-board. He had many meetings up and down the country.
To be continued
|
|
|
|
| Vatican to host conference w/ COVID jab developers, Big Tech leaders, Fauci and Chelsea Clinton |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-16-2021, 06:16 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Vatican to host conference featuring COVID jab developers, Big Tech leaders, Fauci and Chelsea Clinton
Vaccine developers, Mormon elders, pro-abortion Chelsea Clinton, population control advocate Jane Goodall, a New Age activist, a prominent UK Muslim scholar, and a pro-abortion American actress known for posing nude, are all speakers at an upcoming Vatican conference on ‘health.’ There are only two Catholic clergy listed amongst the 114 speakers.
![[Image: vatconf154ai_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg]](https://assets.lifesitenews.com/images/made/images/remote/https_www.lifesitenews.com/images/local/vatconf154ai_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg)
VATICAN CITY, April 15, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The Vatican has announced its fifth International Health Conference on “Exploring the Mind, Body & Soul,” and will host scores of globalist and abortion-promoting speakers such as Chelsea Clinton, the CEOs of abortion-tainted vaccine companies Pfizer and Moderna, the director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, and Dr. Anthony Fauci.
The conference, entitled “Exploring the Mind, Body & Soul. How Innovation and Novel Delivery Systems Improve Human Health,” is due to take place May 6 through 8.
An incredible 114 speakers are set to appear at the event, which is hosted by the Pontifical Council for Culture, the Cura Foundation, the Science and Faith Foundation (STOQ), and Stem For Life (SFLF).
The speakers include prominent and diverse names such as the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna, the former of which produces abortion pills; the Director of the National Institute of Health (NIH) Francis Collins, who advocates using fetal tissue in research projects; the head of Google Health, David Feinberg; and Dr. Anthony Fauci from the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, whose advice to government officials played a major role in shutting down American churches last year.
NIH director Francis Collins has a long history of anti-life policies, and has previously acclaimed the “scientific benefits” which come from fetal tissue research, claiming that such work could be conducted “with an ethical framework.”
He is joined at the Vatican conference by Salesforce CEO, Marc Benioff, who has firmly aligned himself with the globalist, liberal elite, by banning emails from Republicans and the Trump campaign in the wake of the January 6 Capitol protests, as well as prohibiting all clients from even questioning the 2020 U.S. election. Benioff has a history of promoting LGBT issues, and is described by Time as “one of the most outspoken executives,” for LGBT affairs.
Also speaking at the conference will be United Nations representative and conservationist Jane Goodall, who supports population control; new age activist Deepak Chopra; rock guitarist Joe Perry; Mormon Elder William K. Jackson; executive chair of the British Board of Scholars and Imams, Shaykh Dr. Asim Yusuf; pro-abortion model Cindy Crawford; and disgraced ex-prefect of the Secretariat for Communication, Monsignor Dario Viganò.
Numerous other medical professionals, representatives of U.S. federal agencies, university lecturers, high-ranking company officials, and musicians also form the number of speakers. There are only two Catholic clergy listed amongst the 114 speakers.
Taking place within Vatican City, the event is being promoted with the social media messaging of “#UniteToPrevent and #UniteToCure.”
The image promoting the conference (featured at the top of this article) appears to be based on Michelangelo’s famous depiction of the Creation of Adam. In the new image two hands reach towards each other, with both hands covered by disposable gloves.
Indeed, the logo for the conference is a circle of people linking hands, colored in the tones of the LGBT rainbow flag, and positioned next to the crossed keys and Papal tiara of the Pontiff.
The event is hosted by Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, the president of the Pontifical Council for Culture, along with the General Secretary of the STOQ Monsignor Tomasz Trafny, and Robin L. Smith, who is the founder, president and chairman of Cura Foundation and Stem for Life, and vice-president and director of STOQ.
However, the trio will not be moderating the event, as this role will fall to ten “world-renowned journalists,” such as the executive VP of Forbes Moira Forbes,, Katie Couric, and journalists from major left-wing media corporations such as CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and the Wall Street Journal.
Will Vatican conference ignore God?
Perhaps as a sign of the Vatican’s recent declaration of financial difficulties, the conference is supported by numerous large organizations such as Sanford Health, Akkad Holdings, John Templeton Foundation, vaccine company Moderna, and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
The first stated aim of the conference is to foster “open dialogue” and to nurture “an interdisciplinary approach to tackle major health care challenges around the globe.”
Another goal is to “Examine the mind, body and soul interaction and discuss what it means to be human, and how transformative medical technologies are raising new challenges around human enhancement and the interpretation of the mind, body and soul.”
Given the minute presence of Catholic clergy at the conference, and the moderation by secular journalists, it remains to be seen whether this goal will reference to Catholic teaching on the relation between man and God, and whether it will ignore Catholic theological and philosophical thought regarding the soul.
Pope Francis’s recent environmental encyclical Laudato Si, is a guiding theme of the three-day conference.
Quoting from the document, the conference aims to “facilitate a conversation…‘about how we are shaping the future of our planet (...) which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all’.”
In the ten goals listed for the upcoming 2021 conference, the Pontifical Council for Culture made no reference to God or the Catholic Church.
As part of the conference, a smaller roundtable event will also take place, entitled “Bridging Science and Faith,” and is directed at the “relationship of religion and spirituality to health and wellbeing, including the relationship between mind, body and soul.”
Fauci to deliver conference’s opening address
The opening day of the conference will be headed by an intervention from Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and President Joe Biden’s chief health advisor, who recently assured the World Health Organization of the Biden regime’s commitment to funding abortion, and last year suggested that sex with strangers was safer than receiving Holy Communion during COVID times.
Fauci has spent more than a year stoking fear in the American public over the Wuhan coronavirus, despite it only having an infection fatality rate of 0.15%, and able to be effectively treated using Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D, and zinc.
Topics for the conference range from “Are We What We Eat?” and “Human Enhancement,” to “Living Healthily to 120 and Beyond” and “Sustainable Health Care: Protecting Our Environment.”
Only six of the topics are remotely connected to religion, and deal with themes such as “Religious Dietary Practices and Health” and “How Do You Define the Soul?”
The conference will also address issues related to the current domination of global affairs by governmental responses to COVID-19.
Aided by the presence of the CEOs of both Pfizer and Moderna, whose abortion-tainted vaccines are increasingly followed by deaths and serious injuries in the thousands, the conference will discuss the “revolutionising” of cell therapy, as well as “Comprehensive COVID-19 Solutions” and “A New Generation of Vaccines.”
Pope Francis will close the event by giving the participants a private, virtual “audience.”
With the first such conference taking place back in 2011, previous events have seen individuals such as pro-LGBT pop star Katy Perry addressing attendees on the subject of transcendental meditation.
This year’s iteration of the event has the largest number of speakers by far, and with its advertised line up of speakers and topics, looks set to continue the irreligious and anti-Catholic themes of previous conferences.
‘Another body blow to the Church’s prophetic witness against the abominable crime of murdering pre-born babies’
Already, faithful Catholics have taken to social media to express their consternation at the conference. Commenting on the manipulated image of the Creation of Adam, U.K. commentator Deacon Nick Donnelly, wrote: “The Vatican’s pastiche of Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam exposes their promotion of ‘a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God’ (CCC 675).”
In a comment provided to LifeSiteNews, Deacon Donnelly said that Pope Francis’s condemnations of abortion are undermined by the choice of speakers due to appear at the event.
Quote:There is a strange disjunction between Pope Francis’ words about abortion and his actions. While Pope Francis has issued some very strong statements condemning abortion these have been gravely undermined by his actions.
In 2016 he publicly praised Emma Bonino who boasts about facilitating 10,000 illegal abortions and who spearheaded the legalisation of abortion in Italy.
In 2018 he gave a major papal honor to the Dutch militant abortion activist Lilianne Ploumen, six months after she led a campaign to raise $300 million to fund abortions around the world.
In 2020 the world’s media trumpeted the pope accepting the use of cell lines in COVID vaccines that originate from aborted babies.
Now he’s welcoming to the Vatican, Chelsea Clinton, the vice-president of the Clinton Foundation that has deep ties with industrial scale abortionists Planned Parenthood, and the CEO’s of Moderna and Pfizer, experimenters on aborted babies.
The inclusion of prominent abortion advocates such as Chelsea Clinton as speakers at the Vatican’s Conference is another body blow to the Church’s prophetic witness against the abominable crime of murdering pre-born babies.
In the case of abortion, actions really do speak louder than words.
Similar concerns were expressed by Restoring the Faith Media, who noted how “The COVID Religion appears to have eclipsed the Catholic Faith in Rome. Complete with its own liturgy (socialist distancing), sacramentals (masks, hand sanitizer), and even its own sacraments (unless you inject this tainted serum, you have no life in you), the overt mockery of the faithful is on full display.”
A representative of Restoring the Faith commented to LifeSite: “Rather than correcting course, officials in the Eternal City appear to be accelerating towards that Great Apostasy Our Lady warned us would someday be upon us.”
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fis3-ssl.mzstatic.com%2F...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fis3-ssl.mzstatic.com%2Fimage%2Fthumb%2FPublication%2Fv4%2Fec%2Fd6%2F37%2Fecd6373b-d2f5-2199-0823-150b698f2fd3%2Fsource%2F1200x630bb.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
![[Image: Human-Fetal-Tissue-640x480.jpg]](https://media.breitbart.com/media/2021/04/Human-Fetal-Tissue-640x480.jpg)
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fnobility.org%2Fwp-conte...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fnobility.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F04%2FGarcia-Moreno.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.vox-cdn.com%2Fthum....0.jpg&f=1]](https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.vox-cdn.com%2Fthumbor%2FdPCstnDlWPW_mFuwQz1d0Uf-FpA%3D%2Fcdn0.vox-cdn.com%2Fuploads%2Fchorus_asset%2Ffile%2F3698602%2Fqueen-elizabeth-i.0.jpg&f=1)
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2F...29.png&f=1]](https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F3%2F31%2FMass_in_a_Connemara_Cabin_by_Aloysius_O%2527Kelly_%25281883%2529.png%2F250px-Mass_in_a_Connemara_Cabin_by_Aloysius_O%2527Kelly_%25281883%2529.png&f=1)
