Biden’s Military Vaccine Mandate is a Political Test
After only 95 COVID deaths, Biden wants to purge tens of thousands of unvaccinated US military personnel.
Friends,
And it couldn't happen to a better ogre than the odious Gregory.
An air of earnest contemplation hung over Sunday Mass, tinged by sadness.
This would be one of the last weeks the church’s parishioners would be able to celebrate using a traditional Latin form that traces its roots back more than a millennium.
Last year, prompted by ideological wars between conservative and liberal wings, Pope Francis said he wanted to limit use of the old Latin form of Mass.
This week, the consequences of that papal letter — issued halfway across the world — landed here in Washington with heavy consequences for this small parish in the city’s Chinatown neighborhood.
By Sept. 21, the parish was told, they were to cease use of the Latin rituals that had been part of St. Mary’s history almost since its founding in 1845. Friday’s local decree, written by Cardinal Wilton Gregory, who oversees the archdiocese of Washington, allows only three non-parish churches in the region to perform the Latin Rite. That means hundreds of Catholics who attend that type of Mass at roughly six parishes in the D.C. area — including St. Mary Mother of God — will be forced to overhaul their ritual or abandon their spiritual homes to attend the three locations in the area allowed to perform it.
“It’s been devastating to be honest,” said Erin Menke, 42, whose family has attended St. Mary for almost two decades. Three sons had been altar servers at the parish. To assist the parish priest, they painstakingly learned the intricacies of the Latin Mass, which incorporates traditional elements like incense, Gregorian chant and elaborate gestures and words often missing from the modern form of the Mass.
“There’s a sacred reverence to it that is just beautiful,” Menke said. “These words that are spoken and have been spoken for centuries in the church, they often feel like the closest thing to heaven that we’ve got. To realize we are going to lose that, we’re in shock.”
Friends,
The Respect for Marriage Act would enshrine same-sex “marriage” into federal law, override duly enacted laws and constitutional amendments in 35 states, require the federal government to recognize polygamy or any other redefinition of marriage that a state may come up with, and open the door to a wide range of new threats to religious freedom.
The bill, largely intended as a Democratic messaging stunt before the midterms, is nothing less than a declaration of war on the family and Christians and a gift to the radical LGBT movement and Democrats’ far-left base.
The Mass suppression becomes effective September 21 of this year, giving TLM parishioners at churches such as Saint Mary Mother of God (where this writer has attended for over 26 years; the parish had the TLM from 1845 until 1969, then again from the mid-1980s until now) just nine weeks to pack up and say goodbye. To say goodbye to where I was married. To say goodbye to where I served as godfather for baptisms. To say goodbye to the Gregorian chant schola I have sung in for nearly three decades. To say goodbye to the church where I attended around 2,000 traditional Latin Masses, numerous baptisms, and many nuptial and Requiem Masses. To say goodbye to where I made many of my friends. To say goodbye to where TLM parishioners -- from Antonin Scalia to Pat Buchanan to Nellie Gray to James Buckley to young adults and large families -- spent countless hours at coffee and donuts socials after Sunday Masses. To say goodbye to the Blessed Karl Mass and the epicenter for March for Life TLMs. To say goodbye to my spiritual home.
Matthew 23
13 But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not enter in; and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter.
14 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: because you devour the houses of widows, praying long prayers. For this you shall receive the greater judgment.
15 Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you go round about the sea and the land to make one proselyte; and when he is made, you make him the child of hell twofold more than yourselves.
Amici,
This umpteenth show of strength by Cupich, who is cynical and ruthless towards the faithful even before the Canons of the Institute of Christ the King, can constitute a healthy moment of reflection on the many omissions and equivocations that need to be clarified, especially in the matter of acceptance of the Conciliar mens and the Bergoglian “magisterium.” I trust that the Canons of Christ the King and all of the Ecclesia Dei institutes will be able to see in these days of trial a precious opportunity for purification, courageously witnessing to the necessary coherence between the profession of Faith and its cultic expression in the Mass, and the consequent irreconcilability between these and the doctrinal and liturgical deviations of Vatican II. Because it is not possible to celebrate the Mass of Saint Pius V and at the same time to accept the errors of its enemies.
Cupich knows this very well, and this is why he wants to prevent the celebration of that Mass. He knows how much that Mass is a very powerful exorcism against the servants of the devil, both those who wear miters and those who do not. He knows how immediately that Mass is understandable to anyone for its supernatural sense of the sacred and divine – the mysterium tremendum of Moses before the burning bush – and how that Mass opens the eyes of the faithful, warms their hearts, and enlightens their minds. After decades of unspeakable torments, the faithful are finally able to approach the Majesty of God, to be converted, to change their lives, to educate their children in holiness, and to spread the Faith by their example. What could be more desirable for a Bishop who is truly a Shepherd of the Sheep entrusted to him by the Lord? And what could be more detestable for those who want to see the Sheep be torn to pieces by wolves or fall into the abyss?
The lay faithful, priests, and Bishops have the sacred and urgent duty to rise up against the decisions of these completely discredited characters and to demand, without yielding an inch, that the venerable Tridentine Liturgy remain an inviolable bulwark of doctrine, morality, and spirituality. We must obey God rather than men (Acts 5:29), especially when these men have demonstrated by their reprehensible conduct, that they do not love either God or their brothers in the Faith.
Friends,
Good question. A "short" answer:
It's a chain of causation that goes back to the Reformation. One element was René Descartes' idea that we are machines, and the human soul is but a "ghost in the machine." You can see the result of that in modern medicine: it treats us primarily like machines, rather than souls. "Dr House" was a good example in popular culture of a physician who proceeded on those grounds.
But a BIG link in that chain was Darwin and the whole theory of Darwinism beyond the bounds of Darwin himself. Once it became generally accepted that humans were just clever apes, with some human tribes smarter than others (whites smarter than browns, browns smarter than blacks) we were linked into the primate series (chimps smarter than gorillas, etc.). This in turn acted like a corrosive slowly but steadily making the argument that we're just animals that needed treated like animals. See the Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male for how the big shots applied Darwinian thinking. Or the history of the Nazis.
Then look at Marx and economic determinism, the latter of which, in a capitalistic form, motivates Big Gov/Big Pharma/Big Med today. G.K. Chesterton said economic determinism was like saying, "Because I have feet, I only walk around on them to find shoes for them." That's a perfect description of what the Powers-That-Be think of us and the way they've tried to educate us to be for a century. John Dewey played a huge role in educating us into being that type of being. Look him up (1859-1952), lauded by the cultural destroyers and loathed by those of us who know his role in "uneducating" us entirely.
Amici,
That is our vocation and our duty to which we are vowed before Almighty God. We must be faithful to that. We can do nothing else without becoming mere hirelings that flee with the onset of the wolves (cf. Jn 10:23).
If we must be canonically independent for a while, so be it. We do not wish this, of course, and shall ensure that we maintain good relations with other monastics and shall invite appropriately experienced monks to make visitations every three years, and so on. If we must be independent, we must not become insular. In time, in God’s Providence, the authorities will come to recognise the integrity of our life and grant us the appropriate authorisation—as has happened in the not-so-distant past.
The most obvious parallel is that of the first two decades of the history of the Abbey of Le Barroux: its founder, Dom Gerard Calvet, was suspended and expelled from the Benedictine order for having his men ordained without permission (those ordained were suspended also)—only for him to be blessed as an abbot by a cardinal sent by the Vatican some fifteen years later.
Let us not forget the origins of the Fraternity of St Peter or of the Institute of the Good Shepherd: they would not exist today if it were not for the conscientious disobedience of several decades ago that ensured that the Society of St Pius X continued on when it was canonically suppressed in the 1970s.
People who benefit from the good work of these Institutes today, or indeed who admire the Abbey of Le Barroux, should not forget the fact that they exist today because historically their founders took conscientious decisions to ignore parts of canon law and decrees of suppression that would have otherwise brought about their death. Our times, unfortunately, seem to be becoming as extraordinary as were theirs and may well necessitate similar actions.
Amici,
Cupich of Chicago has told the members of the Institute of Christ the King in Chicago, that he is effectively shutting them down as of 1 August. This will be formally announced on Sunday at the Institute’s church on the South Side of Chicago.
No Masses. Nothing. 31 July is their last day to function.
I’m sorry that the Institute itself was not able to break the news.
This is very bad for everyone, as it is another move to slam shut the gates of grace, to make the Church smaller, stingier, narrower. If a place is doing well, then – by gum – crush it.
It seems that they would rather have smoking, salt-sown craters rather than vibrant churches where Tradition is maintained. I am reminded of the fateful words of Tacitus about the Romans in Germany: “Where they make a desert, they call it peace.”
No man who practices deceitshall live within my house.No man who utters lies shall standbefore my eyes.Morning by morning I will silenceall the wicked in the land,Uprooting from the city of the Lordall who do evil.Psalm 101 (Douay-Rheims Psalm 100)
In yesterday's article titled Prophecy and "....the tomb seething with worms that is the Bergoglian church", I mentioned Global Warming/Climate Change.
There's been some new developments.
Trying to live up the the lie that is "Climate Change" by "Going Green" in energy production, governments around the world are in tremendous stress. The government of Sri Lanka seems to have collapsed, and now the prime ministers of Italy and Estonia have just resigned, joining Boris Johnson in the unemployment line. Pity we can't get ride of the Biden Regime so easily!
Another item concerned Covid and the testing for it. A friend told me he had acquired Covid. I wrote him back asking how he knows he has Covid, and he's now responded. He says he experienced classic Covid symptoms – which can come with other sorts of illness, of course – and his regularly-taken antigen test turned positive, then a subsequent PCR test he engaged confirmed it.
He's rock-solid in believing this, and we are in Placebo/Nocebo territory. If one believes one will recover, he likely will; if one things he cannot (nocebo), he might not. And of course this works for the inbetween state of neither dying nor being healthy, but just being sick.
I don't try to argue. I tried early on, but that didn't work. Some folks have bought into "the narrative" about Covid, and there's no shifting them. There's no "Minority Report" with such folks. So be it.
Though of course I could argue, if I thought it would do any good. Here are five items to know about if you want to argue against the Covid tests.
- First of all, whenever you are ill, either from toxins from any source: old-fashioned poisons, EMFs, malnutrition, or stress, kidney or gall stones, whatever, these cause cellular degeneration and produce a lot of exosomes, virus-sized genetic carrying items that clean up cell detritus and communicate one's health status to other parts of the body. All of these things in turn ring alarm bells in these tests: antigen, antibody, PCR, etc. (I have COPD, for example, and more or less chronic kidney stones: any Covid test would scream bloody murder if I was stupid enough to let myself be tested.)
- Now, you-all know what I think of the PCR. As for the antigen/antibody tests (closely related to each other but still not quite the same): "An antigen is a molecule that stimulates an immune response by activating white blood cells that fight disease. Antigens may be present on invaders, such as bacteria, viruses, parasites, fungi, and transplanted organs, or on abnormal cells, such as cancer cells." Whew. Right there one has an entire HOST of possibilities to juggle. How do you remotely decide among all that to declare, as it were: "I'll take Door Number 3, Bob!"
- So an antigen test is a diagnostic test testing for pathogen detection that registers the presence or absence of a particular antigen of an illness-causing pathogen. But what if you have never isolated, or purified, and then characterized, the pathogen in question? With Covid, they've published articles saying they've isolated it. Indeed, that looks good in the paper's title. But read the fine print in the Method section. I proofread a lot of scientific papers in sociology, and while they're generally pretty good, always the most tedious part is the Methods section. Yet it is the most significant section. If you read that section carefully, you'll occasionally find a pretty slipshod "method". A smallish sample might be involved. Restricted criteria. A lot of supposition in drawing conclusions can easily manifest itself. Even guesswork. All that can exist in "hard science" papers too, along with always a lot of Star Trek Next Generation-type "technobabble". See this mainstream news article from 2018 about the failure of scientific papers. But everyone wants to dwell on the Conclusion's section. Yet that is only as good as the Methods section proves itself to be.
- For Covid, they used the cell-culture method invented 60 years ago to "characterize" a hodge-podge celluar-biotic mixture drawn – only in part, mind you – from a single middle-aged Wuhan citizen. We are talking about specific molecules here drawn from molecular soup, and the soupier it is, the easier to find the "specific" genetics! How can one test for anything in that context? The PCR itself "tests" for a sequence of DNA drawn from the cell-culture method used on that Wuhan fellow, and it does so by repeated cycles of magnification, and everyone knows the more cycles you run, the more positives you get! But again, how can you test for Covid genetic when you've never isolated and purified Covid? There's no way to know that the bit of material you have is either unique or even originated in the virus you're testing for. And most importantly: remember, the package insert for the PCR and antibody tests say that you may get a false positive if you have one of about 40 conditions!
- The whole thing is simply nuts. All of these tests trigger positives if you are ill, and being ill means by definition to have a higher concentration of bio-detritus floating about your system. It is a classic case of finding what you're looking for or also 'the effect proves the cause', when in all the history of virology, we've never truly found a virus that causes a disease. (Or even extracted a virus from human body fluid.
Such are my updates. Keep in mind that "science" is now mostly technology. How do you know you have X disease? Mostly because machines tell you so. Physicians don't run the machines, either, but rather techs. (A lot cheaper to employ!) And whereas "science" wants to know, and should be hyper-rigorous in proving any thesis, technology wants to make, period, and make primarily a profit. Always keep that in mind. By itself, it explains a great deal of the whole Covid debacle.
AnP
Preach it, Brother Viganò! The good archbishop was right on target calling the Bergoglian nightmare anti-church "the tomb seething with worms."
"Permit me," Archbishop Viganò writes, "to express my spiritual closeness to you at a moment of great trial for you: as a baptized Catholic and as a Minister of God, it must be painful for you to be accused by the same person who, with the mercy that distinguishes his every act, receives notorious abortionists, those who are publicly cohabiting, transvestites, sodomites, rebellious clerics, heretics, usurers, and those who starve their people."
Amici,
A commentator ("coop") at Steve Kirsch's site posted the following comment:
Stanford is injecting children right now in a trial!
https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2021issue2/upfront/clinical-trail-children-covid-vaccines.html
“Since May, researchers have tested whether the vaccine produces an immune response and prevents COVID-19 in children 5 through 11 years old.
The Stanford study site is also evaluating vaccine dosages for children 6 months through 4 years old.
Final results for the older age group are expected later this year.
“Children under 18 make up about a quarter of the U.S. population, so if we want to get the virus under control, we really need to include them,” said Yvonne Maldonado, MD, who is running the trials’ Stanford site.
Maldonado is the Taube Professor in Global Health and Infectious Diseases at Stanford."
AnP:
To which insanity, I responded:
“Children under 18 make up about a quarter of the U.S. population, so if we want to get the virus under control, we really need to include them,” said Yvonne Maldonado, MD, who is running the trials’ Stanford site."
Point 1 Children have never been shown to be adversely affected in the first place, as carriers or as ill children. Focusing on them therefore is either ontologically stupid or it has nefarious purpose. There can be no escaping either conclusion.
Point 2 According to standard virus theory, these waves of plagues come and go naturally, they have well-recognized "life-cycles" that play out, and have done for recorded history, and interfering with that natural cycle causes the viruses to be both longer-lasting and more virulent.
Point 3 Prove the damned thing exists in the first place, you twit, before your Big Pharma masters conjure up back-magic potions to deal with it! Since "Covid" is only an "in silico" beast, solely computer modeled, you have no argument for anything, except to exhibit your ignorance. So, point four:
Point 4 Go soak your empty head, Yvonne.
Argument from Authority
Something quite significant needs to be understood. We lay a lot of weight on arguments from authority, but such are only as good as the authority, yet "authority" is often just old thinking that's been bypassed, or is just entrenched because it makes certain people way too much money. And therefore, to have garnered a high credential in some academic institution often means you merely know how to parrot ideas that are stale, wrong, or completely irrelevant to the current situation. Think of modern-day Marxists. Almost all of them are "idiot intellectuals" ensconced in academia, unable to change a lightbulb but more than willing to pontificate on how you, yourself, should live.
ANYONE with experience in academia knows how that works, and how petty and even feudal so much of higher education is! Usually, established systems "self-select" to reinforce what configurations (mental, spiritual, intellectual, etc.) they already have. Over any length of time, it gets near impossible to reform or reinvigorate such a system. Certain Churches obviously self-select over generations, and the current Catholic Church under Bergoglio and those who have been supporting him, the "Modernists" constitute a good example.
Never has there been a collection of fools and knaves as we have in the dying "Vatican II Church", that "tomb seething with worms" as Archbishop Viganò so aptly refers to it. What business of any sort but the most ideologically driven would shut down the most vibrant and growing segment of itself? Yet that is what Bergoglio has done.
Historically, one sees this same phenomenon in militaries: they're always fighting the last war or resisting new ideas in general. Currently, the U.S. military is an utter fiasco. Brilliant officers are forced out, and replaced by toadies who insist men can get preggers. It's literally insane. Another military that isn't quite so "hardened of the arteries" then comes along and cleans their clock, as the U.S. military's will be.
It also happens in the history of business and politics, and of course, medicine.
But somehow, this pattern just keeps repeating. People seem naturally disposed to live in mental ruts, going around and around like broken records. They resist what audit systems exist. Congress is supposed to be an audit system of government, as is judicial review, but look what little good these do today! Only severe crises as what we're experiencing from the whole Covid/Covid "vaccine" mess have the chance to force change.
And indeed, the change must be "forced"! Think of the changes the 1929 Stock Market Crash forced on the economy, or Pear Harbor forced on the U.S. military, or the early Union defeats in the Civil War. Examples from all areas could be multiplied ad infinitum.
AnP