| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 763 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 760 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Google
|
|
|
| New Vatican document urges Catholic families to ‘ecological conversion’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 2 hours ago - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
 |
New Vatican document urges Catholic families to ‘ecological conversion’
Two Vatican dicasteries released a joint document calling on Catholic families to embrace ‘integral ecology,’ drawing a direct line between environmental practice and moral formation.
![[Image: Untitled-33.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Untitled-33.png)
hurricanehank/Shutterstock
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — A new Vatican document calls on Catholic families to embrace “integral ecology,” framing “ecological conversion” as inseparable from the “journey toward holiness” and linking ecological habits to the fight against abortion and euthanasia.
On April 27, the Dicastery for Integral Human Development and the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life released a joint document titled “Integral Ecology in the Life of the Family,” the stated goal of which is to present the Catholic family as the “primary subject” of conversion to integral ecology.
“Social ecology is necessarily institutional, and gradually extends to the whole of society, from the primary social group, the family, to the wider local, national and international communities,” the document reads, quoting directly from Pope Francis’ 2015 encyclical Laudato si’.
“Families are not only called to care for their own members,” the document continues. “Significantly, the (Second Vatican) Council also recognized the role of families in actively participating in local communities, and even in being protagonists or, in a sense, genuine influencers of national policies that affect them – such as policies concerning social issues, education, infrastructure, labor, healthcare, and so on.”
The 79-page text is divided into two parts. The first outlines the concepts of ecology, family, and “grassroots commitment” in Pope Francis’s teaching. Here it is stated that the vocation to holiness inherent in every marriage necessarily implies conversion to an ecological way of life: “The journey toward holiness within a family can help address the roots of the ecological crisis, since we cannot delude ourselves into healing our relationship with nature and the environment without healing all fundamental human relationships.”
In the second part, which is itself divided into seven chapters, the document goes on to provide a series of practical guidelines and recommendations addressed to families.
In the first and second chapters, titled “Listening to the Cry of the Earth” and “Listening to the Cry of the Poor,” the authors argue that humanity and the planet are facing a “single ecological crisis” – one that concerns not only the degradation of the “Common Home” but also the rise of poverty. In this way, the document draws a direct connection between a supposed environmental emergency and economic problems.
According to the document, the first solution begins with “always keeping in mind the universal destination of goods.” The text thus echoes Pope Francis’ misleading interpretation of this concept that belongs to the Church’s social doctrine.
According to Francis, the “universal destination of goods” represents the goal of every sound social policy and, in practice, coincides with the redistribution of resources and wealth carried out by the state.
In Traditional Catholic doctrine, however, the “universal destination of goods” is a starting point: It affirms that the goods of the earth are meant for all, but that this principle is realized through free initiative, private property, and personal responsibility, not through coercive state intervention. It is the ethical foundation of economic freedom, not the justification for redistributive policy.
Embracing the typically socialist logic that seeks to identify a single actor as the cause of ecological crises (pollution) and economic crises (poverty) – namely wealthy, multinational corporations, and, more broadly, the private sector – can only lead to a politicization of the Church’s magisterium. In doing so, this view reduces the magisterium to a tool of globalist agendas and supranational entities such as the U.N. and the EU, which aim to impose increasingly centralized and intrusive fiscal and economic policies.
Moreover, the text includes bioethical issues such as abortion and euthanasia as part of the stated ecological‑economic crisis rather than as effects of a theological, anthropological, and moral crisis. The document thus suggests a normative and moral connection between adopting ecological lifestyles and combating bioethical issues. Since both stem from a “culture of waste,” if one learns to recycle and to respect the environment, then one will also learn to respect human life at every stage, per the new document.
However, this logical passage is not theologically or philosophically consistent. It conflates moral conversion with behavioral adaptation, implying that external ecological habits could generate internal ethical renewal. In reality, the relationship is inverted: respect for human life arises from a sound moral conscience, not from a supposed environmental discipline. Reducing moral formation to ecological practice risks transforming Christian ethics into a form of “green” moralism, where salvation is measured by lifestyle rather than by grace and virtue. The Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ has been replaced by respect for the “Common Home.”
Starting from these chapters, the document then presents a series of concrete proposals for changing the family’s lifestyle in a more ecological direction. Some suggestions are simple, others more demanding. “If you have access to an outdoor space, create a compost bin or a worm farm,” the document states. “If, however, you do not have access to such a space and the municipality does not provide composting services, ask your local school or parish whether it would be willing to host a community compost container.”
The text also recommends “collecting rainwater (and) visiting second‑hand markets” alongside “taking the opportunity to pray surrounded by nature, which may also include an outdoor Mass, with the permission of the local priest.”
The text suggests continuity with the concept of human ecology proposed by Pope John Paul II in Centesimus annus (1991), quoting a passage from it. Yet the perspective of Karol Wojtyła is diametrically opposed to that suggested by this document. According to the former pontiff, the solution to the ecological problem so dear to the modern world can only be found once the primary issue has been addressed: the acknowledgement of creation as order willed by God – a principle that also implies the existence of a natural moral law and grounds any genuine ecology in Christian anthropology.
Unfortunately, Francis’ socialist-like view has been adopted by Leo XIV in the apostolic exhortation Dilexi te (2025), in which the Pope explicitly proposed greater state interventionism as the main solution of the alleged ecological-economic crisis.
|
|
|
| Anthony Fauci’s former senior adviser indicted for role in COVID cover-up |
|
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 07:18 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular]
- No Replies
|
|
Anthony Fauci’s former senior adviser indicted for role in COVID cover-up
David Morens, a senior adviser to Fauci from 2006 to 2022, faces charges of conspiracy against the United States,
destruction or falsification of records in federal investigations, and more.
![[Image: GettyImages-1234075892.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/GettyImages-1234075892.jpg)
Dr. Anthony Fauci
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, Pool
Apr 28, 2026
(LifeSiteNews) — A former senior adviser to Dr. Anthony Fauci has been indicted for the role he played in the cover-up of the origin of the COVID-19 virus.
In 2020, COVID-19 brought the world to a standstill as governments enforced harsh lockdowns, delivering devastating economic and social consequences to workers, families, healthcare facilities, and churchgoers.
David Morens, 78, who was a senior adviser to Fauci from 2006 to 2022, has been charged with conspiracy against the United States; destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations; concealment, removal, or mutilation of records; and aiding and abetting, according to the New York Post.
The indictment, unsealed on Monday in Maryland federal court, also lists two unnamed co-conspirators who “concealed, removed, destroyed and caused the concealment, and removal of federal records to evade FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) and FRA (Federal Records Act),” the New York Post reported.
“Morens oversaw a now-infamous grant from NIH to the Manhattan-based nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance beginning in 2014 that ended up funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research,” the New York Post noted.
Morens is accused of using his private email to conceal exchanges with colleagues in order to maintain control of Fauci’s preferred narrative that the COVID-19 virus originated naturally from a “wet market” near Wuhan, China, rather than from the lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where Fauci was reportedly secretly funding “gain of function research” – an area of scientific experimentation banned in the United States.
In May 2024, Morens testified before the House COVID Select Subcommittee about an email that he sent in February 2021 claiming that he had learned to make emails disappear after he received FOIA requests, according to a Fox News report.
“These allegations represent a profound abuse of trust at a time when the American people needed it most – during the height of a global pandemic,” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement.
“As alleged in the indictment, Dr. Morens and his co-conspirators deliberately concealed information and falsified records in an effort to suppress alternative theories regarding the origins of COVID-19,” Blanche continued. “Government officials have a solemn duty to provide honest, well-grounded facts and advice in service of the public interest – not to advance their own personal or ideological agendas.”
“Not only did Morens allegedly engage in the illegal obfuscation of his communications, but he received kickbacks for doing so,” FBI Director Kash Patel said in a statement.
|
|
|
|
| Congressman flusters abortion advocate by asking what her ‘favorite method’ is |
|
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 07:14 AM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Congressman flusters abortion advocate by asking what her ‘favorite method’ is
Rep. Brandon Gill told an abortion advocate that he didn’t blame her for not responding to his questioning.
‘I wouldn’t want to talk about this either if I were you, because it is barbaric and evil.'
![[Image: GettyImages-2257617766.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/GettyImages-2257617766.jpg)
U.S. Rep. Brandon Gill
Al Drago/Getty Images
Apr 28, 2026
(LifeSiteNews) — Republican U.S. House Rep. Brandon Gill of Texas made an abortion advocate visibly squirm during a Capitol Hill hearing when he repeatedly asked her what her “favorite method of abortion” is.
“I’m an advocate for patients having access to the full realm of reproductive health care,” Jessica L Waters replied.
Undaunted, Gill pressed Waters, who touts herself as a nationally recognized expert in U.S. abortion rights law and policy.
“But do you have a preferred method of abortion that you like?” Gill asked.
Gill then offered to read descriptions of different abortion methods. “I want to get your take on how much you like these.”
“The first type is called a ‘Suction Abortion.’ This is when the cervix is dilated and a strong suction, 29 times the power of a household vacuum cleaner, tears the baby’s body apart and sucks it through the hose into a container,” Gill said.
“Do you prefer that method?” Gill asked.
Waters chose not to answer, instead saying that she stood by her former testimony.
Gill wouldn’t let the visibly disturbed Waters off the hook. “That sounds kind of gross, doesn’t it? Sounds pretty gruesome. Do you agree?”
Waters again refused to answer Gill’s questions.
“What about this one: This one is called ‘Dilation and Curettage,’” Gill noted. “After dilation of the cervix, a sharp-looped knife is inserted into the uterus. The baby’s body is cut into pieces and extracted, often by suction.”
“Do you prefer that method?” Gill again asked.
Waters attempted to avoid Gill’s questioning by returning to a discussion of the FACE Act.
Gill wasn’t having it. “You’re an abortion advocate. I’m asking if you prefer the Dilation and Curettage’ method.”
When Waters again deflected, Gill challenged her: “You don’t want to talk about abortion itself, why is that?”
“Is it because it’s uncomfortable to talk about?” he asked the now-stuttering abortion advocate.
“It should be uncomfortable,” Gill said in a somber tone.
“How about this one? It’s called ‘Dilation and Evacuation.’ Forceps are inserted into the uterus, grabbing and twisting the baby’s body to dismember him or her,” Gill described. “If the head is too large, it must be crushed in order to remove it. Do you prefer that method?”
Gill then said to the clearly shaken Waters, “It’s uncomfortable to hear this, isn’t it?”
“It is … because it’s barbaric and evil,” Gill declared.
The Republican congressmen would not let up.
“How about this one? It’s called a ‘Saline Injection.’ It’s when a 20 percent salt solution is injected through the mother’s abdomen into the baby’s amniotic fluid. The baby’s skin is burned off. The baby ingests the solution and dies of salt poisoning, dehydration, and hemorrhaging of the brain.”
“Do you prefer that method?” Gill asked.
Again, the now-livid Waters sidestepped Gill’s questioning.
Gill then said that he didn’t blame Waters for not addressing his questioning. “I wouldn’t want to talk about this either if I were you, because it is barbaric and evil.”
|
|
|
|
| Leo XIV on Anglican Dialogue: Overcoming Differences, No Matter How Intractable They Seem |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-27-2026, 10:43 AM - Forum: Pope Leo XIV
- Replies (2)
|
|
Leo XIV on Anglican Dialogue: Overcoming Differences, No Matter How Intractable They Seem
![[Image: z6nnlxn960hbk41dsx7woj661tc6niu69hv4kpe?...1777425479]](https://seedus2043.gloriatv.net/storage1/z6nnlxn960hbk41dsx7woj661tc6niu69hv4kpe?secure=q2Z-7_0mM0ZoxKdfI5k3sw&expires=1777425479)
gloria.tv | April 27, 2026
Meeting for the first time with Anglican Dame Sarah Mullally, who holds the title Archbishop of Canterbury, Leo XIV encourages Catholics and Anglicans to proclaim Christ together.
They prayed together in the Urban VIII Chapel in the Apostolic Palace.
Leo XIV spoke about a fake archbishop who was an Anglican layman, and a pope who was far from saintly.
“When archbishop Michael Ramsey and Saint Pope Paul VI announced the first theological dialogue between Anglicans and Catholics [in 1966], they spoke of seeking the ‘restoration of complete communion in faith and sacramental life’. Certainly this ecumenical journey has been complex. While much progress has been made on some historically divisive issues, new problems have arisen in recent decades, rendering the pathway to full communion more difficult to discern.
I know that the Anglican Communion is also facing many of these same questions at this time.
Nevertheless, we must not allow these continuing challenges to prevent us from using every possible opportunity to proclaim Christ to the world together.
As my beloved predecessor, Pope Francis, said to the Primates of the Anglican Communion in 2024, ‘it would be a scandal if, due to our divisions, we did not fulfil our common vocation to make Christ known.’
For my part, I add that it would also be a scandal if we did not continue to work towards overcoming our differences, no matter how intractable they may appear.”
|
|
|
|
| Mgr. Ségur: Excerpt - Short Answers to Common Objections Against Religion [1908] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-27-2026, 10:39 AM - Forum: Sedevacantism
- No Replies
|
|
Mgr. Louis de Ségur: Short Answers to Common Objections Against Religion - 1908
Taken from here.
FOURTEENTH OBJECTION. THERE ARE CERTAINLY SOME BAD PRIESTS - HOW CAN THEY BE THE MINISTERS OF GOD?
Answer. Because, in becoming bad men, they do not cease to be Priests.
Do you cease to be a Christian, because you commit a sin? Does a judge cease to be a judge, do his decisions cease to have a binding
force because his own integrity is not above reproach? Does a father cease to be a father because he fails in his duties? Does a captain lose the right to command his men because he himself commits a breach of discipline?
If it is so in human affairs, where public trusts may, in the strictest sense, be taken away from those who are not worthy of them, how much more stable, more inalienable yet, should not be, in spiritual things, that sacred character of the priesthood on which rests the security of men's consciences, and the whole life of the faithful!
If our Priests ceased to be Priests by the sole fact of committing some grievous sin, we should never know if we really received the holy things from their hands; for God alone knows and searches men's consciences.
It is for us that they are priests; and for us that they remain so, even when they forget their greatness.
|
|
|
|
| Holy Mass in New Hampshire - May 3, 2026 |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-26-2026, 06:39 AM - Forum: May 2026
- No Replies
|
|
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Feast of the Finding of the Holy Cross
w/ Commemoration of the Fourth Sunday after Easter
[May Crowning]
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fuploads0.wikiart.org%2F...066744167d]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fuploads0.wikiart.org%2Fimages%2Ftintoretto%2Ffinding-the-true-cross-1578.jpg!Large.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=c014da4c03ed09843d3eceb3bbbf8b13afad0c09d6c9687198d588066744167d)
Date: Sunday, May 3, 2026
Time: Confessions - 9:45 AM
Holy Mass - 10:30 AM
Location: The Oratory of the Sorrowful Heart of Mary
66 Gove's Lane
Wentworth, NH 03282
Contact: 315-391-7575
sorrowfulheartofmaryoratory@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
