| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Forum Statistics |
» Members: 166
» Latest member: Cristera
» Forum threads: 4,162
» Forum posts: 7,648
Full Statistics
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 116 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 112 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Yandex, 70three
|
|
|
| The Meat Replacement Hypothesis |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-23-2022, 08:59 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
 |
The Meat Replacement Hypothesis:
The plot to eliminate animal protein is well ahead of your plans to keep eating it.
American Mind [adapted - emphasis mine] | September 22, 2022
Farmers across the world are in open revolt against their governments. In India, thousands of farmers have stormed New Delhi, alleging collusion between the Prime Minister and major agricultural corporations. In the Netherlands, new restrictions on nitrogen emissions from fertilizer that threaten to destroy farmers’ livelihoods have driven battalions of tractors into the streets—and conflicts with the police. In Sri Lanka, the President’s sudden decision to ban chemical fertilizers and impose universal organic farming recently led to massive protests and the collapse of their government. Similar environmentalist policies are about to be imposed in Ireland and Canada, where just last year truckers shut down the city of Ottawa over COVID vaccination mandates.
Writing for National Review, Andrew Stuttaford predicts an impending farmer’s uprising in Canada in response to what he calls Canada’s “war on beef.” The phrase echoes a common belief on the American right that leftists seek to hyper-regulate or outright ban animal protein in the same way they do guns or fossil fuels. The Foundation for Economic Education began talking about a “war on meat” as early as 2019. Senator Joni Ernst referenced “the left’s war on meat” to advocate her TASTEE Act last year. John Daniel Davidson of The Federalist recently warned that “America is Next” for a farmer uprising, due to the climate policies that Democrats are imposing here. Ultimately, many Americans have come to agree that this war on meat is a conspiracy of globalist elites, attributing even everyday agricultural misfortunes such as fertilizer scarcity, diesel fuel price hikes, widespread food processing and crop fires, and supply chain disruptions to a purposeful agenda.
The concern is warranted. Upending the meat industry for environmental or health reasons should not be a serious policy debate. Ranchers and farmers are the only source of the nutritious, whole protein that nearly every culture includes in its cuisine. For all but the most religious vegan or “food activism” theorist, there is little doubt that including animal protein in your diet keeps you leaner and stronger, alive longer, and free of chronic illness.
Eat the Bugs
I presented the question of a “war on meat” to John Cain Carter, a cattle rancher whose operations in Texas and Brazil led him to establish the well-known rainforest conservation organization Aliança da Terra. Through his advocacy, he is deeply familiar with the world of pro-environment NGOs, but despite working in the same field, he does not view them positively. Groups like the World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, The Nature Conservancy, The Rockefeller Foundation and others are engaged, says Carter, in a “siege on the beef business” and “an attack exquisitely planned as far back as the 1950s.”
“These groups want to wipe out independent family ranches in advance of corporate takeover,” Carter said, “And they push for policies that increase input costs and keep commodity prices stagnant while inflation rises.” And governments, he continued, are more than happy to oblige “under the auspices of climate change, animal welfare, and endangered species to restrict grazing rights, control water usage, and enact other regulations.” In essence, Carter was describing a hostile, focused agenda that was neither accidental nor disorganized.
Many governments and influential NGOs regularly call for the end of meat-based diets, and take steps to ensure that meat is eaten less. Most notoriously, World Economic Forum chair Klaus Schwab has made reducing meat consumption an essential element of the WEF’s “Great Reset” plan. Along with the WEF, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the EU’s “Green Deal” call for less meat-based diets. Germany, Denmark, and Sweden have proposed a meat tax as a way to reduce carbon emissions from cows. All of these measures focused on the meat industry as a significant driver of climate change.
Texas cattle rancher Bart Simmons, who has built a social media presence to counter what he calls “elite anti-meat messaging,” considers such arguments pernicious. “The anti-meat movement effectively tied methane from cattle as a cause for climate change early on in the debate, and it stuck,” Simmons told me. “The EPA attributes only 1.9% of America’s greenhouse gases to methane and nitrous oxide from beef cattle, less than a tenth of other industries like electricity or transportation.” If there is a war on beef, it’s misguided.
This is especially true when we scrutinize what would replace meat in the global diet. The famous expression “we will not eat the bugs” has become a canned response to global initiatives focused on protein derived from crickets or mealworms. But the meat replacement industry is even more technologically savvy: Bill Gates, Richard Branson, and other billionaires have begun heavily investing in laboratory meat products (which they ironically call “clean meat”) grown from stem cells, soy, gelatin, and genetically-engineered yeast. An NYU researcher has even proposed making modifications to human bodies to make us smaller and allergic to meat, specifically citing the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as a motivation. On the economic side, one of the WEF’s favored startups, Doconomy, has introduced a “carbon credit card” which will shut off if the user purchases too much meat. Such climate-conscious financial practices align well with the World Bank’s Food Systems 2030 plan, which shares the same views on global agriculture.
Meat Coupons
It’s not extreme to call this trend a “War on Meat” and to point out that it is being waged by leftist elites. The top left-aligned newspaper The New York Times has called meat-eating racist, the Soros- and Ford-funded organization Open Democracy has called it “far-right”, and President Joe Biden has called for reducing red meat consumption by 90 percent. Agriculture and diet have now become a partisan struggle.
On the other hand, most leftists still eat meat, and anti-meat messaging still occupies a fairly small political niche. In fact, even the globalist organizations mentioned above are not always anti-meat in their official statements and documents. The WEF acknowledges that meat is and always will be a core part of many diets, and ought to be, given its nutritional value. The EU’s Nutri-Score, which is part of the Green Deal, rates meat products very highly as healthy choices, despite the overall program attacking meat consumption.
Whatever the urgency or seriousness of this conspiracy against meat, it would be a mistake to ignore the elites’ anti-meat trend or think it doesn’t affect us personally. Food is never just an individual choice. The unprecedented bounty of the twenty-first century creates the illusion that food supplies are infinite. But this is not the case: meat abounds because demand is high. As meat demand falls—as it has significantly in the United Kingdom and the United States—the meat supply soon follows. If you’re not convinced, go to a few grocery stores and try to buy a jabuticaba or a cherimoya—you’ll find they are not in stock, since there is no demand for them.
As NGOs and the media attack meat from a consumption side, governments across the world attack the farming and ranching profession itself. The tax proposals that have caused the uprisings in The Netherlands and Sri Lanka are just the tip of the iceberg. In the United States, a staggering number of farmers are retirement age, with an entire career spent paying off overleveraged farm land, equipment, and supply purchases, only to have their revenue subject to the whims of price control, weather, and state and federal policies. Meanwhile, while student loans for college attendees are being forgiven, there is no such debt jubilee for farmers—in fact, agricultural debt is treated far worse.
The availability of meat is not solely a matter of government policy, either. America’s farmers generally use methods of raising cattle that enervate instead of replenishing the soil. In order for meat to be plentiful and good-quality, soil must be nutrient-rich and provide diverse vegetation for grazing. Rotational and multispecies grazing are solutions that should be more widely adopted to ensure healthier livestock and reduce the need for fertilizer and pesticide.
Whether or not there is a conspiracy against meat, pro-agriculture reforms must be a national priority. Getting to the bottom of a globalist scheme does nothing to solve the ongoing farming crisis, but neither nor does throwing up our hands as if nothing can be done against elite global planners, who desire to remake the world, but so far lack the coercive power to carry it out.
Saving Meat
Meat lovers should fortify the industry with some concrete steps. First, more robust marketing of healthy, high-quality meat is needed to counter anti-meat messaging. This will protect supply for meat by driving up demand. This is already common among independent sources like fitness and nutrition influencers, cooking and lifestyle magazines, and local trade groups. Like-minded health and wellness institutions and professionals must continue speaking the truth and countering false narratives about meat, before the anti-meat perspective becomes orthodoxy.
Secondly, the policy posture of federal regulatory agencies must refocus against toxic, exploitative food producers—not small farmers. The power of federal agencies like the FDA and USDA should be limited to their original purposes of truth-in-labeling and the protection of the food supply. The current confusion and industry invasion of meat replacements is a direct outgrowth of these agencies’ arrogating the magisterial authority to define specific types of foods. Billionaire-backed laboratory meat startups and green ideologues have pushed the USDA to allow controversial substances like the cultured tissue of fetal bovine serum to be speciously labeled “meat.”
Lastly, meat advocates must push for government policies focused on bolstering meat production and training more farmers. Even the most anti-meat globalist understands that meat is an industry employing millions of people—and the Sri Lankan revolt has demonstrated once and for all what happens when a “Great Reset” is attempted all at once. There is an opening for meat’s defenders to pass legislation that can financially incentivize certain types of healthy farming and make it possible for more young Americans to train in agricultural trades. If the current presidential administration can openly debate the cancellation of billions of dollars of student loan debt, surely we can discuss debt relief for small farmers, many of whom have mortgaged their land and remain buried in long-term interest payments.
Two things can be true at once: powerful forces can be leading opposition to healthy meat consumption, and the meat industry can do more to protect itself. To prevent meat from becoming a rare and prohibitively expensive luxury item, meat producers and consumers must work together to stop punitive legislation and propaganda from destroying meat-based nutrition. Simultaneously, strengthening and reforming the industry must become a policy and a cultural priority. Diet is the root of America’s national health—and we must strive to protect our high-quality protein from livestock agriculture.
|
|
|
| World Economic Forum cites compliance with COVID mandates to promote ‘climate change’ lockdowns |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-22-2022, 05:55 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- No Replies
|
|
World Economic Forum cites compliance with COVID mandates to promote ‘climate change’ lockdowns
The WEF suggested COVID-19 lockdowns have created an environment in which
the ‘lack of social acceptance and political resistance’ to climate restrictions may be overcome.
![[Image: klaus-schwab-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/klaus-schwab-810x500.jpg)
Klaus Schwab speaks as part of SWITCH GREEN during day 1 of the Greentech Festival at Kraftwerk Mitte aired on September 16, 2020 in Berlin, Germany. Photo by Getty Images/Getty Images for Greentech Festival
Sep 21, 2022
GENEVA, Switzerland (LifeSiteNews) — The World Economic Forum is boasting that mass compliance with draconian COVID-19 mandates “demonstrated the core of individual social responsibility” and helped pave the way for upcoming “climate”-related restrictions.
Headed by German engineer, economist, and COVID-19: The Great Reset author Klaus Schwab, the WEF made the connection in a September 14 report associated with its ongoing 2022 Sustainable Development Impact Meetings.
Quote:BREAKING: Davos launching new push for permanent “climate change” lockdowns: “The lockdowns aren’t for them, the lockdowns are for YOU.”
pic.twitter.com/nweQNmVqqN
— Jack Posobiec ?? (@JackPosobiec) September 20, 2022
The WEF report suggested moves to track and restrict personal carbon usage has had “limited success due to a lack of social acceptance, political resistance, and a lack of awareness and fair mechanism for tracking ‘My Carbon’ emissions.”
However, the document noted that the unprecedented response to COVID-19 has created an environment in which that “lack of social acceptance and political resistance” may be overcome.
“A huge number of unimaginable restrictions for public health were adopted by billions of citizens across the world,” the report read. “There were numerous examples globally of maintaining social distancing, wearing masks, mass vaccinations and acceptance of contact-tracing applications for public health, which demonstrated the core of individual social responsibility.”
According to the report, that compliance “could help realise ‘My Carbon’ initiatives for shaping the future towards smart and sustainable cities.”
RELATED: COVID was just the beginning: Climate lockdowns are the next stage of the Great Reset agenda
The authors of the paper pointed out that the ascendency of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and “Smart” technology emerging from the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution have provided platforms whereby personal consumption of energy can be monitored and limited.
The document cited “major advances in smart home technologies, transport choices with carbon implications,” and “the roll-out of smart meters” that the WEF said helps people choose “to reduce their energy-related emissions.”
The WEF also touted “the development of new personalized apps to account for personal emissions, and better personal choices for food and consumption-related emissions.”
While the language used in the WEF’s report suggests that individuals will be able to voluntarily opt into programs limiting their alleged carbon emissions, the notion has generated concern that consumers might not always have the choice.
Earlier this month, roughly 22,000 Colorado residents were prevented from adjusting their thermostats after their opt-in “smart” thermostat company locked the devices at 78 degrees F° during a heat wave, citing a local “energy emergency.”
While the “smart” thermostat company, Xcel, emphasized to the media that the program was voluntary and incentive-based, residents said they were surprised and upset to find they couldn’t control their home temperature.
“To me, an emergency means there is, you know, life, limb, or, you know, some other danger out there — some, you know, massive wildfires,” a customer told ABC 7 Denver. “Even if it’s a once-in-a-blue-moon situation, it just doesn’t sit right with us to not be able to control our own thermostat in our house.”
Quote:22,000 people in Colorado had their thermostats locked by their utility company in 90 degree weather due to an ‘energy emergency.’
People will read stories like this, still want a refrigerator that connects to the internet, and somehow believe our grid is ready for 100% EVs.
— Lauren Boebert (@laurenboebert) September 5, 2022
This week, The Great Reset: Global Elites and the Permanent Lockdown author Marc Morano told LifeSite’s John-Henry Westen that lockdowns, restrictions, and even planned economic collapse are all part of the “climate” agenda.
“The COVID lockdowns were literally a version of what they’ve called for for decades in the climate movement,” Morano said. “I attend every United Nations climate summit, and I’m going to the one in Egypt this year … and what these summits call for … is the ‘degrowth movement,’ or ‘planned recessions’ … to fight global warming. And what that means is the government imposes slower economic growth or forces a recession to lower emissions.”
Over the summer, the WEF argued that pushing forward an “clean energy transition,” partly by hiking up already record-breaking gas prices, would be necessary for both saving democracy and staving off environmental catastrophe.
U.S. President Joe Biden, who has presided over skyrocketing inflation and historically high gas prices, drew backlash in May when he suggested that the high cost of fuel was part of an “incredible transition.”
|
|
|
|
| Sorrowful Heart of Mary Newsletter - September 2022 |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-21-2022, 10:38 AM - Forum: Sorrowful Heart of Mary
- No Replies
|
|
✠
![[Image: cf23d8fd-dae2-45f8-8a1f-2886fc31fba8.jpg]](https://files.constantcontact.com/189ca5c9701/cf23d8fd-dae2-45f8-8a1f-2886fc31fba8.jpg)
September 2022
Dear Faithful,
Cardinal Pie of Poitiers (d. 1886) used to say “The Catholic Church is intolerant when it comes to principles of the Faith, but tolerant and charitable in practice; while Liberals, on the contrary, are tolerant when it come to principles (e.g. “coexistence” of all beliefs), but intolerant in practice.”
We can see this applied to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, when it came to upholding principles of the Faith he was intolerant of error and boldly accused the Second Vatican Council of introducing novel principles against the Faith (e.g. Ecumenism, Pluralism, Religious Liberty, etc.) and stood opposed to them. But when it came to people, he was gentle and tolerant with their shortcomings, his kindness stands out in the memory of all who knew him.
But with Liberals, as an example, we can just look at Pope Francis who is tolerant of pagan idols (e.g. Pachamama) in the name of Vatican II’s teaching on “inculturation;” he tolerates Protestantism, divorce, sodomy, Modernism and just about every evil under the sun! But with Traditional Catholic people he is absolutely intolerant, calling them “backward,” “obstacle to the progress of Vatican II,” “blind bats,” and his favorite, “rigid.” He shuts down “conservative” Novus Ordo religious houses and seminaries adopting the Latin Mass and punishes outspoken “conservative” Novus Ordo bishops. Pope Paul VI did the same by “intolerantly” leveling a phony suspension on Abp. Lefebvre, while at the same time “tolerantly” prostrating himself before a schismatic orthodox bishop. Then Pope John Paul II followed suit, by “intolerantly” punishing Abp. Lefebvre with an illegal excommunication while at the same time “tolerantly” receiving the pagan ritual-mark of Shiva on his forehead! Indeed, Liberals are tolerant with errors but intolerant when it comes to Truth and Catholics faithful to Tradition!
The same applies in civil society. Catholics and most honest men rooted in the Natural Law, defend the unborn and are intolerant of contraception and abortion; while, on the other hand, Liberals are tolerant of every error and vice under the label of “pro-choice”, but intolerant with unwanted babies, and resort to every sort of cruelty dripping with blood, in order to exterminate them by abortion! Indeed, LIBERALISM DRIPS WITH BLOOD!
FIRSTLY, UNITY IN THE FAITH!
This brings us to the absolute importance of the primacy of the Faith; the primacy of Doctrine! To survive this apostate age, the Catholic must be unshakably rooted in the Truth! We must never give any attention to those incorrectly calling traditional Catholics “schismatics," in fact, after fifty-seven years since the Council, we should be used to it! Let us never forget that the profession of the Faith is always the first foundation for true unity! This bond of unity is built on the solid, unchanging principles of the Catholic Faith. All unity in the Catholic Church must first be founded on this rock on which Christ said to build. It is the rock on which St. Peter’s successors are commanded to stand and not build on the sands of Modernism!
Pope Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Satis Cognitum, speaks about the true unity of the Church, saying: “Such great and such absolute concord among men must have as its necessary foundation, the union of understanding and agreement of intelligences; from which will naturally flow the harmony of men’s wills and agreement in action. This is why, according to the Divine Plan, Jesus wanted the unity of the Faith to exist in His Church; for Faith is the first of all bonds that unites men to God and it is due to this that we are called ‘faithful’.”
Pope Pius XI repeated the same idea when he said in his Encyclical condemning false ecumenism, Mortalium Animos: “Since charity is founded on an honest and sincere faith, it is the unity of the Faith which must be the principle bond uniting the disciples of Christ.”
From this insistence of the traditional Magisterium, it is clear there is a much higher foundation for unity in the Church than just a nebulous “unity of communion” or “unity of luv”: it is the unity of Faith! The foundation for all unity in the Catholic Church is firstly built on the Faith!
From this it is clear that Traditional Catholics are anything but “schismatics” or their own “marginalized church” because the first real schismatics are heretics. “Heresy," says Cardinal Billot, “is schism, for it directly opposes the unity of the Faith.” So, one can go against the “unity of communion” without going against the unity of the Faith, but one cannot go against the unity of Faith without going against the “unity of communion,” since the former is the foundation for the latter. The unity of all members professing the Catholic Faith is the fundamental basis on which rests all other unity of the Pope, bishops, priests and laity.
THOSE WHO DEVIATE FROM THE FAITH MAKE THE SCHISM
Now, looking closely at the situation of the Church since the Second Vatican Council, we see all those in positions of authority are imbued with Liberalism and Modernism; extending from Abp. Annibale Bugnini and Cardinal Ratzinger to Pope John XXIII and Pope Francis. They have imposed reforms that destroy the Church because they oppose the Traditional Faith, Mass, and Sacraments. Thus, they have broken with the Tradition of many centuries which is, ultimately, the unity of Faith; and the “unity of communion” they are always trying to achieve is only a “pseudo-unity” because it has lost its true foundation.
The Modernist hierarchy, as Modernist, is heretical: it is opposed to the unity of Faith by the spreading of its errors and promotion of their pseudo-unity or “unity of communion.” In other words, as Abp. Lefebvre often repeated, it is the Conciliar Church that is truly schismatic, because it seeks a unity that is no longer a Catholic unity!
Abp. Lefebvre didn’t mince words when he said: “The Conciliar Church is practically schismatic. [...] It’s a virtually excommunicated Church, because it’s a Modernist Church” (Fideliter, 70, p. 8). Again, “The Pope wants to make a unity outside the Faith. It’s a communion. A communion with whom? With what? How?... it’s not a unity anymore. This can only be done in the unity of Faith” (Fideliter, 79, p.8).
AND THE POPE?
As Cardinal Journet explains, in his pre-Vatican II work, Church of the Incarnate Word (vol. II, p. 839 sq.), the Pope himself can sin against the ecclesiastical communion by breaking the unity of leadership. This would happen if he did not fulfill his duty and denied the Church the direction she is entitled to expect from him in the name of Someone greater than himself, namely, Christ, Her founder and invisible Head. And this is, unfortunately, the painful situation in which we find ourselves ever since the Council ended, in 1965. If Abp. Lefebvre stayed away from any agreement with the Modernist hierarchy and the Conciliar Church, it was out of fidelity to Tradition, by refusing to join the real schism and breaking with the unity of Faith, as it has always been believed in the Church.
“The Church is not the Mystical Body ‘of the Pope’, but of Christ!” (Fr. Roger-Thomas Calmel, OP, About The Church and the Pope, in Itineraires 173, May, 1973, p. 28). Fr. Calmel goes on to say that if it ever happens that the Pope is so deficient in his office as to promote heresy and schism, then it is better to obey Christ and remain faithful to the Church of all time, even if this means enduring the wrath of the current authorities. Abp. Lefebvre preferred to stay clear of this Modernist hierarchy with its false “unity of communion” saying: “To leave, then, the official Church? To some extent, yes, of course! If the bishops are in heresy, it is necessary to leave this environment of the bishops if one does not want to lose his soul. If we move away from these people, it is absolutely the same as with people with AIDS. We don’t want to catch it. They now have ‘spiritual AIDS’, contagious diseases. If you want to stay healthy, we must not go with them” (Conference at Écône, September 9, 1988, cited in Fideliter, 66, p. 28).
CONCLUSION
"So then, who are the real “schismatics”? It is not those who are attached to Tradition. Rather, in reality, it is those who distance themselves from it! If the traditionalists are not “in communion,” it’s only with the Conciliar Church with whom they are not in communion, and that is precisely, their badge of honor! True communion will be restored when Rome returns to Tradition and “re-crowns Our Lord Jesus Christ!” (Abp. Lefebvre). But to seek union with Rome BEFORE the authorities have returned to the unity of the Faith is to abandon our fight, it is - in a certain way - to betray the Truth, by mingling it in with the pluralist and indifferent system orchestrated by the unfaithful hierarchy in charge. This would be the triumph of the new ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, with its “subsistit in.” For us, it is not enough for Rome to declare: “the Church of Christ subsists in Tradition;” it must declare: “the true Church of Christ is Tradition.”
Finally, following in the line of Abp. Lefebvre, we never have, nor ever will have, any intention of forming some “parallel Church” or some “petite eglise” (“small church”), independent from the one Christ founded. And that is why we do not seek to establish a parallel hierarchy (a veritable danger with the Thuc line) or to live withdrawn in our own circles and closed to others. We simply desire to steadfastly continue in our duty of professing the Faith and Mass of all time!
Only compromise or contacts endangering the Faith must be avoided. Our chapels and missions are open to all the faithful, the priests’ Mass schedules, sermons and catechisms are publicly available on-line and we are most willing to explain to anyone our position. We do not refuse to meet with others, with necessary prudence, in order to bring them back to Tradition, nor must we be shaken in the face of accusations, such as “being marginalized,” or being a “futile Resistance,” or “renegades” which are nothing but the result of our fidelity to the Faith of all time!
“We are neither schismatics nor excommunicated, we are not against the Pope. We are not against the Catholic Church. We do not have a parallel church. All this is absurd! We are what we have always been, Catholics who simply continue. That’s all! There’s no need to look for Noon when it’s 2:00 AM. We do not make a ‘small church’!” (Abp. Lefebvre, Fideliter, 70, p. 8).
ONE FINAL PRECISION
It must be added that, while speaking of the authorities of the Church as “heretical” or “schismatic,” it does not mean in the canonical sense or that they have necessarily broken from the Church. For this, it would be necessary that their heresy or schism be declared notorious by canon law, which seems almost impossible, since the authorities of the Church must do this.
Nevertheless, their heresy and schism are no less true, they are breaking with Tradition, destroying the Faith and the Mass of all time, and influencing the damnation of many souls. Their schism and heresies continue unchecked and are spreading everywhere without them being publicly declared as notorious by law, which makes it a far more dangerous situation, since they continue ravaging souls within the Church, who, blinded by false obedience, do not even suspect the least danger! We have to just stay away from this Conciliar Church and those who compromise with it, and we must continue to denounce their errors. This was the conduct of Abp. Lefebvre and we maintain that position.
One last, crowning quotation from the very theologian who assisted Abp. Lefebvre during the Second Vatican Council, Fr. Victor-Alain Berto, who died in 1968, who said: “What is a Modernist? He is a man, who no longer has the Faith (since by definition, Modernism is a heresy), but he has his own way of no longer having it! [...] He retains all dogmatic expressions but radically changes their meanings or accompanies them with contradictions - he is not embarrassed by his contradictions. He does not feel the need to leave the Church, on the contrary, his own style of being heretical implies he remains there. A Modernist outside the Church is no longer a Modernist! He is a ‘Liberal’ or a ‘rationalistic Protestant’, he is an ‘unbelieving philosopher’, or an ‘unbelieving exegete’, or an ‘unbelieving historian’, anything but a ‘Modernist!’ The specific mark of Modernism is to be a heretic inside the Church. The plan of action of Modernism is to undermine dogma from within, as termites in a tree [...] The more Modernist he is, the more difficult it is to recognize him, and all the more he knows how to hide and keep up appearances” (Document of Fr. Berto extracted from the personal archives of Abp. Lefebvre).
Let us turn with all our hearts to our Queen of the Most Holy Rosary! To Her has been entrusted our final life preserver in this catastrophe. At Fatima, She said “Only She can help you!” Let us generously fight on, intolerant with Error and tolerant with our neighbors’ faults, and always trusting in Her powerful assistance!
In Christ the King,
Fr. David Hewko
|
|
|
|
| Abp. Viganò: Belgian bishops are rejecting the Catholic Faith with homosexual ‘blessings’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-21-2022, 10:18 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Abp. Viganò: Belgian bishops are rejecting the Catholic Faith with homosexual ‘blessings’
Archbishop Viganò said the Catholic bishops of Belgium were promoting a 'sacrilegious rite' after they published a document containing a 'blessing' for same-sex couples.
![[Image: Archbishop_Carlo_Maria_Vigano_2-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Archbishop_Carlo_Maria_Vigano_2-810x500.jpg)
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
Sep 21, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) – With great scandal for the salvation of souls and the honor of the Church of Christ, the Bishops’ Conference of Belgium has approved and published a rite for the “blessing” of homosexual unions, brazenly contravening the immutable teaching of the Catholic Magisterium, which considers such unions “intrinsically perverse” and which, as such, not only may not bless them but rather must condemn them as contrary to the natural Moral law.
The ideological basis of this sacrilegious rite is indicated in the subtly deceptive words of Amoris Laetitia, which states that “every person, regardless of sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his or her dignity and treated with consideration.”
RELATED: Catholic bishops in Belgium publish blessing ceremony for same-sex couples
The process of doctrinal and moral dissolution carried out by the Bergoglian sect continues at an unstoppable pace, heedless of the confusion it causes among the faithful and the consequent incalculable damages to souls.
It is now evident, beyond all doubt, that it is absolutely impossible to reconcile the teaching of the Gospel with the deviations of these heretics who abuse their power and authority as Pastors, using it for the very opposite purpose for which Christ instituted the Sacred Hierarchy in the Church.
And what is even more evident is the perverse role reversal that is taking place, in which he who sits in Rome has the task of formulating heterodox principles opposed to Catholic doctrine, and his accomplices in the Dioceses have the role of scandalously applying them, in an infernal attempt to undermine the Moral law in order to obey the spirit of the world.
The shameful excesses of some exponents of the Hierarchy find their origin in a deliberate and intentional plan that comes from the top, which by means of the “synodal path” wants to make the rebellious Episcopate autonomous in spreading errors of Faith and Morals, even as it uses authoritarianism to prevent the faithful Bishops from proclaiming the Truth of Christ.
21 September 2022
Matthæi Apostoli et Evangelistæ, Feria Quarta Quattuor Temporum Septembris
|
|
|
|
| California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs law allowing human bodies to be turned into garden soil |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-21-2022, 06:11 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs law allowing human bodies to be turned into garden soil
The law doesn’t forbid the sale of such ‘soil,’ or its use in growing food for human consumption.
Tue Sep 20, 2022
SACRAMENTO, California (LifeSiteNews) — California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed controversial legislation over the weekend authorizing the “composting” of human remains for soil. The law will allow the material derived from the decomposed bodies to be sold and used to grow food for human consumption, SFGATE reported.
Signed into law Sunday, The Cemetery and Funeral Act (AB 351) will implement regulatory methods for the state to approve so-called “reduction facilities,” in which dead human bodies are broken down in a process not dissimilar to a household composting system.
Quote:The measure is slated to take effect in January 2027.
Human composting burial legalized in California https://t.co/N6kQPXywrx pic.twitter.com/Yp6U1P2u8M
— New York Post (@nypost) September 20, 2022
California has become the fifth state to legalize the practice, joining fellow West Coast states Oregon and Washington along with Colorado and Vermont.
SFGATE noted that California’s law strays from Colorado’s in that it doesn’t forbid the sale of composted human remains or the use of the “soil” for growing fruit and vegetables for human consumption.
Democratic Assembly member Cristina Garcia, who authored the bill, said in June the legislation was meant to help address “climate change and sea-level rise” by giving California residents “an alternative method of final disposition that won’t contribute emissions into our atmosphere.”
Garcia said that since “[t]rees are important carbon breaks for the environment,” she looks forward to “continuing my legacy to fight for clean air by using my reduced remains to plant a tree.”
The practice of destroying the remains of human beings in order to enrich the soil is known by the euphemism Natural Organic Reduction (NOR).
In 2020, NOR company and activist organization Recompose became the first group in the U.S. to open a human composting funeral home. The Kent, Washington facility houses 10 hexagonal cylinders in which deceased human bodies are stored and their decomposition process is hastened, The Seattle Times reported.
According to Recompose, the so-called “reduction” process involves placing the deceased person “in a reusable vessel, covering [the body] with wood chips and aerating it, which creates an environment for microbes and essential bacteria.”
A human body will be “fully transformed into soil” after “about 30 days,” the organization says. “Soil” derived from the corpses can then be “used to enrich garden beds, planted with a tree, divided across multiple locations, or donated to conservation efforts.”
Information provided on Recompose’s website gives some indication into the ideology behind the NOR movement.
According to the site, employees must “[a]dvocate for climate healing, soil health, and environmental justice,” be “anti-racist” and “committed to advocating for and protecting the rights of BIPOC, religious minorities, and undocumented people,” as well as “[e]ngage with the work of queer feminist practices of inclusion and equity.”
Recompose plans to open a California “reduction facility” 2027 after AB 351 takes effect.
Moves to normalize the use of dead bodies to create soil have been heavily criticized by Catholic groups, who argue the practice fails to pay due respect to the sanctity of human life.
Last year, the Colorado Catholic Conference stated it would not support “NOR” since the Catholic Church “teaches that the human body is sacred and the dignity of the human person is the foundation of a moral society.”
Likewise, the ![[Image: 73-f7850e14-5ce2-4e55-ba9d-e56f81a62e0f]](https://www.9news.com/article/features/colorado-legalize-human-composting-dead-body-become-garden-soil/73-f7850e14-5ce2-4e55-ba9d-e56f81a62e0f) said it’s “essential that the body of a deceased person be treated with reverence and respect,” arguing that the “composting” method “is more appropriate for vegetable trimmings and eggshells than for human bodies.”
California’s Catholic Conference has also blasted the allegedly eco-friendly alternative to reverent human burial.
CCC executive director Kathleen Domingo told SFGATE on Tuesday the practice “reduces the human body to simply a disposable commodity.”
Pointing out that NOR was designed for livestock, not human beings, Domingo said the process to break down a human body is equivalent to “a home composting system.”
Moreover, Domingo suggested that spreading composted remains of human beings over trafficked areas “risks people treading over human remains without their knowledge.” In addition, she argued that “repeated dispersions in the same area are tantamount to a mass grave.”
Peter Marlow, executive director of the Archdiocese of San Francisco, told the outlet that San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone also opposes the California law authorizing so-called “human composting.”
Gov. Newsom, however, a self-professed Catholic who has drawn widespread criticism from conservatives for his far-left stance on issues ranging from abortion to the alleged “climate crisis,” signed the bill Sunday without making any public comment.
|
|
|
|
| USDA scattering oral rabies vaccines by air over thirteen states |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-21-2022, 06:05 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
USDA scattering rabies vaccines for wildlife in 13 states — including Virginia
![[Image: VVPXJIRLLAVXPHS66TNVJ7P5FQ.jpg]](https://www.dailypress.com/resizer/HnrX3gzd9vluFgkBDFoocV17uwo=/800x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tronc/VVPXJIRLLAVXPHS66TNVJ7P5FQ.jpg)
FILE - USDA wildlife specialist Will Guigou, right, and pilot Thomas Taylor prepare to distribute packets of baited rabies vaccine by helicopter from a container between Guigou's knees Tuesday, Oct. 22, 2013, at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport's Lovell Field in Chattanooga, Tenn. The U.S. government has begun scattering millions of packets of oral rabies vaccine from helicopters and planes over 13 states from Maine to Alabama. The major aim is to keep raccoons from spreading their strain of the deadly virus to states where it hasn't been found or isn't widespread, said field trial coordinator Jordona Kirby. (Doug Strickland/AP)
The Associated Press via The Daily Press [adapted] | August 26, 2022
NEW ORLEANS — The U.S. Department of Agriculture has begun scattering millions of packets of oral rabies vaccine from helicopters and planes over 13 states from Maine to Alabama.
The major aim is to keep raccoons from spreading their strain of the deadly virus to states where it hasn’t been found or isn’t widespread, said field trial coordinator Jordona Kirby.
The USDA is also continuing tests of a vaccine approved in Canada to immunize skunks as well as raccoons, said Kirby of Wildlife Services, which is part of the agriculture department’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
The major aim is to keep raccoons from spreading their strain of the deadly virus to states where it hasn't been found or isn't widespread, said field trial coordinator Jordona Kirby. (Toby Talbot/AP)
Rabies is spread through an infected animal’s saliva, usually through bites. However, saliva that gets into the eyes, nose or mouth can also infect someone, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Thirteen people in South Carolina were considered potentially exposed in March because they had bottle-fed or given medicine to a sick calf that turned out to have rabies, said Dr. Michael Neault, the state veterinarian.
Globally, the virus kills 60,000 people a year, most bitten by dogs, the World Health Organization states.
That’s about the same number that get shots to prevent rabies in the U.S. after being bitten or scratched by an infected or possibly infected animal, according to the CDC.
State and local pet vaccination laws mean the virus is mostly spread by wildlife in the U.S.
The national rabies control program started in 1997 in Texas, where coyotes were spreading the canine variant of the virus, Kirby said.
She said vaccine drops eliminated that variant in 2004. Three years later, the CDC declared the nation free of canine rabies.
That doesn’t mean unvaccinated pets are safe. Canine rabies is among more than 20 variants — seven found in terrestrial mammals and more than 13 in species of bats, said rabies control program coordinator Richard Chipman.
A bite from an animal infected with any variant can make any other mammal sick. Scratches occasionally do so, since animals lick their paws.
A three-year program in Arizona and New Mexico eliminated a bat rabies strain in foxes, Kirby said. And Texas, with help from USDA, dropped 1.1 million baits along the Mexican border in January to keep coyotes from bringing the canine variant back.
Raccoons are the main rabies reservoir in 18 states along and near the East Coast and skunks in 21 others, according to data from 2020, the latest year available.
Bats made up 31% of the nearly 4,500 animals found with rabies in 2020. But since nearly all of the 40-plus bat species found in the U.S. eat insects and the rest drink nectar or eat fruit, oral vaccines would be much trickier.
Some scientists have speculated that bats could be vaccinated during hibernation, perhaps with a fine mist or with a gel that could be transferred from bat to bat, Chipman said. Early research is testing the idea in vampire bats, which live in Mexico and Central and South America and might spread such a vaccine within a colony by grooming each other.
Rabid wildlife isn’t just a rural problem. A rabid fox on Capitol Hill was caught less than 24 hours after the first report in April. By then, about a half-dozen people had reported bites or nips to U.S. Capitol Police, but others may have gone to other agencies, a Capitol Police spokesperson said by email.
Raccoon rabies campaigns started in August in parts of northern Maine, western Pennsylvania, West Virginia and southwestern Virginia. The 348,000 Raboral V-RG baits in Maine and 535,000 in the three other states are being dropped from planes in rural areas and from vehicles in urban and suburban areas.
In all, about 3.75 million packets — coated with a fishmeal attractant or encased in 1-inch (2.5-centimeter) fish meal cubes — will be distributed in nine states, ending when 1.1 million are dropped in Alabama in October.
The vaccine has been found safe for more than 60 kinds of animals including domestic dogs and cats. Eating a large number of vaccine packets might give dogs an upset stomach but wouldn’t cause any permanent problem, APHIS says.
About 3.5 million doses of the experimental vaccine Onrab are being distributed in parts of Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Tennessee — which also are getting the approved vaccine — plus four other states.
Onrab comes in blister packs with green, marshmallow-flavored coating. Wildlife Services hopes it may be approved next year in spite of lingering pandemic-related delays.
|
|
|
|
| Method of Hearing Mass IN UNION WITH THE SACRED PASSION OF JESUS CHRIST By St. Francis de Sales |
|
Posted by: ThyWillBeDone - 09-21-2022, 03:46 AM - Forum: The Saints
- No Replies
|
 |
Method of Hearing Mass IN UNION WITH THE SACRED PASSION OF JESUS CHRIST By St. Francis de Sales
Based on the Tridentine Rite
https://prodigalcatholic.com/method-of-h...-de-sales/
When the priest goes to the foot of the Altar
Jesus enters the garden
O Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, Who was pleased voluntarily to endure mortal terror and anguish at the view of Your approaching passion, give me grace henceforth to consecrate all my sorrows to You. O God of my heart! Assist me to support my trials in union with Your agony, that through the merits of Your Passion they may become profitable to my soul.
At the Beginning of Mass
Prayer of Jesus in the garden
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God, Who was pleased to be comforted by an angel in Your dreadful agony, grant through the merits of Your prayer in the garden that Your consoling angel may ever assist me in mine.
At the Confiteor
Jesus prostrated in the garden
Lord Jesus Christ, Who in the excess of Your anguish, was bathed in a sweat of blood while praying to Your Father in the Garden of Olives, grant that I may participate in Your sorrows by sympathy, and unite bitter tears of repentance with Your tears of blood.
The Priest kisses the Altar
Judas betrays Jesus with a kiss
Lord Jesus Christ, who submitted to the embrace of Judas, preserve me by Your grace, from misfortune of ever betraying You, and assist me to repay calumny and injustice with cordial charity and active kindness.
The priest goes to the Epistle side.
Jesus is dragged to prison
Lord Jesus Christ, Who submitted to be bound with ropes by the hands of wicked men, break, I beg You, the chains of my sins and attach the powers of my soul and body closely to You by bonds of charity, that they may never escape from the salutary restraint of perfect submission to Your Divine Will.
At the Introit
Jesus receives a blow
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was conducted as a criminal to the house of Annas, grant that I may never suffer myself to be led into sin by temptations of the evil spirit, or the evil suggestions of my fellow creatures, but that I may be securely guided by the Divine Spirit in the perfect accomplishment of Your holy ordinances.
At the Kyrie Eleison
Jesus is thrice denied by Peter
Lord Jesus Christ, Who submitted to be thrice denied in the house of Caiphas, by the head and prince of the apostles preserve me from the danger of evil company, that I may not be exposed to the misfortune of separation from You.
At the Dominus Vobiscum
Jesus looks at Peter and touches his heart
Lord Jesus Christ, who by one glance of love did melt the heart of St. Peter into a fountain of penitential tears, grant by Your mercy that I may weep for my sins and never by word or deed deny You, who art my lord and my God.
At the Epistle
Jesus is conducted to the house of Pilate
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was pleased to be led before Pilate, and there falsely accused, teach me to avoid the deceits of the wicked, and to profess my faith by the constant practice of good works.
At the Munda Cor Mum
Jesus is led to Herod
Lord Jesus Christ, who silently endured to be again falsely accused before Herod, grant me patience under calumny, and silence under outrages.
At the Gospel
Jesus is mocked as a fool and sent back to Pilate
Lord Jesus Christ, Who submitted to be sent as a fool by Herod to Pilate, who though enemies before, then became friends, strengthen me so powerfully by Your grace, that instead of apprehending the machinations of the wicked, I may learn to bear their malice as You did and thus render their injustice profitable to my soul.
The Priest uncovers the Chalice
Jesus is stripped of His garments
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was pleased to be despoiled of Your garments and most inhumanly scourged for love of me, grant me grace to lay aside the burden of my sins by a good confession, and never to appear before You despoiled of the virtues of a Christian.
At the Offertory
Jesus is scourged
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was pleased to be fastened to the pillar and torn with stripes, grant me grace to patiently endure the scourges of Your paternal correction and never more to grieve Your Heart with my sins.
The Priest offers the Chalice
Jesus is crowned with thorns
Lord Jesus Christ, Who submitted, through love for me, to be crowned with thorns, grant that my heart may be so penetrated with the thorns of repentance in this world, that I may deserve to be hereafter crowned with You in glory.
The priest washes his fingers
Pilate washes his hands
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, Who, although declared innocent by Pilate was subjected to the insults and outrages of the Jews, grant me the grace to lead an irreproachable life and at the same time to maintain a holy indifference to the opinions of men.
The priest washes his fingers
Pilate washes his hands
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, Who, although declared innocent by Pilate was subjected to the insults and outrages of the Jews, grant me the grace to lead an irreproachable life and at the same time to maintain a holy indifference to the opinions of men.
At the Preface
Jesus is condemned to death
Lord Jesus Christ, Who, though the God of all sanctity, submitted through love for me to a most ignominious condemnation, grant me grace to avoid rash judgments and strengthen me to bear with patience, the injustice of men.
At the Momento for the living
Jesus carries His Cross
Lord Jesus Christ, Who carried your heavy Cross for my salvation, grant that I may voluntarily embrace the cross of mortification and carry it daily for Your love.
At the Communicantes
Veronica wipes with a linen cloth the Face of Jesus
Lord Jesus Christ, Who on Your way to Calvary, said to the holy women that wept for the love of You: “Weep not for me but for yourselves;” give me the grace to weep for my sins with tears of holy contrition and love that will render me agreeable to Your divine Majesty.
Blessing of the Bread and Wine
Jesus is nailed to the Cross
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was nailed to the Cross for my redemption, attaching to it through Your Sacred Flesh, my sins, and the eternal punishment due to them, grant me Your saving fear, that resolutely observing Your Holy precepts, I may ever be attached to the Cross with You.
At the Elevation of the Host
The Cross of Jesus is elevated between Heaven and earth.
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was pleased to be elevated on the Cross and exalted above the earth for the love of me, detach my heart, I beg You, from all terrestrial affections and elevate my understanding to the consideration of Heavenly things.
At the elevation of the Chalice
The Blood of Jesus flows from His wounds.
Lord Jesus Christ, Your sacred wounds are the inexhaustible source of all grace; grant then, that Your Precious Blood may purify my soul from all evil thoughts and prove a salutary remedy for all my spiritual miseries.
At the Momento for the dead
Jesus prays for all men
Lord Jesus Christ, who prayed on the Cross for all men, even for Your executioners, grant me the spirit of meekness and patience, that according to Your precepts and example I may love my enemies and cordially return good for evil.
At the Momento for the dead
Jesus prays for all men
Lord Jesus Christ, who prayed on the Cross for all men, even for Your executioners, grant me the spirit of meekness and patience, that according to Your precepts and example I may love my enemies and cordially return good for evil.
At the Pater Noster
The seven words of Christ
Lord Jesus Christ, Who from the cross recommended Your Blessed Mother to the beloved disciple, and the disciple to Your Mother, receive me, I beg You, under Your protection, and grant that amidst the snares and perils of this world I may never lose the treasure of thy friendship.
At the division of the Host
Jesus expires of the Cross
Lord Jesus Christ, Who before expiring on the Cross commended Your Soul to Your Father, grant that I may die spiritually with You now, and so confide my eternal destiny with confidence to Your hands at the hour of my death.
At the division of the Host
Jesus expires of the Cross
Lord Jesus Christ, Who before expiring on the Cross commended Your Soul to Your Father, grant that I may die spiritually with You now, and so confide my eternal destiny with confidence to Your hands at the hour of my death.
At the Agnus Dei
The conversion of sinners
Lord Jesus Christ, the contemplation of Your torments has excited repentance in many hearts; grant me, through the efficacy of Your painful sufferings and ignominious death, perfect contrition for my past offenses, and the grace to avoid all willful sin.
At the Communion
Jesus is buried
Lord Jesus Christ, Who was pleased to be buried in a new monument, give me a new heart, so that being buried with You, I may attain to the glory of Your resurrection.
At the Ablution
Jesus is embalmed
Lord Jesus Christ, who was pleased to be embalmed and wrapped in a clean linen cloth by Joseph and Nicodemus, give me the grace to receive most worthily, Your Precious Body and Blood in the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, with a heart embalmed with the precious ointment of Your virtues.
After the Communion
The Resurrection of Jesus Christ
Lord Jesus Christ, Who triumphantly issued from the fast sealed monument, grant that, rising from the tomb of my sins, I may walk in newness of life so that when You shall appear in glory I may merit also to appear with You.
At the Dominus Vobiscum
Jesus appears to His disciples
Lord Jesus Christ, who gladdened the hearts of Your Blessed Mother and Your apostles by manifesting Yourself to them after Your Resurrection, grant that, since I cannot be so happy as to behold You in this mortal life, I may hereafter enjoy the unclouded vision of Your glory.
At the Post-Communion
Jesus converses for forty days with His disciples
Lord Jesus Christ, Who after Your Resurrection deign to converse for forty days with Your disciples, instructing them in the mysteries of our faith, increase, I beg You, my knowledge of those Divine Truths, and confirm my belief in them.
At the Post-Communion
Jesus converses for forty days with His disciples
Lord Jesus Christ, Who after Your Resurrection deign to converse for forty days with Your disciples, instructing them in the mysteries of our faith, increase, I beg You, my knowledge of those Divine Truths, and confirm my belief in them.
At the Priest’s blessing
The descent of the Holy Ghost
Lord Jesus Christ, Who sent the Holy Spirit on Your apostles, while engaged in unanimous and persevering prayer, purify my soul, I beg You, that the Paraclete, finding therein a dwelling well pleasing to Him, may adorn it with His gifts and replenish it with His consolations
Thanksgiving after Mass
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God and Redeemer of men, I humbly thank You for having permitted me to assist today at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. I beg You, through the efficacy of that adorable Sacrifice, to strengthen me against all temptations, and to grant that, having served You faithfully in this life, I may hereafter attain to the possession of Your glory.
AMEN
Share this:
|
|
|
|
| Opinion: Ethereum becomes WEF coin, and a global CBDC is born |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-20-2022, 10:51 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Ethereum becomes WEF coin, and a global CBDC is born
Marketed as a climate friendly alternative, a major digital asset becomes the frontrunner for a global central bank digital currency.
Jordan Schachtel [slightly adapted] | September 15, 2022
The people in charge of the Ethereum token, a popular digital asset previously marketed as a decentralized money, decided last night to finalize its transition into what amounts to WEF (World Economic Forum) coin, securing the network’s path on the road to state capture, and perhaps, the birth of the ruling class’s 1.0 version of a global Central Bank Digital Currency.
The Dossier is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Completed under the big budget marketing campaign of a “climate friendly” and ESG compliant reshuffle, the Ethereum protocol moved from a proof of work system — which borrowed from Bitcoin’s model of distributed, decentralized computing power (work) for validating the network — to a proof of stake system, which relies on dominant stakeholders to do the same.
There is no longer any “work,” or energy output, required, which is why the ESG and climate hoax crowd has hailed the project as a revolutionary achievement. They seem to miss the fact that ETH now represents a digital fiat currency, as there is no longer a legitimate case for a value proposition attached to it.
The Ethereum Foundation (whose Executive Director serves on the World Economic Forum's Global Blockchain Council) and other “crypto” institutions, knowing full well that they could not create a better free market money than Bitcoin, have been battling behind the scenes for years to become the first movers to regulatory capture, a “prize” that comes to its small network of controlling interests via a massive infusion of global capital.
The small network that controls Ethereum has long had a very cozy relationship with the World Economic Forum and major technocratic statist outfits, and it already relies on companies like JP Morgan and Amazon Web Services to secure its critical infrastructure.
So what makes the WEF crowd and their fellow travelers so hyped about “The Merge”?
Quote:The WEF is VERY EXCITED about Etherium transitioning to a fiat scam.
Front and center on their home page.
A centralized currency that rewards & grants power to those who control largest chunks.
ETH is WEF coin, and now positioned as future global CBDC. - Jordan Schachtel
Unlike Bitcoin’s proof of work system, which provides for robust decentralization and individual security, ETH is now set up so a select few “stakeholders” can determine the outcome of the entire system. The dominant stakeholders can simply get together and manipulate the protocol as they see fit.
But it’s not the private entities that present the greatest threat to liberty and privacy.
This asset is now an easy target for a hostile state or international institutional takeover.
Ethereum stakeholders are an incredibly centralized bunch. They come in the form of registered, *regulated* companies like Lido and Coinbase, organizations that are upfront about the reality that they are subject to complete regulatory and state capture.
Should a powerful government want to invalidate the ETH tokens held by Jon Doe, a labeled opponent of the regime, they can simply pressure Coinbase and the gang to blacklist his transactions. The same goes for Jane Doe, who a random bureaucrat could determined is a “criminal,” and force a major stakeholder to change the rules to punish Mrs Doe. Her Ethereum wallet can be blacklisted with the click of a button, rendering her entire wealth in this currency instantly worthless.
For years, globalist, authoritarian legislators, regulators, and central bankers throughout the United States, Europe, and Asia have sought to find a way to lure creative minds into their CBDC projects, with very few in the space showing much interest.
Ethereum’s marketing team, however, has manipulated many smart, naive, good natured, idealist programmers into building what have become very popular financial tools, especially their dollar-pegged (along with other state currencies) assets on the network, such as the USDC coin, which can potentially be weaponized for the future implementation of a global Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) system.
Instead of building their own system from the ground up, CBDC advocates in government and quasi-private enterprise may manipulate these volunteer and paid programmers, whose work they can now easily control, to employ a CBDC asset into their respective societies.
The stage has been set. In the digital asset space, it’s Bitcoin versus WEF/ETH coin. Freedom Money versus CBDC tyranny.
|
|
|
|
| The SSPX: Ten Years Ago |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-20-2022, 07:42 AM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- Replies (1)
|
|
Ten Years Ago…
2nd Feb. 2012 - Bishop Fellay sermon: “We Are Ready”
“We are not an independent group. Even if we are fighting with Rome, we are still, so to say, with Rome. …It’s also important that we don’t finally imagine a Catholic church which is just the fruit of our imagination but which is no longer the real one. And with the real one we have problems. […]
So what is going to happen now? Well, we have sent our answer to Rome. … Do they really want us in the Church or not? We told them very clearly, if you accept us as is, without change, without obliging us to accept these things, then we are ready.” (See: https://web.archive.org/web/201202061752...ruary-2nd/)
18th March 2012 - Bishop Fellay, writing to all SSPX priests in Cor Unum:
“We need to take up a new position with respect to the Official Church”
“We now have friendly contacts in the most important dicasteries, and also in the Pope’s entourage! As we see this situation, we think that the efforts of the aging hierarchy will not succeed in stopping this movement that has begun – a movement that desires and hopes for the restoration of the Church, although still in a rather muddled way. Even though the return of a “Julian the Apostate” cannot be ruled out, I do not think that the movement can be stopped.
If this is true, and I am convinced of it, this requires that we take up a new position with respect to the official Church. Quite obviously we must support this movement with all our strength, and possibly to guide and enlighten it. This is precisely what many people expect of the Society. This is the context in which it is advisable to ask the question about some form of recognition of the Society by the official Church. Our new friends in Rome declare that the impact of such recognition would be extremely powerful on the whole Church, as a confirmation of the importance of Tradition for the Church. […] Concrete circumstances are what will show when the time has arrived to take the step towards the official Church. ” (See: https://www.therecusant.com/fellay-cor-unum-march2012)
7th April 2012 - Letter of three SSPX Bishops to the Superior General and his
two Assistants - “Do not engage the Society in a purely practical agreement!”
“Reverend Superior General, Reverend First Assistant, Reverend Second Assistant, For several months, as many people know, the General Council of the FSSPX is seriously considering Roman proposals for a practical agreement, after the doctrinal discussions of 2009 to 2011 proved that a doctrinal agreement is impossible with current Rome. By this letter the three bishops of the FSSPX who do not form part of the General Council wish to let him know, with all due respect, of the unanimity of their formal opposition to any such agreement. […]
Don't we see already in the Fraternity symptoms of a lessening in its confession of the Faith? Today, alas, the contrary has become “abnormal”. Just before the consecration of the bishops in 1988 when many good people insisted that Archbishop Lefebvre had to reach a practical agreement with Rome that would open a large field of apostolate, he expressed his thoughts to the four new bishops: ‘A large field of apostolate perhaps, but in ambiguity, and while following two directions opposed at the same time, and this would finish by us rotting.’ […]
Your Excellency, Fathers, take care! … At least listen to your Founder. He was right 25 years ago. He is right still today. On his behalf, we entreat you: do not engage the Society in a purely practical agreement.
With our most cordial and fraternal greetings,
In Christo and Maria,
Mgr. Alfonso de Galarreta
Mgr. Bernard Tissier de Mallerais
Mgr. Richard Williamson ”
(See: https://www.therecusant.com/menz-letter-to-3-bishops)
14th April, 2012 - Letter of Reply from the Superior General and his two
Assistants to the Three SSPX Bishops: “It is not realistic to require that
everything be settled to arrive at what you call a practical agreement.”
“Menzingen,
14 April, 2012
Your Excellencies,
To your collective letter addressed to the members of the General Council we have given our full attention. We thank you for your concern and for your charity. Allow us in turn with the same concern for charity and justice to make the following observations. […]
Reading your letter one seriously wonders if you still believe that the visible Church with its seat in Rome is truly the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, a Church horribly disfigured for sure from head to foot, but a Church which nevertheless still has for its head Our Lord Jesus Christ. One has the impression that you are so scandalised that you no longer accept that that could still be true. Is Benedict XVI still the legitimate pope for you? If he is, can Jesus Christ still speak through his mouth? If the pope expresses a legitimate desire concerning ourselves which is a good desire and gives no command contrary to the commandments of God, has one the right to pay no attention and to simply dismiss his desire? … You blame us for being naïve or fearful, but it is your vision of the Church that is too human and even fatalistic; you see dangers, plots, difficulties, you now longer see the help of grace and the Holy Ghost. […]
Within the Society, we are in the process of making the Council's errors into superheresies, as though it is becoming absolute evil, worse than anything, in the same way that Liberals have dogmatised this pastoral council. This failure to distinguish leads one or the other of you three to an “absolute hardening”. This is serious because such a caricature no longer corresponds to reality and logically it will in the future finish up in a true schism. And it may well be that this fact is one of the arguments pushing me
to delay no longer in responding to the pressure from Rome. […]
So that as for the most crucial question of all, that of whether we can survive in the case of the Society being recognised by Rome, we do not arrive at the same conclusion as you do. Let it be noted in passing that we did not look for a practical agreement. That is false. All we have done is not refuse a priori, as you ask us to do, to consider the Popes offer. For the common good of the Society, we would far prefer the present solution of the intermediary status quo but it is clear that Rome will put up with it no longer.
In itself, the proposed solution of a personal Prelature is not a trap. That is clear firstly from the fact that the present situation in April of 2012 is very different from that of 1988. To claim that nothing has changed is a historic error. […] Fewer and fewer Romans believe in Vatican II.
This concrete situation, together with the canonical solution being proposed, is very different from that of 1988 and when we compare the arguments given by Archbishop Lefebvre at that time we draw the conclusion that he would not have hesitated to accept what is being proposed to us. […] It is not realistic to require that everything be settled to arrive at what you call a practical agreement.
You cannot know how much your attitude over the last few months - quite different for each of you - has been hard for us. It has prevented the Superior General from sharing with you these great concerns, which he would gladly have brought you in to, had he not found himself faced with such a strong and passionate lack of understanding. How much he would have loved to be able to count on you, on your advice to undergo this so delicate moment in our history. It is a great trial, perhaps the greatest of all 18 years of his being superior. Our venerable founder gave to the Society bishops a task and precise duties. He made clear that the principle of unity in our Society is the Superior General. But for a certain time now, you have been trying - each one of you in his own way - to impose on him your point of view, even in the form of threats,
and even in public. This dialectic between the truth and the faith on the one side and authority on the other is contrary to the spirit of the priesthood. He might at least have hoped that you were trying to understand the arguments driving him to act as he has acted these last few years in accordance with the will of divine Providence.
We are praying hard for each of you that we may find ourselves all together once again in this fight which is far from over, for the greater glory of God and for love of dear Society. May Our risen Lord and Our Lady deign to protect and bless you,
+Bernard Fellay (Superior General)
Niklaus Pfluger+ (First Assistant)
Alain-Marc Nély+ (Second Assistant) ”
(See: https://www.therecusant.com/menz-letter-to-3-bishops)
15th April 2012 - Doctrinal Declaration composed and signed by the Superior
General on behalf of the SSPX and delivered to Rome (but kept secret from
even the SSPX’s own priests for almost a full year).
“I. We promise to be always faithful to the Catholic Church and to the Roman Pontiff, the Supreme Pastor, Vicar of Christ, Successor of Peter, and head of the body of bishops.
II. We declare that we accept the teachings of the Magisterium of the Church in the substance of Faith and Morals, adhering to each doctrinal affirmation in the required degree, according to the doctrine contained in No.25 of the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council.(1)
III.
1. We declare that we accept the doctrine regarding the Roman Pontiff and regarding the college of bishops, with the Pope as its head, which is taught by the dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus of Vatican I and by the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium of Vatican II, chapter 3 (de constitutione hierarchica Ecclesiae et in specie de episcopatu), explained and interpreted by the nota explicativa praevia in this same chapter.
2. We recognise the authority of the Magisterium to which alone is given the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, in written form or handed down (2) in fidelity to Tradition, recalling that, “the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter in order for them to make known, through revelation, a new doctrine, but so that with His assistance they may keep in a holy and expressly faithful manner the revelation transmitted by the Apostles, that is to say, the Faith.”(3)
3. Tradition is the living transmission of revelation ‘usque ad nos’(4) and the Church in its doctrine, in its life and in its liturgy perpetuates and transmits to all generations what this is and what She believes. Tradition progresses in the Church with the assistance of the Holy Ghost(5), not as a contrary novelty(6), but through a better understanding of the Deposit of the Faith(7).
4. The entire tradition of Catholic Faith must be the criterion and guide in understanding the teaching of the Second Vatican Council, which, in turn, enlightens - in other words deepens and subsequently makes explicit - certain aspects of the life and doctrine of the Church implicitly present within itself or not yet conceptually formulated(8).
5. The affirmations of the Second Vatican Council and of the later Pontifical Magisterium relating to the relationship between the Church and the non-Catholic Christian confessions, as well as the social duty of religion and the right to religious liberty, whose formulation is with difficulty reconcilable with prior doctrinal affirmations from the Magisterium, must be understood in the light of the whole, uninterrupted Tradition, in a manner coherent with the truths previously taught by the Magisterium of the Church, without accepting any interpretation of these affirmations whatsoever that would expose Catholic doctrine to opposition or rupture with Tradition and with this Magisterium.
6. That is why it is legitimate to promote through legitimate discussion the study and theological explanations of the expressions and formulations of Vatican II and of the Magisterium which followed it, in the case where they don't appear reconcilable with the previous Magisterium of the Church(9).
7. We declare that we recognise the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II.
8. In following the guidelines laid out above (III,5), as well as Canon 21 of the Code of Canon Law, we promise to respect the common discipline of the Church and the ecclesiastical laws, especially those which are contained in the Code of Canon Law promulgated by John-Paul II (1983) and in the Code of Canon Law of the Oriental Churches promulgated by the same pontiff (1990), without prejudice to the discipline of the Society of Saint Pius X, by a special law.
Notes --
(1) Cf. the new formula for the Profession of Faith and the Oath of Fidelity for assuming a
charge exercised in the name of the Church, 1989; cf. Code of Canon Law, canon
749,750, §2; 752; CCEO canon 597; 598, 1 & 2; 599.
(2) Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis encyclical.
(3) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution, Pastor Aeternus, Dz. 3070.
(4) Council of Trent, Dz. 1501: “All saving truth and rules of conduct (Matt. 16:15) are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the Apostles themselves,[3] the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand.”
(5) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 8 & 9, Denz. 4209-
4210.
(6) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3020: “Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding “Therefore […] let the understanding, the knowledge, and wisdom of individuals as of all, of one man as of the whole Church, grow and progress strongly with the passage of the ages and the centuries; but let it be solely in its own genus, namely in the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.” [Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, 23, 3].”
(7) Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Dz. 3011; Anti-modernist Oath, no. 4;
Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, Dz 3886; Vatican Council II, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 10, Dz. 4213.
(8) For example, like the teaching on the sacraments and the episcopacy in Lumen Gentium, no. 21.
(9) There is a parallel in history in the Decree for the Armenians of the Council of Florence, where the porrection of the instruments was indicated as the matter of the sacrament of Order. Nevertheless theologians legitimately discussed, even after this decree, the accuracy of such an assertion. Pope Pius XII finally resolved the issue in another way.” (See: https://www.therecusant.com/doctrinalpreamble-15apr2012)
For an overview, in chronological order, see: www.therecusant.com/reference-materials
|
|
|
|
| Silencing of the Messengers: Father Fuentes (1959 – 1965) |
|
Posted by: Stone - 09-20-2022, 06:44 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- No Replies
|
|
Silencing of the Messengers: Father Fuentes (1959 – 1965)
Interview with Sister Lucy
On December 26, 1957 Father Augustin Fuentes, who was preparing to become the postulator of the causes for beatification of Francisco and Jacinta Marto, met with Sister Lucy at her convent in Coimbra, Portugal. Here, he was able to converse with the Fatima seer at great length. Upon his return to his native Mexico, he gave a conference on the meeting, in which he reported Sister Lucy's words. Father Alonso, the official Fatima archivist for 16 years, stressed that the account of this conference was published “with every guarantee of authenticity and with due episcopal approval, including that of the Bishop of Fatima.” Father Fuentes affirmed that the message came “from the very lips of the principal seer.”
Sources: This matter has been documented at length by Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité in Volume III of his series The Whole Truth About Fatima. The following text is The Fatima Crusader's translation of the Spanish and the English texts published in Frère Michel's book The Third Secret (Volume III, pp. 336-338). The subtitles have been added for your convenience.
The Report by Father Fuentes
“I wish to tell you about the last conversation which I had with Sister Lucy on the 26th of December (last year). I met her in her convent. She was very sad, very pale and emaciated. She said to me,”
“No One Has Paid Any Attention”
“Father, the most Holy Virgin is very sad because no one has paid any attention to Her Message, neither the good nor the bad. The good continue on their way, but without giving any importance to Her Message. The bad, not seeing the punishment of God actually falling upon them, continue their life of sin without even caring about the Message. But believe me, Father, God will chastise the world and this will be in a terrible manner. The punishment from Heaven is imminent.”
The Secret Not Revealed
“Father, how much time is there before 1960 arrives? It will be very sad for everyone, not one person will rejoice at all if beforehand the world does not pray and do penance. I am not able to give any other details, because it is still a Secret. According to the will of the Most Holy Virgin, only the Holy Father and the Bishop of Fatima are permitted to know the Secret, but they have chosen to not know it so that they would not be influenced. This is the third part of the Message of Our Lady, which will remain secret until 1960.”
Russia, the Scourge of God
“Tell them, Father, that many times the Most Holy Virgin told my cousins Francisco and Jacinta, as well as myself, that many nations will disappear from the face of the earth. She said that Russia will be the instrument of chastisement chosen by Heaven to punish the whole world if we do not beforehand obtain the conversion of that poor nation.”
“The Decisive Battle” Between Mary and Satan: the Falling Away of Consecrated Souls and Priests
Sister Lucy also told me: “Father, the devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Blessed Virgin. And the devil knows what it is that offends God the most, and which in a short space of time will gain for him the greatest number of souls. Thus the devil does everything to overcome souls consecrated to God, because in this way the devil will succeed in leaving the souls of the faithful abandoned by their leaders, thereby the more easily will he seize them.”
“That which afflicts the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Heart of Jesus is the fall of religious and priestly souls. The devil knows that religious and priests who fall away from their beautiful vocation drag numerous souls to hell. … The devil wishes to take possession of consecrated souls. He tries to corrupt them in order to lull to sleep the souls of laypeople and thereby lead them to final impenitence. He employs all tricks, even going so far as to suggest the delay of entrance into religious life. Resulting from this is the sterility of the interior life, and among the laypeople, coldness (lack of enthusiasm) regarding the subject of renouncing pleasures and the total dedication of themselves to God.”
That Which Sanctified Jacinta and Francisco
“Tell them also, Father, that my cousins Francisco and Jacinta sacrificed themselves because in all the apparitions of the Most Holy Virgin, they always saw Her very sad. She never smiled at us. This sadness, this anguish which we noted in Her, penetrated our souls. This sadness is caused by the offenses against God and the punishments which menace sinners. And so, we children did not know what to think except to invent various means of praying and making sacrifices.”
The other things which sanctified these children was to see the vision of Hell.
The Mission of Sister Lucy
“Father, that is why my mission is not to indicate to the world the material punishments which are certain to come if the world does not pray and do penance beforehand. No! My mission is to indicate to everyone the imminent danger we are in of losing our souls for all eternity if we remain obstinate in sin.”
The Urgency of Conversion
Sister Lucy also said to me: “Father, we should not wait for an appeal to the world to come from Rome on the part of the Holy Father, to do penance. Nor should we wait for the call to penance to come from our bishops in our diocese, nor from the religious congregations. No! Our Lord has already very often used these means, and the world has not paid attention. That is why now, it is necessary for each one of us to begin to reform himself spiritually. Each person must not only save his own soul but also help to save all the souls that God has placed on our path.”
“The devil does all in his power to distract us and to take away from us the love for prayer; we shall be saved together or we shall be damned together.”
Last Times
“Father, the Most Holy Virgin did not tell me that we are in the last times of the world, but She made me understand this for three reasons.”
The Final Battle
“The first reason is because She told me that the devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Virgin. And a decisive battle is the final battle where one side will be victorious and the other side will suffer defeat. Also, from now on we must choose sides. Either we are for God or we are for the devil. There is no other possibility.”
The Last Remedies
“The second reason is because She said to my cousins as well as to myself, that God is giving two last remedies to the world. These are the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. These are the last two remedies which signify that there will be no others.”
The Sin Against the Holy Spirit
“The third reason is because in the plans of Divine Providence, God always, before He is about to chastise the world, exhausts all other remedies. Now, when He sees that the world pays no attention whatsoever, then as we say in our imperfect manner of speaking, He offers us with certain fear the last means of salvation, His Most Holy Mother. It is with certain fear because if you despise and repulse this ultimate means, we will not have any more forgiveness from Heaven, because we will have committed a sin which the Gospel calls the sin against the Holy Ghost. This sin consists of openly rejecting, with full knowledge and consent, the salvation which He offers. Let us remember that Jesus Christ is a very good Son and that He does not permit that we offend and despise His Most Holy Mother. We have recorded through many centuries of Church history the obvious testimony which demonstrates by the terrible chastisements which have befallen those who have attacked the honor of His Most Holy Mother, how Our Lord Jesus Christ has always defended the honor of His Mother.”
Prayer and Sacrifice and the Holy Rosary
Sister Lucy told me: “The two means for saving the world are prayer and sacrifice.”
Regarding the Holy Rosary, Sister Lucy said: “Look, Father, the Most Holy Virgin, in these last times in which we live, has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Rosary. She has given this efficacy to such an extent that there is no problem, no matter how difficult it is, whether temporal or above all spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families, of the families of the world or of the religious communities, or even of the life of peoples and nations, that cannot be solved by the Rosary. There is no problem I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves. We will sanctify ourselves. We will console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls.”
Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary
“Finally, devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Most Holy Mother, consists in considering Her as the seat of mercy, of goodness and of pardon, and as the sure door by which we are to enter Heaven.”1
Ecclesiastical Reaction to the Above Interview
Father Fuentes published interview with Sister Lucy produced, but only a year later, a strong reaction from the episcopal curia of Coimbra, the diocese in which Lucy's convent is located. They published an anonymous note that accused Father Fuentes of inventing these statements of Sister Lucy, claiming that Sister Lucy herself renounced the published testimony as untrue. The curia had declared that Father Fuentes had outright fabricated the remarks quoted above. To this day, no one has been willing to take responsibility for this note. As such, in law such a note is null and void. In Mexico, Archbishop Manuel Pio Lopez and Cardinal José Garibi y Rivera defended Father Fuentes, but to no avail. He was relieved of his position as postulator for the beatification of Jacinta and Francisco, and subsequently replaced by Father Luis Kondor.
Commentary
What happened to cause such an uproar? Someone is lying about the interview between Father Fuentes and Sister Lucy. Both Father Kondor and Father Alonso believed that Father Fuentes did not falsify reports of his interview with Sister Lucy. After being appointed the official Fatima archivist in 1966, at first Father Alonso adopted the belief that Father Fuentes had fabricated the statements he attributed to Sister Lucy. However, after ten years of studying the Fatima archives and meeting with Sister Lucy, Father Alonso changed his position and actually sought to rehabilitate Father Fuentes. He stated that the texts of Fuentes conference “do not say anything that Sister Lucy has not said in her numerous writings delivered to the public.” He also declared that “the genuine text … does not, in my opinion, contain anything that could give rise to the condemnatory notice issued from Coimbra.”2 Therefore, we can safely conclude that the curia's response to Father Fuentes' published interview is an indication that Sister Lucy's message is one that someone wanted silenced.
Notes:
1. Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité, The Whole Truth About Fatima, Volume III: The Third Secret, (Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, New York, 1990) pp. 504-508.
2. Father Alonso at first agreed that Fr. Fuentes made up the interview. But in 1975, after he had been studying the Fatima documents for some time, he concluded that it likely came from Sister Lucy. For more information, see The Whole Truth About Fatima, Vol. III, pp. 552-554.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-43...30x726.png]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Feb065f0b-02c1-43fa-a230-d8340d0d4d2c_2330x726.png)
![[Image: bv434031pzx5typoq2qjc43esg6uygzpw5g1sg1....ormat=webp]](https://assistant.gloria.tv/1z94gyaCTBei3D8MsGrYwjE6j/bv434031pzx5typoq2qjc43esg6uygzpw5g1sg1.webp?format=webp)
![[Image: ofyit1xichr8gh97v9dij0m10spehl6cvcckfod....ormat=webp]](https://assistant.gloria.tv/1z94gyaCTBei3D8MsGrYwjE6j/ofyit1xichr8gh97v9dij0m10spehl6cvcckfod.webp?scale=1024&format=webp)
