| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Forum Statistics |
» Members: 250
» Latest member: DonnaHus
» Forum threads: 5,906
» Forum posts: 11,183
Full Statistics
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 113 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 110 Guest(s)
Bing, Facebook, Google
|
| Latest Threads |
Third Week after Easter [...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:14 AM
» Replies: 6
» Views: 11,776
|
Third Sunday after Easter
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
04-21-2024, 04:19 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 9,994
|
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Th...
Forum: Doctors of the Church
Last Post: Stone
04-21-2024, 04:10 AM
» Replies: 12
» Views: 2,320
|
"How to post a billboard ...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
04-20-2024, 08:17 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 99
|
Bp. Williamson promoting ...
Forum: True vs. False Resistance
Last Post: Stone
04-20-2024, 07:45 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 189
|
Fr. Ruiz on the funeral o...
Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
Last Post: Stone
04-20-2024, 06:24 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 100
|
Holy Mass in Pennsylvania...
Forum: April 2024
Last Post: Stone
04-19-2024, 07:17 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 76
|
Holy Mass in Pennsylvania...
Forum: April 2024
Last Post: Stone
04-19-2024, 07:14 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 160
|
Honor: A Lost Wor[l]d
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
04-19-2024, 06:00 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 105
|
Young Adults Gathering - ...
Forum: Event Schedule
Last Post: Stone
04-18-2024, 05:45 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 259
|
|
|
| The Recusant: An Open Letter to Confused Lefebvrists |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-15-2024, 05:22 AM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- No Replies
|
 |
An Open Letter to Confused Lefebvrists
Taken from The Recusant.com [slightly adapted]
An Open Letter to Confused Catholics reflects the reality in Archbishop Lefebvre’s day and although some decades have passed since it was written, and in spite of some of the references becoming a little dated, the essential wisdom it contains is timeless. And yet there are those who maintain that Archbishop Lefebvre was all very well for then but his wisdom is no longer what is needed today..!
Very well. Let’s take a little look and see how what he says applies to our situation today. The Resistance must follow Archbishop Lefebvre’s footsteps, or it might as well not exist! We maintain that if Archbishop Lefebvre were alive today, he would be fighting along side us. But let’s see what we can see, and as far as possible, let the words speak for themselves. The quotations on the [about Modernist Rome] are from Open Letter to Confused Catholics and show us Archbishop Lefebvre’s analysis of modernist Rome back then. [Below them] is our analysis of where the modern SSPX finds itself today.
Modernist Rome then:
“On two occasions I have heard emissaries of the Holy See say to me: ‘The social Kingdom of Our Lord is no longer possible in our times and we must ultimately accept the plurality of religions.’ This is exactly what they have said to me.”
The Modern SSPX now:
Many people report having heard from the mouths of SSPX priests such as Fr Nicholas Pfluger that now is not the right time for the Social Reign of Christ the King. Wanting to be accepted by modern Rome “as we are” means in practice acceptance of modern Rome as they are. Recognition of SSPX marriages, permission for SSPX ordinations and jurisdiction for SSPX confessions means in practice the SSPX accepting that they are to become part of a conciliar plurality of “movements” and “charisms” in the church (along side the Neo-Catechumenal Way, the Focolari, Medjugorje advocates, the ‘Catholic Charismatic Renewal,’ the Anglican Ordinariate, ‘Opus Dei’ and all the other catalogue of horrors in the conciliar church.)
Modern Rome:
“When I was a child, the Church had the same faith everywhere … anyone had told me then that it would be changed, I would not have believed him. … The new liberal and modernist religion has sown division. Christians are divided within the same family because of this confusion which has established itself; they no longer go to the same Mass and they no longer read the same books.”
The Modern SSPX now:
The SSPX may have kept (for now) the Traditional Mass, but that on its own is no guarantee of orthodoxy as anyone who has ever attended a diocesan indult Mass regularly for any length of time will be able to tell you.
Not so very long ago, the SSPX of “our youth” was the same everywhere. You could ask the same question of any priest and expect the same answer, there were no “liberal” or “conservative” SSPX priests. If someone had told us that in a few years there would be some SSPX priests who were creationists and others who were evolutionists, some who were pro-lockdown and anti- “conspiracy theories” and others of the opposite view, some who went about promoting NFP and warning married couples not to have too many children and others who held firm to the Church’s moral teaching on that score, some SSPX priests who thought the dialogue Mass was a good thing and others who thought it a bad thing… who would have believed it possible? And did not the liberalising of the SSPX also bring family division in its wake? Family members “no longer go to the same Mass,” they even “no longer read the same books,” since the new, liberal, modernist SSPX is now more interested in promoting books such as The Realist Guide than it is in promoting the books of Archbishop Lefebvre or Fr. Denis Fahey. Just try getting hold of those in a repository of the SSPX today.
Modernist Rome then:
“Priests no longer know what to do; either they obey blindly what their superiors impose on them, and lose to some degree the faith of their childhood and youth, renouncing the promises they made when they took the Anti-Modernist Oath at the moment of their ordination; or on the other hand they resist…”
The Modern SSPX now:
The newer SSPX priests are themselves much more liberal and are naturally in favour of all the modernism and liberalism. The older priest who know better must either silently accept what they see happening and shut their eyes in the interests of a ‘quiet life’ and in so doing they lose to some degree the faith of their youth together with its zeal and good fruits; or they resist. But if they show any sign of resisting, or even of resenting the new liberal attitudes at large in the SSPX, they are faced with the prospect of punishment, transfer, silencing or even expulsion, together with being maligned by their own superiors as disobedient, proud, divisive, etc.
Modernist Rome then:
“How many more have been forced to abandon the parishes where for years they had practised their ministry, victims of open persecution by their hierarchy…”
The Modern SSPX now:
How many SSPX priests of twenty or thirty years standing, pillars of zeal and good works, have been forced out of the SSPX parishes and Mass centres where for years they had practiced their ministry, in some cases the very parishes they themselves had founded and built up, victims of open persecution by their hierarchy…
Modernist Rome then:
“In the Diocese of Campos in Brazil, practically all the clergy have been driven out of the churches after the departure of Bishop de Castro-Mayer, because they were not willing to abandon the Mass of all time which they celebrated there until recently.”
The Modern SSPX now:
The Traditionalist clergy who were driven out of Campos held firm with Archbishop Lefebvre for a little while after his death, but they eventually gave in and signed a compromise with modern Rome, gratefully accepting the approval which the modernists had to offer and in turn recognising their wretched Council and its poisonous teaching. Today they are indistinguishable from any other quasi-“traditional” indult or “Ecclesia Dei” group. At the time of Campos’s surrender to the modernists (2002) the SSPX condemned this compromise with the enemy. And then, barely a decade later, the SSPX itself followed suit and itself surrendered to the same enemy. To re-read what the SSPX said about Campos is to read the old SSPX condemning the SSPX of today.
Modernist Rome then:
“You will be tempted to say: ‘But what can we do about it? It is a bishop who says this or that. Look, this document comes from the Catechetical Commission or some other official commission.’ That way there is nothing left for you but to lose your faith. But you do not have the right to react in that way.”
The Modern SSPX now:
You will be tempted to say: ‘But what can we do about it? It is Bishop Fellay, it is Fr. Pagliarani who says this or that. Look, this is what it says on sspx.org, this is what this official SSPX youtube video says… Look, Fr. Robinson says that the world is billions of years old; look at these articles telling me that it’s fine to have the covid jab, that’s what SSPX is officially saying so it must be OK.’ That way there is nothing left for you but to lose your faith. But you do not have the right to react in that way.
Modernist Rome then:
“The crisis is profound, cleverly organized and directed, and by this token one can truly believe that the master mind is not a man but Satan himself. For it is a master-stroke of Satan to get Catholics to disobey the whole of Tradition in the name of obedience. A typical example is furnished by the “aggiornamento” of the religious societies. By obedience, monks and nuns are made to disobey the laws and constitutions of their founders, which they swore to observe when they made their profession. Obedience in this case should have been a categorical refusal.”
The Modern SSPX now:
Satan’s masterstroke has been to get even Traditional Catholics to loosen their grip on Tradition in the name of obedience. By obedience, SSPX priests and religious have turned their back on Archbishop Lefebvre, their founder, without whom they would never even have been Traditional in the first place. How many priests knew that the SSPX was being subverted in 2012 but ultimately fell in line and obeyed? Obedience in this case should be a categorical refusal.
Modernist Rome then:
“Have you thought that even if we who are of a certain age run a smaller risk, children and younger seminarians brought up in new catechisms, experimental psychology and sociology, without a trace of dogmatic or moral theology, canon law or Church history, are educated in a faith which is not the true one and take for granted the new Protestant notions with which they are indoctrinated? What will tomorrow’s religion be if we do not resist?”
The Modern SSPX now:
Have you ever thought that even if you, being of a certain age, run a smaller risk because you remember the old SSPX which formed you and which you can still remember, there is a whole generation of young seminarians and children brought up in the new, liberal SSPX who know nothing of the old SSPX which used to condemn the errors of the conciliar church, promote the fight for the Social Kingship of Christ, and which took a firm stand against modern culture and the modern world in general? They take for granted the inoffensive, ‘respectable,’ worldly persona of the new SSPX to which they belong and the liberal, worldly attitudes with which they are indoctrinated. What will tomorrow’s religion be if we do not resist?
Modernist Rome then:
“Cranmer’s Prayer Book was composed by mixing parts of the Greek liturgy with parts of Luther’s liturgy. How can we not be reminded of Mgr. Bugnini drawing up the so-called Mass of Paul VI, with the collaboration of six Protestant “observers” attached as experts to the Consilium for the reform of the liturgy? The [Anglican] Prayer Book begins with these words, “The Supper and Holy Communion, commonly called Mass...,” which foreshadows the notorious Article 7 of the Institutio Generalis of the New Missal, revived by the Lourdes Eucharistic Congress in 1981: “The Supper of the Lord, otherwise called the Mass.” The destruction of the sacred, to which I have already referred, also formed part of the Anglican reform.”
The Modern SSPX now:
In the 16th Century, the Catholic Church condemned the Anglican Prayer Book with its notion of “the Lord’s Supper.” It was un-Catholic, offensive to God, did not give grace and the faithful were not to attend it. The New Mass is indeed remarkably similar to an Anglican communion service. Thus it is perhaps not so surprising that in the days of Archbishop Lefebvre and for a little while after, the SSPX likewise condemned the New Mass as being un-Catholic, offensive to God, not grace-giving, and something which the faithful should not attend. Today the Resistance finds itself having to condemn anyone else who tries to rehabilitate the New Mass as being in any way Catholic, approved of by God, grace-giving or something which the faithful might be able to attend. Both Bishop Williamson and the new SSPX are guilty of this; both have deviated away from Tradition and towards the conciliar church.
Modernist Rome then:
“Let us add this, that the greatest service we can render to the Church and to the successor of Peter is to reject the reformed and liberal church.”
The Modern SSPX now:
Let us add this, that the greatest service we can render to the Church, to the SSPX and to the memory of Archbishop Lefebvre is to reject the reformed and liberal SSPX.
|
|
|
| St. Bernard: To Jesus through Mary |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-15-2024, 05:06 AM - Forum: The Saints
- No Replies
|
|
St. Bernard: To Jesus through Mary
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2Fe...ipo=images]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2F736x%2Fed%2Fd9%2Ffd%2Fedd9fd0e3b8f67ec75444d17e03712e1--st-bernards-baby-jesus.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=b0b001c00c2571216094db412337ec7adc88bb638cffbf5c0575fb341d7658db&ipo=images)
As early as the 12th century, we find a great saint, the highly acclaimed Bernard of Clairvaux, preaching to the faithful that they must go to Jesus through Mary. It is through His Holy Mother that we find access to the God-Man. It is the Virgin, he tells us, who is the "royal way" to find Jesus Christ.
TIA | April 13, 2024
St. Bernard of Clairvaux
Taken from Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Vol !, Second Sunday after Advent, p 156
A virgin shall conceive and bear a Son (Is vii). It is now surely clear how the Virgin is the royal way by which the Savior has drawn near to us, coming forth from her virginal womb as a Bridegroom from His bridal chamber. Let us endeavor, therefore, to go up to Jesus by Mary, for Jesus came down to us by her. Let us seek His grace through her by whom He came to succor our needs.
O blessed finder of grace! O Mother of life! O Mother of salvation! May we through thee have access to thy Son. May He, Who was given to us by thee, receive us by thee. May He admit her purity and, for its sake, forgive our impurities. May He give us the pardon of our pride, because of the pleasure He took in thy humility. May thy abundant charity cover the multitude of our sins. May thy glorious fruitfulness get for us fruitfulness of merit.
Our Lady, our Mediatrix, our Advocate, reconcile us to thy Son, commend us to thy Son, present us to thy Son. By the grace thou hast found, by the prerogative thou didst merit, by the Mercy thou didst bring forth, obtain, O blessed one, that He Who deigned to become, through thy maternity, partaker of our weakness and misery, may, through thy intercession, make us partakers of His glory and bliss.
|
|
|
|
| Why is Pope Francis embracing the patriarchy (of the West)? |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-14-2024, 06:02 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- Replies (1)
|
|
Why is Pope Francis embracing the patriarchy (of the West)?
Pope Francis has revived the papal title Patriarch of the West, bringing back the style which has fallen in and out of usage over the centuries and was most recently dropped by Benedict XVI in 2006.
![[Image: https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.ama...00x600.png]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fbf34ddc7-b72c-4f69-9747-b7a4001c8c1f_900x600.png)
Pope Francis, Bishop of Rome, Vicar of Christ, Supreme Pontiff, Patriarch of the West, Primate of Italy, Servant of the Servants of God, presides at a prayer vigil at the Vatican on Oct. 4, 2014. © Mazur/catholicnews.org.uk.
THE PILLAR [slightly adapted] | April 10, 2024
In the 2024 edition of the Annuario Pontificio, the Vatican’s annual statistical yearbook, Patriarch of the West once again appears in the litany of formal papal dignities listed at the opening.
It’s an historical title, though sometimes controversial, which was in continuous use for more than a century after it was first introduced into the annuario by Pius IX in 1863. Before that, the style was used more or less at the pope’s pleasure, after being first coined by Theodore I in the seventh century.
The Vatican has not, as yet, made any statement or clarification on why the title has suddenly come back into use, or what, if anything, Pope Francis intends to signal by reasserting his claim to it.
But what does it mean, anyway?
Which way is West?
At the time “Patriarch of the West” was dropped by Benedict XVI, the then-Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity issued a clarifying statement recapping the history of the title and claiming that dropping it from the list of papal styles and dignities would be a boost to ecumenical relations with the Orthodox Churches.
Historically speaking, the council (now dicastery) explained, “the ancient Patriarchates of the East, fixed by the Councils of Constantinople (381) and Chalcedon (451), were related to a fairly clearly circumscribed territory, when the territory of the See of the Bishop of Rome remained vague.”
“Within the imperial ecclesiastical system of Justinian, alongside the four Eastern Patriarchates (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem), the Pope was understood as Patriarch of the West.”
Coined as a formal style of the pope by Theodore I in 642, the title itself, though, was “only rarely resorted to and had no clear meaning,” but became fashionable in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, during a period when papal titles multiplied, said the council.
At the time it was dropped from formal usage in 2006, the Vatican’s ecumenical department noted that the notion of “the West” had become something of a geographic contradiction.
While it was traditionally understood to mean what had been the western European part of the Roman Empire, in the modern world it applied loosely to the whole Latin Church, which stretched from New Zealand around the world to Hawaii.
As such, the council called it “obsolete and practically no longer usable. It therefore seems meaningless to insist on dragging it behind [the pope’s name].”
Giving up the title was an expression of “historical and theological realism,” the pontifical council said.
But if that’s the case, what does bringing it back now signal?
An ecumenical matter?
The ecumenical dicastery also suggested in 2006 that dropping the title “could be of benefit to ecumenical dialogue” with the Eastern Orthodox Churches, though it wasn’t clear how that might happen — nor is it obvious that it’s made a difference in the last 17 years.
As regards the perennially thorny issue of papal primacy and ecumenical relations, the council’s statement noted that “without using the title of ‘Patriarch of the West,’ the Fourth Council of Constantinople (869–70), the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) and the Council of Florence (1439), listed the Pope as the first of the then five Patriarchs.”
For the avoidance of all doubt, it also said dropping the title “clearly changes nothing” regarding the status of the Roman Pontiff as head of the global Church and (in the words of Lumen gentium) “the successor of Peter” and “the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity of both the bishops and of the faithful.”
So, what were they hoping it might do? Well, some speculated at the time that shedding the title “Patriarch of the West” could better articulate the Roman Pontiff’s role as head of the universal Church, East and West, and not specifically or problematically concerned only with the governance of the Latin Church.
Conversely, some worried at the time that the move was a kind of subtle assertion of universal papal primacy over the Eastern Orthodox patriarchs and generated some pushback in ecumenical relations.
This kind of criticism actually followed the pontifical council’s statement, even though it tried to make clear that while the pope wasn’t giving up any actual authority or prominence — just a title — “even less” was he asserting any substantive new claim.
It’s possible that in the course of more than fifteen years of ecumenical talks since 2006, Benedict’s move simply hasn’t been received well by the Orthodox, and it was quietly recommended that Francis bring the title back since the people to whom it’s renunciation was most meant to appeal actually didn’t care for it.
Is this about… synodality?
Of course, it’s possible Francis’ decision to bring back the title has nothing to do with ecumenism at all. In fact, it could be he’s rethought the whole idea of a western patriarchy, so to speak, in the light of his own brand of applied ecclesiology, and decided it’s a useful way to think about how he sees his role in the Catholic Church.
Writing in 2006, the dicastery for Christian unity made an interesting point about Vatican Council II and how the Catholic Church expresses its unity and hierarchy in the modern age.
Calling the title “meaningless” in the modern age, the pontifical council said at the time that “this is all the more so since the Catholic Church, with the Second Vatican Council, found for the Latin Church in the form of the episcopal conferences and their international meetings of episcopal conferences, the canonical order adapted to today’s needs.”
While bishops’ conferences continue to play an important role in Church affairs, Pope Francis has made synodality a fundamental expression of how he sees the Church growing and functioning in the coming years. To this end, he has also made the ongoing synod on synodality his signature legacy in office, and it’s a process in which he may have decided the old patriarchal title might just be useful.
In the Catholic Church, the rank of patriarch is somewhat rare.
In addition to heads of some Eastern Catholic Churches, the rank is given to the head of the Latin diocese of Jerusalem, the archbishops of Venice, Lisbon, and Goa and Deman in India (known as the Patriarch of the East Indies) — dioceses of historically seafaring cities or otherwise expansive territories and widely scattered communities.
In addition to ceremonial precedence, patriarchs historically functioned as a kind of “super metropolitan,” presiding over metropolitan archbishops in the same way archbishops head up ecclesiastical provinces.
It could be that as Pope Francis is encouraging increased synodality in the life of the Church — both theoretical and practical — he has decided that the traditional patriarchal title is a useful expression of how he sees papal hierarchical leadership functioning in an increasingly synodal Church.
Whatever the reason for the change, Pope Francis’ move is likely to prompt questions about his reasons. Whether the Vatican plans to offer any answers remains to be seen.
|
|
|
|
| Senator Rand Paul: “Smoking Gun” Connecting Fauci To Research That Led To COVID Creation |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-11-2024, 05:22 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
Sen. Rand Paul accuses 15 gov’t agencies of covering up knowledge about COVID origins at Wuhan lab
The Kentucky senator said that not one of these agencies warned anyone that the Chinese lab had already put together plans to create a virus.
![[Image: Rand-Paul.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Rand-Paul.png)
Sen. Rand Paul
YouTube
Apr 10, 2024
(LifeSiteNews [slightly adapted]) — U.S. Sen. Rand Paul says that officials from 15 U.S. government agencies were aware that the Chinese-run Wuhan Institute of Virology was “trying to create a coronavirus like COVID-19” yet remained silent about it.
Paul, a Republican who has represented Kentucky in the Senate since 2011, has been Congress’ most vocal critic of Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institutes of Health. Many of their combative interactions during Senate hearings over the past five years have gone viral on social media.
Paul published an op-ed for Fox News this week alleging to have uncovered what some have called “smoking gun” evidence that shows Fauci and more than a dozen government agencies essentially lied about collaborating with China.
“These officials knew that the Chinese lab was proposing to create a COVID 19-like virus and not one of these officials revealed this scheme to the public,” Paul wrote. “In fact, 15 agencies with knowledge of this project have continuously refused to release any information concerning this alarming and dangerous research.”
Paul alleges that the agencies were made aware of an initiative by British Dr. Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit that Paul has said received millions in taxpayer dollars, in conjunction with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The project, dubbed the “DEFUSE” project, aimed to create a coronavirus “that would have been shockingly similar to the COVID-19 virus.”
“For years, I have been fighting to obtain records from dozens of federal agencies relating to the origins of COVID-19 and the DEFUSE project,” Paul wrote. “Under duress, the administration finally released documents that show that the DEFUSE project was pitched to at least 15 agencies in January 2018.”
“Disturbingly, not one of these 15 agencies spoke up to warn us that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been pitching this research. Not one of these agencies warned anyone that this Chinese lab had already put together plans to create such a virus.”
EcoHealth issued a press release on August 9 disputing Paul’s findings. The group said that they “did submit a proposal for a project named DEFUSE” but that it was declined and that it was “never submitted to any other federal agencies for consideration.” The statement also says EcoHealth “did not support ‘gain-of-function’ research” at the Wuhan Institute.
Investigative reporter John Stossel exposed the connection between EcoHealth, Dr. Fauci, and the Wuhan lab during a story he did on Paul’s findings.
Paul maintains that Daszak “concealed” information about the proposal during previous Congressional testimony. He also says Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases “was not only briefed on Wuhan’s desire to create this virus, [it] was actually listed as a participant in the initial DEFUSE pitch. Fauci’s Rocky Mountain Lab was named as a partner alongside the Wuhan Institute of Virology in the proposal.”
Paul credits Lt. Col. Joseph Murphy, a whistleblower, for informing the public about the DEFUSE project.
“Likely, hundreds of people in the government knew of this proposal to create a COVID-19-like virus and virtually every one of these people chose to keep quiet, to obscure, and ultimately to conceal information that might have saved lives by letting the world know this was no sleepy animal virus with poor transmission,” he wrote. “All evidence suggests COVID-19 was a laboratory-enhanced virus purposefully adapted for human transmission.
Paul believes those who have “covered up” the DEFUSE project “should be punished but likely won’t.”
“At the very least … the perpetrators should be made to admit the truth and Congress should finally put in place sufficient oversight to make sure dangerous gain of function experiments are sufficiently vetted and, if necessary, prevented.”
|
|
|
|
| Climate Experiment Kept Quiet to Avoid Public Backlash |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-10-2024, 07:11 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Geoengineering Test Quietly Launches Salt Crystals into Atmosphere
A solar geoengineering experiment in San Francisco could lead to brighter clouds that reflect sunlight. The risks are numerous.
[Emphasis mine.]
April 4, 2024
CLIMATEWIRE via Scientific American | The nation's first outdoor test to limit global warming by increasing cloud cover launched Tuesday from the deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier in the San Francisco Bay.
The experiment, which organizers didn't widely announce to avoid public backlash, marks the acceleration of a contentious field of research known as solar radiation modification. The concept involves shooting substances such as aerosols into the sky to reflect sunlight away from the Earth.
The move led by researchers at the University of Washington has renewed questions about how to effectively and ethically study promising climate technologies that could also harm communities and ecosystems in unexpected ways. The experiment is spraying microscopic salt particles into the air, and the secrecy surrounding its timing caught even some experts off guard.
"Since this experiment was kept under wraps until the test started, we are eager to see how public engagement is being planned and who will be involved," said Shuchi Talati, the executive director of the Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering, a nonprofit that seeks to include developing countries in decisions about solar modification, also known as geoengineering.
"While it complies with all current regulatory requirements, there is a clear need to reexamine what a strong regulatory framework must look like in a world where [solar radiation modification] experimentation is happening," she added.
The Coastal Atmospheric Aerosol Research and Engagement, or CAARE, project is using specially built sprayers to shoot trillions of sea salt particles into the sky in an effort to increase the density — and reflective capacity — of marine clouds. The experiment is taking place, when conditions permit, atop the USS Hornet Sea, Air & Space Museum in Alameda, California, and will run through the end of May, according to a weather modification form the team filed with federal regulators.
The project comes as global heat continues to obliterate monthly and yearly temperature records and amid growing interest in solar radiation modification from Silicon Valley funders and some environmental groups. It also follows the termination of a Harvard University experiment last month that planned to inject reflective aerosols into the stratosphere near Sweden before it was canceled after encountering opposition from Indigenous groups.
Solar radiation modification is controversial because widespread use of technologies like marine cloud brightening could alter weather patterns in unclear ways and potentially limit the productivity of fisheries and farms. It also wouldn't address the main cause of climate change — the use of fossil fuels — and could lead to a catastrophic spike in global temperatures if major geoengineering activities were discontinued before greenhouse gases decrease to manageable levels.
The University of Washington and SilverLining, a geoengineering research advocacy group involved in the CAARE project, declined interview requests. The mayor of Alameda, where the experiment is being conducted, didn't respond to emailed questions about the project.
The secrecy surrounding the landmark experiment seems to have been by design, according to The New York Times, which, along with a local newspaper, was granted exclusive access to cover the initial firing of the spray cannons.
"The idea of interfering with nature is so contentious, organizers of Tuesday's test kept the details tightly held, concerned that critics would try to stop them," the Times reported. The White House also distanced itself from the experiment, which is being conducted with the cooperation of a Smithsonian-affiliated museum.
The project team has touted its transparency, noting that visitors to the USS Hornet, which now serves as a floating museum, will be able to view the experiment.
"The world needs to rapidly advance its understanding of the effects of aerosol particles on climate,” Kelly Wanser, the executive director of SilverLining, said in a press release. "With a deep commitment to open science and a culture of humility, the University of Washington has developed an approach that integrates science with societal engagement, and can help society in essential steps toward advancing science, developing regulations, promoting equitable and effective decision-making, and building shared understanding in these areas."
The CAARE project is part of a larger coastal study that the University of Washington consortium is planning to pursue. The second phase of that effort would take place on a pier around a mile offshore in a coastal environment, according to a study description the school released Monday.
While a peer review of that proposal was generally positive, the scientists also flagged some transparency shortcomings.
"One reviewer noted that it would help to have more information on the site location," said a Washington-University-commissioned report. "Is there local resistance or concerns (whether founded or unfounded) around issues like local air quality, etc.? How many options exist, and how do different options affect the field study plan?"
The study plan also made no mention of its potential ecological impacts, a key consideration recommended by a 2022 Biden administration marine cloud brightening workshop. That's a significant oversight, according to Greg Goldsmith, the associate dean for research and development at Chapman University.
"History has shown us that when we insert ourselves into modification of nature, there are always very serious unintended consequences," said Goldsmith, who studies the implications of climate change for plant structure and function. "And therefore, it would be prudent to listen to what history has shown and look for consequences."
|
|
|
|
| SSPX Priest on Trial for Abusing 7 Children |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-09-2024, 06:52 AM - Forum: The New-Conciliar SSPX
- Replies (1)
|
|
How horrifying and tragic...
SSPX Priest on Trial for Abusing 7 Children
![[Image: rs=w:1280]](https://img1.wsimg.com/isteam/ip/be00658c-19a3-4de6-9fc0-358ce018c6d6/rostand-1.jpg/:/cr=t:0%25,l:0%25,w:100%25,h:100%25/rs=w:1280)
Stella Maris [adapted] | April 6, 2024
A priest of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) is on trial for abusing seven children.
On April 4, Fr. Arnaud Rostand, former U.S. district superior, appeared in criminal court in Gap, France, where he is charged with sexually assaulting multiple minors from 2002 to 2018 in France, Switzerland and Spain.
In his court testimony, the 58-year-old priest admitted to his crimes and apologized to victims, saying he has “always struggled against this attraction” to adolescents.
Significantly, Rostand made his SSPX superiors aware of his struggles as early as 1998, writing a letter to his superiors admitting his attraction to children. He repeated his concerns to superiors in 2000, 2006 and 2016.
Rostand himself confirmed in a 2010 interview, “In August of 2008, Bishop Fellay, the General Superior of the Society of Saint Pius X, appointed me as Superior of the District of the United States.” He served as district superior from 2008–2014.
In spite of these warnings, the SSPX, primarily through Fellay, continued placing Rostand in positions of authority in Europe, Asia and the United States.
Rostand’s victims were former students of SSPX academies.
The priest said he has been receiving psychiatric care since 2019.
“I realize today that I should have acted differently,” he conceded in court.
In response to questioning over why he never turned himself in to police, he said, “I ask forgiveness from the victims and regret profoundly everything I have done.”
TRACK RECORD OF ABUSE
The charges against Fr. Rostand come less than a year after fellow French SSPX priest Fr. Pierre de Maillard was convicted in court for abusing 27 minors over the course of 25 years.
The trial was reported across French media as a "horror trial," with de Maillard gaining the singular reputation of being named “the greatest serial predator” in France.
![[Image: rs=w:1280]](https://img1.wsimg.com/isteam/ip/be00658c-19a3-4de6-9fc0-358ce018c6d6/2023-05-15_maillard_sspx.jpg/:/cr=t:0%25,l:0%25,w:100%25,h:100%25/rs=w:1280)
Fr. Pierre de Maillard, convicted in 2023 of abusing 27 children
Rostand’s trial also comes a year and a half after American SSPX priest Fr. Matthew Stafki pleaded guilty to molesting his six-year-old niece over the course of three years.
In December 2020, an SSPX teacher in France was convicted for abusing 13 children, and just two months prior, in October 2020, SSPX priest Fr. Frederic Abbet was apprehended and imprisoned in Switzerland for abusing at least five boys in his care.
In 2017, SSPX priest Fr. Christophe Roisnel was sentenced to 19 years in prison for raping and torturing three female teachers at an SSPX academy in France.
Because victims are largely shunned and ostracized by their SSPX community if they accuse a priest, and leadership has used heavyhanded tactics to silence witnesses, it remains unknown how many actual victims exist, and how many SSPX priests have abused their flock. (Read this archive for more reports.)
Former U.S. District Superior Fr. Jürgen Wegner admitted in a leaked phone call that he knew of "hundreds of cases" of abuse within the Society. [...]
Lawyers for Rostand tried to minimize his harm, dismissing claims that Rostand was a dangerous predator, instead calling him “a weak, fragile, reprehensible man.”
Public Prosecutor Violaine Perrot is asking that Rostand be sentenced to four years monitored probation, with treatment, and a total ban on volunteer work or any professional ministry involving minors. She is also asking for financial compensation for the victims.
The court will issue its judgment and sentence on June 6.
SSPX RESPONDS
The SSPX issued an official statement on April 5, claiming that superiors suspended Rostand in 2014 “after ambiguous and inappropriate attitudes were brought to their attention.”
“For ten years, the accused has been subject to appropriate disciplinary supervision within the Society,” the statement continues.
The SSPX notes that it reported Rostand to law enforcement in 2019.
The statement ends with a call to prayer for the victims.
“As usual, Menzingen issues a press release full of half-truths and self-congratulation,” said one European source whose family member was abused by an SSPX priest. He requested anonymity to protect his family.
In recent years Rostand served in an administrative capacity at SSPX headquarters in Menzingen, Switzerland, until the current superior general, Fr. Davide Pagliarani, promoted him to the post of prior (equivalent to parish priest) in 2018.
“I also know that catechism classes for children are given in the part of the general house allocated to this priory,” the source said, indicating that Rostand would have had access to children, in spite of the SSPX’s claims that he was under “disciplinary supervision.”
The SSPX's statement omits the fact that superiors knew of Rostand’s pedophilic tendencies as early as 1998, yet placed him in positions of authority on several continents. These include Asia (Ceylon and Manila, Philippines) and North America.
In 2022, Rostand was sent to Montgardin, France — nicknamed the “Golden Prison” because it serves as the SSPX’s home for troubled clergy.
![[Image: rs=w:1280]](https://img1.wsimg.com/isteam/ip/be00658c-19a3-4de6-9fc0-358ce018c6d6/montgardin.jpg/:/cr=t:0%25,l:0%25,w:100%25,h:100%25/rs=w:1280)
Montgardin, nicknamed "the Golden Prison"
For instance, SSPX priest Fr. Damien Carlisle, accused of abusing young boys in Gabon, Africa, and later in New Zealand, also spends his days in Montgardin.
PLACING PREDATORS IN POWER
Numerous reports show that Fellay has a track record of placing predators back in ministry, after a short stint in “prayer and penance.” The abusers often go on to continue their abuse — and so it seems in the case of Fr. Rostand.
Bishop Fellay was replaced as superior general in 2018 by Fr. Davide Pagliarani, who has been accused of following the same modus operandi as his predecessor.
![[Image: rs=w:1280]](https://img1.wsimg.com/isteam/ip/be00658c-19a3-4de6-9fc0-358ce018c6d6/Proof.png/:/cr=t:0%25,l:0%25,w:100%25,h:100%25/rs=w:1280)
Proof that Fr. Rostand was named prior in 2019 (taken from SSPX bulletin "Le Rocher")
“Pagliarani has acted with the same criminal recklessness and deliberate endangerment,” said the European source, “since as soon as he took office (July 2018) he moved Rostand, physically in the same building in Menzingen, from bureaucrat with no pastoral function (‘communications officer’) to prior, therefore necessarily in contact with the faithful, families, children, etc.”
Pagliarani also placed admitted pedophile Fr. Patrick Groche [...], where he is accused of molesting African boys — in Maison Saint-Ignace in Lourdes, France in 2020, near the world-famous shrine. While he technically placed restrictions on Groche to be strictly supervised, there is evidence that Groche comes and goes as he pleases and that he has access to children.
One of his victims visited the Lourdes priory in July 2022, where Groche was seen surrounded by altar boys before Mass. When Groche learned that one of his victims was present, he disappeared and remained absent throughout Mass.
Concerns remain that Rostand may have unnamed victims in India, the Philippines and North America.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcbcpnews.net%2Fcbcpnews...ipo=images]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcbcpnews.net%2Fcbcpnews%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F05%2Fascension2.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e9dc249925b451914c2501ddcfe2b2f2b6424ecd303ccd5b7cfaa4614fc38ecf&ipo=images)
