| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 395 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 393 Guest(s)
Bing, Google
|
|
|
| Offenses against God as our Creator: EU Wants All 'Gendered Language' Erased |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-30-2024, 05:45 AM - Forum: Global News
- No Replies
|
 |
EU Wants All 'Gendered Language' Erased
ZH | JAN 30, 2024
Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,
A European Union body has called for all ‘gendered language’ to be purged from existence, including completely innocuous sayings such as ‘Joe Public’, as well as words such as ‘virile’ which it claims are too often associated with men.
The Telegraph reports that The European Institute for Gender Equality (yes that exists) has compelled a 61-page document outlining what words should be wiped from existence and have more “sensitive” replacements.
The document has been named Toolkit on Gender-sensitive Communication. Examples of words and terms to be resigned to the dustbin of history include ‘Master of ceremonies,’ ‘No man’s land,’ ‘Manpower,’ and ‘Repairman.’
In EU Newspeak, those terms would become ‘host,’ ‘Unclaimed territory,’ ‘human power,’ and ‘Repairer’, while they want the term ‘Joe public’ replaced with ‘average citizen’.
Comply average citizen.
Conservative MP Nigel Mills commented “This is utter madness. It’s an attack on the English language.”
The EU also suggests swapping around the words ‘King and Queen’, so Queen comes first. The fundamental problem with this is that the reason people put ‘King’ first is because he’s the guy in charge. He was supposedly chosen by God to be the leader. The Queen is just the woman he married. She isn’t in charge of anything. Swapping around words doesn’t change that concept, it just makes you sound a bit stupid.
Where this gets really creepy, however, is with the call to erase words that have nothing to do with gender.
The document suggests that words like ‘bossy,’ ‘pushy,’ and shrill should not be used because they “have strong connotations that are strongly associated with only women”.
They used the word ‘strong’ twice there.
Suggested newspeak replacements for those words are ‘assertive’ and ‘high-pitched’ or ‘grating voice’.
Let’s try this out for size.
‘The female sports commentator is annoyingly high pitched and has a very grating voice’.
Is that acceptable?
The EU institute also wants to consign the concept of virility to the scrapheap, reasoning that it is “strongly associated with only men” and should be replaced by “strong or energetic.”
They really do like the word ‘strong.’
The development comes in the wake of legions of other efforts to police and change language considered to be ‘insensitive’ or ‘gendered’.
|
|
|
| EU "will sabotage Hungary's economy if Budapest blocks fresh aid to Ukraine" |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-29-2024, 07:46 AM - Forum: Global News
- Replies (1)
|
|
Brussels threatens to hit Hungary's economy if Orban vetoes Ukraine aid - FT
![[Image: LZQGO67ZSRP3JHU3OEQFKG53XI.jpg]](https://www.reuters.com/resizer/28T58NmHeOfQ9at2FAWg_FOCwcM=/1200x0/filters:quality(80)/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/LZQGO67ZSRP3JHU3OEQFKG53XI.jpg)
Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban attends a roundtable during the summit between leaders of the European Union (EU) and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), in Brussels, Belgium July 17, 2023. REUTERS/Johanna Geron Acquire Licensing Rights
Jan 29 (Reuters - emphasis mine) - The European Union will sabotage Hungary's economy if Budapest blocks fresh aid to Ukraine at a summit this week, under a confidential plan drawn up by Brussels, the Financial Times reported on Sunday.
Brussels has outlined a strategy to explicitly target Hungary's economic weaknesses, imperil its currency and drive a collapse in investor confidence in a bid to hurt "jobs and growth" if Budapest refuses to lift its veto on the aid to Kyiv, the newspaper reported, citing a document drawn up by EU officials.
Notorious for many bitter feuds with the EU during his 13 years in power, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has become a vocal critic of the bloc's support for Ukraine and boasted about his ties with the Kremlin since Russia went to war in Ukraine in February 2022.
The document seen by FT declares that "in the case of no agreement in the February 1 [summit], other heads of state and government would publicly declare that in the light of the unconstructive behaviour of the Hungarian PM . . . they cannot imagine that" EU funds would be provided to Budapest.
Hungary's EU minister Janos Boka told the newspaper Budapest was not aware of the financial threat, but that the country "does not give in to pressure".
|
|
|
|
| Joseph Ratzinger and the New Liturgical Movement |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-29-2024, 06:32 AM - Forum: The Architects of Vatican II
- No Replies
|
|
From the liberal and modern publication, Crisis Magazine:
Joseph Ratzinger and the New Liturgical Movement
The struggle to define and to understand active participation is a fruit of two different conceptions of the liturgy. Joseph Ratzinger constantly affirmed the view that the liturgy is the the work of God and not a product of man.
Crisis Magazine [Emphasis mine.] | December 13, 2022
Unfortunately, division characterizes our present culture and, subsequently, the Church. Are you a Vatican II Catholic? A traditionalist Catholic? A Novus Ordo Catholic? Identity politics has influenced and shaped our unhealthy discourses about the sacred liturgy.
We now find ourselves locked into a “new” liturgical war when we need the liturgical wisdom of great theologians such as Joseph Ratzinger to guide us back to appreciating the authentic spirit of the liturgical movement, lest we drown ourselves in the present bitter and acrimonious sea that fills up our social media feeds or inboxes.
Joseph Ratzinger, in his autobiographical reflection Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977, argues for the need for a “new liturgical movement.” The purpose of this movement will call to life the “real heritage of the Second Vatican Council.” In Milestones, Ratzinger calls for a “renewal of liturgical awareness” and a “liturgical reconciliation that again recognizes the unity of the history of the liturgy and that understands Vatican II, not as a breach, but as a stage of development: these things are urgently needed for the life of the Church.”
In order to promote liturgical renewal, the early members of the liturgical movement supported the active and intelligent participation of the faithful in the celebration of the sacred liturgy before they called for changes such as celebrating evening Masses, offering the Mass versus populum, etc. According to one of the early pioneers of the liturgical movement, Dom Lambert Beauduin, liturgical movement promotes active participation “by means of understanding and following the liturgical rites and texts [of the Mass].” [See here on the modernism associated with active participation. - The Catacombs] We need the liturgical wisdom of great theologians such as Joseph Ratzinger to guide us back to appreciating the authentic spirit of the liturgical movement.
The first magisterial use of the phrase “active participation” (participatio actuosa) in a magisterial document comes from Pope St. Pius X’s motu propio on sacred music, Tra le sollecitudini:
Quote:Filled as we are with a most ardent desire to see the true Christian spirit flourish in every respect and be preserved by all the Christian faithful, we deem it necessary to provide before anything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for no other object than that of acquiring this spirit from its foremost and indispensable font, which is the [active] participation in the divine mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church. [See here for an excellent response to those who claim that active participation as it was 'weaponized' at Vatican II, originated with Pope Pius X. - The Catacombs]
The fact that the original use of the phrase “active participation” occurs in a magisterial document on Gregorian chant should disabuse us of the idea that participation should be focused solely on the celebration of the liturgy in the vernacular, the flourishing of liturgical ministries for lay people, liturgy facing the people (versus populum), or merely our outward actions and responses within the sacred liturgy.
The real actio within the liturgy is oratio. In his work Spirit of the Liturgy, Ratzinger argues that participation is not simply our external action during the liturgy, it is our share in God’s action whereby each person prays that they “may be transformed into the Logos, conformed to the Logos, and so be made the true Body of Christ.” Ratzinger is very clear that external actions are secondary to internal prayer:
Doing really must stop when we come to the heart of the matter: the oratio. It must be plainly evident that the oratio is the heart of the matter, but that it is important precisely because it provides a space for the actio of God.
Oratio assists the worshipping member of the Body of Christ to enter into the self-giving love of Christ.
The manner in which the liturgy is celebrated in the average parish suggests that one should be “doing” something to participate fully in the liturgy. Contrary to this notion that would have us focus on the external at the expense of the internal or the visible over and above the invisible. All of the responses, the singing of hymns, the chanting of the Propers of the Mass, and all liturgical gestures should move us into a transcendent silence lifting us into the celebration of the sacrificial and eschatological nuptial banquet of the Lamb, who was once slain.
The struggle to define and to understand active participation is a fruit of two different conceptions of the liturgy. In one of his interviews with the journalist Peter Seewald, Ratzinger notes that we can view the liturgy as “something living and growing” or “something that has been made.” Hence, Ratzinger constantly affirms the view that the liturgy is the “opus Dei” (the “work of God”) and not a product of man as symbolized by the false worship of the Golden Calf in Exodus.[See
The concern of Ratzinger with the implementation of the reformed post-Vatican liturgy and simply the Missal of St. Paul VI is that it has characteristics of something that has been made by a committee of experts and not the fruit of organic development and growth.
The hermeneutic of reform in continuity remains a foundational theme for Ratzinger/Benedict throughout his thought. It is one of the reasons Ratzinger is critical of referring to the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) as the “Tridentine Mass.” It is a misnomer insofar as the Missal of St. Pius V (1570) has been reformed by Clement VIII (1604), Urban VIII (1634), Leo XIII (1884), Benedict XV (1920), and most recently by St. John XXIII (1962). Hence, we can refer to the TLM as Mass celebrated according to the Missal of St. John XXIII.
In their assessment of Benedict XVI’s allowance for the wider celebration of the Missal of St. John XXIII as the “extraordinary form” of the Roman Rite and the Missal of St. Paul VI and St. John Paul’s Missal as the “ordinary form” of the Roman Rite, Fr. Weinandy, et alia, raise this concern: “By reestablishing the extraordinary form, Benedict unwittingly employed a hermeneutic of discontinuity, as if the revised rite were not in continuity with the old.” Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum and the accompanying letter addressed to the bishops, Con Grande Fiducia, articulate a motive of “liturgical reconciliation” intent on preserving the unity between the two forms of the one Roman Rite. In other words, his aim has always been the preservation of the hermeneutic of reform in continuity.
Monsignor Klaus Gamber has been referred to as the “Father of the New Liturgical Movement” by the eminent German theologian Manfred Hauke. Monsignor Gamber argued for allowing the two most recent Roman missals to coexist:
The traditional ritus Romanus [the Missal of St. John XXIII] and the ritus modernus [the Missal of St. Paul VI] should both be accepted as legitimate forms of worship. The two rites are to exist as independent rites and must be kept separate and unique in such a way that the traditional Roman rite and the traditionally used Missale Romanum, together with all other liturgical texts (Rituale and Pontificale), be reinstated or be authorized for use in the form in which they existed prior to the Council.
It is not difficult to see how Gamber influenced Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum. The key distinction between the two is that Benedict maintains the view that there is one rite celebrated in two different forms.
Fr. Weinandy, et alia, have questioned the rationale and the wisdom of Benedict’s Summorum Pontficum because, in their view:
Quote:Benedict’s accommodation of the Tridentine liturgy, while pastorally motivated, undercut the fundamental principle of the liturgical renewal, for the faithful who now attend that liturgy have little opportunity for active participation.
In light of our discussion above of the authentic meaning of “active participation,” I would argue that he did no such thing. One of the key elements necessary to promote active participation is reverential silence, which is often nowhere to be found in the implementation of the reformed liturgy.
One of the fruits of the “mutual enrichment” of allowing the two forms of the Roman Rite to exist is that it may assist the faithful to understand the true nature of “active participation” as envisioned by the liturgical movement. Benedict is trying to bring clarity to active participation that is both interior and exterior within the sacred liturgy. Further, he has tried to recover the notion that worship and participation extend beyond the celebration of the liturgy in the mission of charity toward our neighbor.
Benedict has favored the gift of liturgical pluralism because it can strengthen unity when it is promoted well and given proper pastoral care and accompaniment. I attend a suburban parish that is filled with a diverse body comprised of Nigerians, Hispanics, Latinos, Filipinos, Vietnamese, and Anglos. Mass celebrated according to the Missal of St. John XXIII was offered as one of the main Sunday Masses, and several hundred people attended this Mass regularly. Additionally, you had people who would go back and forth between this Mass and one of the other Masses celebrated according to the Missal of St. Paul VI/John Paul II.
I never encountered any animus toward Vatican II or the “new” Mass. I have and continue to encounter individuals and families in my parish who simply long for reverent liturgy wherein we take beauty and the ars celebrandi seriously. I also participated with regularity in Masses celebrated according to Divine Worship: The Missal (the liturgy of the Personal Ordinariate for former Anglicans/Episcopalians). I have also had the great fortune of participating in varying liturgies of the Eastern Churches (Byzantine, Ruthenian, Syro-Malabar, Maronite, etc.). My participation in liturgical plurality has taught me that we would all benefit from the treasure of rich liturgical and ecclesial diversity.
Benedict, in his pastoral and liturgical wisdom, was not naïve; nor has his vision failed. If anything, the present situation confirms Benedict’s wisdom and the veracity of Christopher Ruddy’s assessment: “A Church that lives from tradition cannot reject its past without mortally wounding itself.”
We need more prayer, fasting, study of the liturgy, greater liturgical formation, and more dia-logos. When the history of this period is written, we will come to appreciate that Joseph Ratzinger was the eldest son of the new liturgical movement, and his theology of liturgy may offer us the hermeneutic we need to appreciate the true heritage of the Second Vatican Council on the sacred liturgy.
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis doubles down on homosexual blessings: ‘Not the union, but the people’ are blessed |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-27-2024, 08:52 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Pope Francis doubles down on homosexual blessings: ‘Not the union, but the people’ are blessed
Pope Francis emphasized that the extra-liturgical blessings 'do not require moral perfection to be received' and 'that when a couple spontaneously approaches to ask for them, one does not bless the union, but simply the people who together made the request.'
![[Image: pope-fernandez.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/pope-fernandez.jpg)
Pope Francis & Cardinal Fernández, January 26, 2024.
Vatican News
Jan 26, 2024
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Francis defended the controversial text Fiducia Supplicans today, stating that blessings of same-sex couples do “not bless the union, but simply the people who together make the request.”
The Pontiff made his comments during a January 26 meeting with the plenary assembly of the Congregation (now Dicastery) for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). Fiducia Supplicans emerged from that same body of the Roman Curia on December 18, having been written by the new CDF Prefect Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, and approved by the Pope.
Speaking about “evangelization” and the sacraments, Francis closed his address by commenting on the hotly contested text. “The intent of ‘pastoral and spontaneous blessings’ is to show concretely the closeness of the Lord and the Church to all those who, finding themselves in different situations, ask for help to carry on – sometimes to begin – a journey of faith,” he said.
The Pontiff doubled down on the arguments both he and Fernández have respectively made in the document and in their subsequent brief comments on it, stating that the blessing of two people together is not meant to condone the fact of the two people being together:
Quote:I would like to emphasize briefly two things: the first is that these blessings, outside of any liturgical context and form, do not require moral perfection to be received; the second, that when a couple spontaneously approaches to ask for them, one does not bless the union, but simply the people who together made the request.
Not the union, but the people — of course taking into account the context, the sensitivities, the places where people live and the most appropriate ways to do it.
The Pope’s defense of Fiducia Supplicans, and by extension its author Cardinal Fernández, follows widespread opposition to the text from bishops, cardinals, and bishops’ conferences around the world.
Indeed, one of the Pope’s close C9 cardinal advisors – Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo – flew to Rome specifically to discuss with Francis and Fernández the fact that bishops in Africa and Madagascar would not be offering blessings of same-sex couples.
Ambongo’s subsequently published letter was co-written with Fernández and had Francis’ direct approval at each step of its writing. Such a move came less than one week after Fernández had warned bishops that they were not permitted to forbid the implementation of the document in their dioceses.
But despite collaborating with Ambongo to issue a continent-wide rejection of the document that he approved, Pope Francis then proceeded to attack critics of Fiducia Supplicans just a few days later. In an Italian TV appearance Francis said those who oppose the text have jumped to “ugly conclusions” because they do not understand it properly.
“Sometimes decisions are not accepted. In most cases, decisions are not accepted because one does not know things,” said the Pope.
While Francis and Fernández have not shied away from defending the text, a former prefect of the CDF has been repeatedly vocal in his criticism of it. Writing in December 2023, Cardinal Gerhard Müller questioned if a Catholic could accept the document’s teaching.
“Given the unity of deeds and words in the Christian faith, one can only accept that it is good to bless these unions, even in a pastoral way, if one believes that such unions are not objectively contrary to the law of God,” he stated.
Following Fernández’s January 4 press release defending the document, Müller responded again, saying that Fernández’s argument still left elements in the document which were “problematic.”
The German cardinal added how the “worldwide negative reaction from large parts of the world’s episcopate and from leading lay people… should give those responsible in Rome food for thought.”
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis and Anglican Archbishop Lead Ecumenical Vespers in Papal Basilica |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-26-2024, 07:29 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- Replies (1)
|
|
Pope Francis, Archbishop of Canterbury lead ecumenical Vespers in papal basilica
Archbishop Justin Welby joined Francis on the altar at St. Paul's Outside the Walls and commissioned the assembled Anglican and Catholic prelates in pairings to return to their home nation to promote Christian unity.
![[Image: pope-welby.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/pope-welby.jpg)
Pope Francis & Justin Welby at ecumenical Vespers, January 25, 2024.
Jan 25, 2024
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews [Emphasis mine]) — Pope Francis and the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury concluded an ecumenical ceremony in Rome today with a “commissioning” to the assembled Anglican and Catholic prelates.
In the Basilica of St. Paul’s Outside the Walls, Pope Francis and Anglican Archbishop Justin Welby joined forces on the altar to lead ecumenical Vespers and to send out pairings of Anglican and Catholic prelates – both male and female – on ecumenical endeavors.
Hailing from 27 countries, the ecumenical pairing involved a Catholic and Anglican prelate from each country, who then return to their home nation to spread ecumenical efforts in the current style of Christian unity.
During Pope Francis’ homily, he spoke on the manner in which “unity” was to be effected, saying that “only a love that becomes gratuitous service, only the love that Jesus taught and embodied, will bring separated Christians closer to one another.”
![[Image: P1120678-scaled.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/P1120678-scaled.jpeg)
Pope Francis at ecumenical Vespers, January 25, 2024
![[Image: P1120665-scaled.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/P1120665-scaled.jpeg)
Pope Francis at ecumenical Vespers, January 25, 2024
“Only that love, which does not appeal to the past in order to remain aloof or to point a finger, only that love which in God’s name puts our brothers and sisters before the ironclad defense of our own religious structures will unite us,” he added.
Stating how “each baptized person is a member of the one Body of Christ,” Francis drew heavily from today’s feast – the Conversion of St. Paul – saying “all efforts to attain full unity are called to follow the same route as Paul, decentralizing our own ideas in order to hear the Lord’s voice and give him the space to take the initiative.”
Addressing the assembled ecumenical clergy and a large body of the Roman Curia, Francis did not highlight the primacy of the Catholic Church but spoke instead of the role of “prayer” in the pursuit of “unity.” Quoting from St. Paul’s dialogue with God in the Scripture passage of his conversion, Francis stated:
“What are we to do Lord? In asking that question, we already have an answer, because the first answer is prayer. Prayer for unity is the primary responsibility in our journey together. And it is a sacred responsibility, because it means being in communion with the Lord, who prayed above all to the Father for unity."
Francis thanked Welby for being present for the joint commissioning of bishops, highlighting that “we can confer on these joint groups of bishops the mandate of continuing to testify to the unity willed by God for his Church in their respective regions, as they move forward together ‘to extend the mercy and peace of God to a world in need.’”
Welby delivered an unplanned homily after Francis’, highlighting the themes of “unity” and “love” and how such aspects must be prioritized over “anger.”
![[Image: P1120693-scaled.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/P1120693-scaled.jpeg)
Canterbury’s Justin Welby during ecumenical Vespers, January 25, 2024
During the commissioning itself, Francis pointed back to Pope Gregory the Great sending St. Augustine to convert the English people. Meanwhile Welby urged that “your ministry alongside one another as Catholics and Anglicans be for the world[b] a foretaste of the reconciling of all Christians in the unity of the one and only Church of Christ[/b] for which we pray this day.”
At this point, Francis and Welby pronounced together in English a commendation to the bishops before greeting them in their pairs as the prelates approached the altar and shook hands with Francis and Welby.
“The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the Communion of the Holy Spirit be with all of you,” Francis and Welby said in unison after greeting the prelates.
![[Image: P1120705-scaled.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/P1120705-scaled.jpeg)
Pope Francis greets an Anglican female prelate, January 25, 2024
![[Image: P1120735-scaled.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/P1120735-scaled.jpeg)
Abp. Justin Welby at ecumenical Vespers
Just prior to the close of the Vespers, Cardinal Kurt Koch – prefect of the Dicastery for the Promotion of Christian Unity – thanked the Pope for his presence, saying it highlighted “how much ecumenical engagement is close to your heart.”
“The ecumenism of charity has enabled us to rediscover the fraternity that, among us Christians and among us Christian communities, exists by reason of the baptism common to all, offering us an effective network of friendly relations,” Koch continued.
![[Image: P1120728-scaled.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/P1120728-scaled.jpeg)
Cardinal Kurt Koch
The ceremony took place at the conclusion of the week of prayer for Christian unity. Running alongside the week of prayer for Christian unity is the “Growing Together” summit, which is being organized by the International Anglican-Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM).
IARCCUM is “an official commission of the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church, established to support ecumenical dialogue between the traditions,” and it was the final event of the Rome section of the IARCCUM summit that Francis joined forces with Welby at Vespers.
IARCCUM described the event as “a significant moment, symbolic for Anglican-Catholic bonds and advancing ecumenical dialogue.”
READ: Archbishop of Canterbury leads ‘Anglican Eucharist’ in Catholic basilica with Pope’s approval
It marks the second time that Francis and Welby have commissioned the pairs of Anglican and Catholic bishops since 2016, a year which saw the first IARCCUM summit.
Over his pontificate, Pope Francis has formed a close relationship with Welby, most recently journeying with him to South Sudan on an ecumenical pilgrimage and inviting the Anglican prelate to take a place of honor at the ecumenical prayer vigil held on the eve of the Synod on Synodality.
|
|
|
|
| “Growing your own vegetables is bad for the planet” |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-25-2024, 08:07 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
|
“Growing your own vegetables is bad for the planet”
Another blatant step in the plan to control our food
OG | January 24, 2024
Have you ever made a prediction and wished you’d recorded it?
Last week, in a phone conversation with a family member, they happened to mention growing their own vegetables, and I said in reply “Enjoy it while you can, they’re gonna start claiming it’s causing climate change soon.”
Literally four days later…
Apparently, a new study from the University of Michigan has found that “urban gardening” is 5 (or maybe 6, they’re not sure) times worse for the environment than “conventional crops”.
I don’t know how they calculated it, and it doesn’t really matter. If you read the bodies of the articles they even say it only applies to some vegetables in some places and it all depends on how the “infrastructure” is put together.
The details aren’t the point. The point is yet another weapon in the war on food. More regulation, more commercialization, less freedom, all in the name of “fighting climate change”.
And if you’re doubting that’s the agenda here, check out the sheer number of government research agencies which the “supported” the research project:
Quote:Support for the project was provided by the UK Economic and Social Research Council, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, French National Research Agency, U.S. National Science Foundation, Poland’s National Science Centre, and the European Union’s Horizon 202 research and innovation program.
It’s a fairly obvious case of needing a study to support a position, going out and and buying one.
This is one of those stories that exists simply to be a headline, so some pundit can quote it on some political panel on primetime TV and start a conversation about “regulation”.
Since we started with a prediction, let’s end with another one: This is just the first step, and you don’t have to be paying especially close attention to see where it goes from here.
They are never going to make growing your own vegetables illegal, they are just going to make it increasingly difficult.
It will start with licenses, for food safety purposes or something. Maybe an outbreak of a disease will be linked to people sharing food from their allotments.
Licenses will be increasingly expensive, and come with restrictions. You’ll only be allowed to use seeds from specific approved vendors, seeds of GMO plants which “mitigate the impact of climate change”. These seeds will likely be “terminator seeds”, meaning they are sterile in the second generation.
And, in that fashion, growing your own vegetables will no longer be an individual and independent experience, but just another corporate subscription service.
|
|
|
|
| Germany steps up crackdown on anti-abortion protests |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-25-2024, 07:47 AM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Germany steps up crackdown on anti-abortion protests
![[Image: 63522326_1004.webp]](https://static.dw.com/image/63522326_1004.webp)
Christian groups in Munich have long been protesting outside the Pro Familia office thereImage: Sachelle Babbar/ZUMA/picture alliance
DW [slightly adapted] | January 24, 2024
As the abortion debate heats up in Germany, the government is tightening its grip on "pro-life" protests. Reproductive rights advocates say the anti-abortion movement in Europe is influenced by US money and tactics.
Family Minister Lisa Paus (Green Party) announced on January 24 a draft law to prevent demonstrators from approaching or harassing visitors within a 100-meter (320 ft) radius of abortion clinics and family planning centers. Posters or flyers aimed at intimidating women will also be banned. Anyone violating the ban could be punished with a fine of up to €5,000 ($5,445).
Paus said that it was important that women were able to receive good advice in such difficult situations without being confronted with "hatred and agitation." "That's why we are striking a balance between freedom of expression and the right of assembly," Paus told German public broadcaster ZDF.
Protests outside of abortion clinics and family planning centers are common in the United States, where abortion is a highly partisan and dominant political issue. Planned Parenthood, which provides reproductive health care and advice at centers throughout the US, even has guidelines on its website for patients on how to deal with protesters gathered outside of its centers.
Although less widespread and less well-publicized than those in the US, anti-abortion protests outside counseling centers and abortion clinics are not a new phenomenon in Germany.
"We didn't see this phenomenon in Germany before, but it has increased in recent years," said Family Minister Paus.
Read the rest of the article here.
|
|
|
|
| EU set to allow draconian use of facial recognition tech, say lawmakers |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-25-2024, 07:41 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
|
EU set to allow draconian use of facial recognition tech, say lawmakers
Late tweaks to the EU’s artificial intelligence law have caused uproar over loopholes for biometric identification.
JANUARY 16, 2024
BRUSSELS (Politico.eu) — Last-minute tweaks to the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act will allow law enforcement to use facial recognition technology on recorded video footage without a judge’s approval — going further than what was agreed by the three EU institutions, according to European lawmaker Svenja Hahn.
The German member of the European Parliament said the final text of the bloc’s new rules on artificial intelligence, obtained by POLITICO, was “an attack on civil rights” and could enable “irresponsible and disproportionate use of biometric identification technology, as we otherwise only know from authoritarian states such as China.”
The wording also made it to the full legal text, which the Spanish Council presidency put together on December 22. The current presidency of the EU Council, held by Belgium, is working with Parliament to finalize bits of interpretative text known as recitals.
In early December, the EU agreed on a pioneering artificial intelligence rulebook — the world's first — to slap wide-ranging binding rules on the use of the burgeoning technology. But Hahn, a member of the liberal Renew group, said the final wording of the text introduced a loophole for the use of facial recognition technology, which was not in the original agreement.
In a statement to POLITICO, Hahn outlined issues with final language on so-called post facial recognition, where the technology is used on pre-existing footage, distinguishing it from real-time scanning of public spaces with AI-augmented cameras, the use of which would be largely outlawed under the AI Act.
The Spanish presidency of the EU Council — representing member countries' governments — and aides from Parliament agreed the rules on post facial recognition on December 22, two weeks after the two institutions and the European Commission reached a common position on the AI rulebook as a whole.
Hahn argued that the text breached that December 8 agreement. “The oral agreement had foreseen the use of post [facial recognition] only for very serious crimes, under very strict conditions, such as a prior judicial reservation. Little of this remained,” Hahn said.
The German parliamentarian said the rulebook's final text would allow police forces to use post facial recognition after the say-so of an administrative authority, rather than a judge's decision. She also lamented that the technology would be allowed to identify suspects for all types of crimes, regardless of how severe these crimes are. “The most trivial misdemeanors could be prosecuted using facial recognition,” she said.
Hahn's concerns were echoed by European Parliament member Patrick Breyer, a member of the left-leaning German Pirate Party and self-proclaimed "digital freedom fighter," who said in a statement Tuesday that "it appears the EU intends to compete with China not only technologically but also in terms of high-tech repression."
The kerfuffle over facial recognition underlines how European Parliament and Council officials left the 36-hour final negotiation round on December 8 with different understandings of what had been agreed to regarding post facial recognition. That happened despite a version of the text being shown on the negotiating room’s screen, according to a diplomat familiar with the matter, granted anonymity to speak about confidential negotiations. The Spanish presidency of the EU Council did not respond to a request for comment.
Clarion call
“We had heard from both the Commission and the Parliament that post [facial recognition] would be subject to strict safeguards and only allowed in some narrow, exceptional circumstances,” said Daniel Leufer, a senior policy fellow at digital rights NGO Access Now. “The latest text that we’ve seen makes a mockery of those announcements.”
Ella Jakubowska, a senior policy adviser at European Digital Rights, said that the text opened “huge loopholes which allow the wide use of post biometric identification.”
But others, including Parliament's leading negotiators of the deal, defended the final text.
Dragoș Tudorache, one of two lawmakers who steered the AI Act through Parliament — and member of the same political group as Hahn — said the language on facial recognition was "supported by a majority" of leading parliament members and that it "reflects the political agreement reached" in December.
EU governments are slated to receive the AI Act’s final text on January 24, with the aim of green-lighting it on February 2. After that, the Parliament will have to pass the law with a plenary vote. Parliamentary committees, political groups or alliances of over 40 lawmakers will be able to propose amendments — which, if approved, will need further legislative work in Council and Parliament.
|
|
|
|
| JPII Academy urges Pope to dismiss Cardinal Fernández over ‘scandalous books’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-24-2024, 07:18 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Too scandalous for even the JPII Academy...
JPII Academy urges Pope to dismiss Cardinal Fernández over ‘scandalous books’
According to the John Paul II Academy, 'These scandalous episodes show that Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández does not have the necessary minimum qualities required to fulfil the role of defender of the faith.'
![[Image: fernandez-e1697559419687.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/fernandez-e1697559419687.jpg)
Cardinal Victor Fernández
Twitter screenshot
Jan 23, 2024
(LifeSiteNews) — The John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family has called on Pope Francis to remove Cardinal Victor Fernández from his position as head of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF).
The John Paul II Academy, founded in 2017 by former members of the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAV) removed by Francis, condemned the “scandalous books” Cardinal Fernandez wrote in the past and asserted that the current head of the DDF “does not have the necessary minimum qualities required to fulfil the role of defender of the faith” and should therefore be removed by the Pope.
In a statement published on January 17, the Academy wrote that it “feels obliged to express its astonishment and perplexity that Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández has accepted the role of Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith despite having in past decades written scandalous books of an erotic nature which border on pornography and which contain passages that clash with the traditional teaching of the Church…”
“n particular his works ‘Sáname con tu boca – El arte de besar’ (‘Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing’) and ‘La Pasión mística – espiritualidad y sensualidad’ (Mystical Passion: spirituality and sensuality). Far from retracting the disgraceful passages that these works contain, Cardinal Fernández has limited himself to stating that he would not have published them today and that he has prohibited their reprinting.”
“The sensual-mystical literature for which the cardinal has a particular propensity is one of the worst evils of our time to the extent that under the pretext of spirituality, it, in reality, does nothing but justify the worst excesses of the sexual revolution that is deeply corrupting our society and leading our youth to the abyss,” the statement continued.
The John Paul II Academy explained that this kind of mystical-sensual literature written by Fernández is dangerous because, even if the author is well-intentioned, it can lead people to sins of lust under the guise of spirituality.
“Although all honest acts performed with good intentions are meritorious before God, sexual relations in our present order of fallen nature are so linked to unruly concupiscence that, generally, they cannot constitute an object that awakens or elevates piety,” the Academy stated.
“Already during the pontificate of Pius XI, the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office published an Instruction entitled [i]De sensuali et de sensuali-mystico litterarum genere explicitly condemning mystical-sensual literature, in particular works of those authors who ‘do not fear to embellish the pasture of a sickly sensuality with sacred things, mixing immodest loves with a certain piety towards God and an entirely false religious mysticism.’”
“The Instruction [by Pius XI] explicitly states that no intention of the author can prevent ‘that readers whose fragility is generally great, as is also great their propensity to lust as a result of the corruption of their nature, gradually caught in nets by the bait of these impure pages, are not perverted in their minds and depraved in their hearts.’”
“It is deplorable that almost a century after this Instruction, lay Catholics should have to remind the Prefect [of the DDF] of the admonition of his own predecessor:
Let these literati learn once and for all that they cannot serve two masters, God and sensuality, religion and impurity. ‘He who is not with me, said the Lord Jesus, is against me’ (Matthew, 12, 30). They are certainly not with Jesus Christ, the writers who, through sordid descriptions, deprave good morals, which are the most authentic foundations of civil and family society.”
According to the John Paul II Academy, “These scandalous episodes show that Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández does not have the necessary minimum qualities required to fulfil the role of defender of the faith.”
“For this reason, this Academy formally asks the Holy Father to dismiss him and appoint in his place a competent theologian faithful to the moral teachings of the Church,” the statement concluded.
Pope Francis’ heterodox re-construction of the PAV
In 1994, Pope John Paul II founded the Pontifical Academy for Life to study and defend human life in all stages, from conception to natural death. However, starting in 2016, Pope Francis dismissed most orthodox members chosen by John Paul II and changed the statutes of the PAV so that new members were no longer required to sign a declaration upholding the Church’s pro-life teachings. Francis has also expanded the PAV mandate to include a focus on the environment.
For this reason, former members of the PAV founded the John Paul II Academy in October 2017 to continue “to unfold the splendor of truth about life and family as taught by Pope St John Paul.”
Since 2017, Francis has made numerous scandalous appointments to the PAV, including members who support euthanasia, abortion, and contraception in blatant contradiction to perennial Church teaching and the original mission of the PAV.
A list of the PAV scandals since its re-vamping by Pope Francis can be found at the bottom of this article. [/i]
|
|
|
|
| Brazilian Catholics Miraculously Defeat the Dutch Protestants |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-23-2024, 08:36 AM - Forum: Resources Online
- No Replies
|
|
Brazilian Catholics Miraculously Defeat the Dutch Protestants
TIA [slightly adapted - not all hyperlinks included] | Janaury 22, 2024
This is the story of the beautiful miracle wrought through Our Lady’s intercession during the Pernambucan Insurrection in the Battle of Monte das Tabocas, which was part of the Lusitanian-Dutch War of the 17th century. The battle took place in Monte das Tabocas, in the city of Vitoria de Santo Antão, Pernambuco, Brazil.
The city’s name translates to “Victory of St. Anthony,” for the city took its name from the miraculous appearance in the battle of St. Anthony the Great (also known as St. Anthony of the Desert, who met with St. Paul the Hermit). Local government officials agreed on this name for their city to give homage to the Saint who ensured the Catholic victory at the Battle of Monte das Tabocas (which translates to the Mountain of Tabocas). Taboca is the local name for a type of bamboo plant native to Brazil.
Since that time, there has been a lively devotion to Our Lady of Tabocas.
In the 17th century, after their defeat in an attempt to conquer Bahia, the Dutch set their sights on Pernambuco. In 1630 Recife was dominated by the Dutch Batavians, and for 15 years, the invaders had been advancing through the lands of Pernambuco.
This was not just a dispute between nations, for what most differentiated the Portuguese-Brazilians from the Dutch was their faith. While Portugal had deeply planted the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church in the Brazilian soil, the Dutch, on the contrary, wanted to impose Protestantism in its most odious form against Catholicism. Therefore, wherever the invaders passed, terrible massacres occurred of the Brazilian population of Pernambuco who remained faithful to Holy Mary.
![[Image: A_038_Vie.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/A_038_Vie.jpg)
Commander João Fernandes Vieira
The battle that marked the beginning of the expulsion of the Dutch troops took place on August 3, 1645. It was a historic battle in several senses, for it is also considered to be the first appearance of a Brazilian national army, which was further consolidated a few years later in the Battle of Guararapes.
A few months earlier, João Fernandes Vieira, commander of the Brazilian troops, had gathered together the men willing to fight in the city of São Lourenço. As the Dutch Batavians approached, João Vieira took his entire contingent to a strategic hill covered with bamboo called taboca, about 30 miles from Recife.
To put a hasty finish to this dangerous insurrection, the Dutch sent a large contingent under the command of Captain Hendrick Van Haus. It was on the 2nd of August that Van Haus reached the edge of the taboca hill where the Catholic soldiers had gathered. For the Dutch, victory seemed certain and simple, for they had 1,500 armed soldiers and numerous allied Indians. Although Vieira had about a thousand men, only 230 of them had firearms.
In an impassioned speech before the battle, Captain Vieira addressed his soldiers recalling that “he who has God on his side cannot doubt the victory." "And we know," he continued, "that we fight against a people who openly offend God. The broken sacred images, the stones of destroyed temples, the bodies of Catholics torn to pieces, the mocking offenses against priests - what is all this but weapons that Heaven gives us to destroy these heretics?”
![[Image: A_038_Bat.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/A_038_Bat.jpg)
Brazilians fighting the Dutch
The next day, the battle took place. As the fight raged on, sometimes one side, sometimes the other would gain the advantage. However, since the taboca-filled forest offered great protection to those on top of the hill, the Dutch always saw their men falling in greater numbers.
While fighting, Fathers Simon de Figueiredo, João de Araújo and the Benedictine Friar João da Resurreição [John of the Resurrection] fearlessly moved through the Catholic ranks, confessing and blessing the Brazilian soldiers. Father Manuel de Morais held high a banner with an image of Jesus Crucified, and urged the soldiers to fight manfully and to make their promises to Our Lord and the Blessed Virgin.
Everyone felt endowed with a truly supernatural courage, willing to fight to the death in defense of the Catholic Faith. The soldiers promised penance and good works; the commander vowed to build a church in honor of Nossa Senhora do Desterro [Our Lady of Exile] and another in honor of Nossa Senhora de Nazaré [Our Lady of Nazareth].
Unnerved by such ardor, the Dutch reaction had no choice but to intensify the attack, and thus managed to regain the advantage in the battle. Then João Vieira shouted: “Valorous Portuguese, long live the Faith of Christ! Forward! Forward!" His words were followed by those of Father Manuel who urged everyone to pray together a Salve Regina.
![[Image: A_038_Des.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/History/HistImages/A_038_Des.jpg)
Our Lady of the Exile Church built by Commander Vieira in gratitude for her help in the battle
At this very moment when the Virgin was so piously invoked, the heretics were seized with an inexplicable panic and began to flee in great confusion. Many Dutch soldiers later reported that what caused them to withdraw so suddenly was the sight of a very beautiful Woman with a Child in her arms and, next to her, a venerable old man dressed in white; the figures were so splendorous that their eyes were blinded. The luminous figures walked among the Catholics, distributing guns, gunpowder and ammunition.
There is no doubt that this Woman was the Blessed Virgin with her Divine Son. Before this last attack, the Pernambucans' ammunition was already reaching its end. However, after the battle it was found that, despite the unrestricted use of bullets, there miraculously remained still more in their stocks.
As for the hermit, he was none other than St. Anthony the Great, or St. Anthony of the Desert, popularly known as Santo Antão. There had been a chapel dedicated to him nearby, but it had been destroyed and abandoned since the invasion of the Dutch heretics.
In gratitude and to fulfill his promise, João Fernandes Vieira had a church built in honor of the Virgin at the entrance to Olinda.
Our Lady of Tabocas, pray for us!
Original here.
|
|
|
|
| Defeating Modernism at the Root Level |
|
Posted by: Stone - 01-20-2024, 08:32 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
- No Replies
|
|
Defeating Modernism at the Root Level
Mary, Destoyer of All Heresies blog | October 1, 2023
Defeating Modernism requires addressing the root cause. The root cause of Modernism according to St. Pius X is the exaltation of agnostic philosophy over natural and supernatural revelation. Philosophy - the art of reasoning about created things - in this era is based on false ideas about nature. Science is treated today as the faith once was; and where science opposes faith the faith is summarily subjected to it, even within the Church:
Quote:...faith occupies itself solely with something which science declares to be unknowable for it. Hence each has a separate field assigned to it: science is entirely concerned with the reality of phenomena, into which faith does not enter at all...
...but it is quite different with regard to faith, which [in the Modernist system] is subject to science...
How did this displacement of theology, long regarded as the Queen of sciences occur? When did this happen? I would caution the reader to tread carefully over the next few paragraphs as the ideas expressed there may be both unsettling and for some, impossible.
As St. Pius X traces in his analysis of the "compendium of all heresies" (Modernism), it is the doctrine of evolution that underpins the agnosticism of the Modernist. Enough ink has been spilt confuting the heresy of so-called theistic evolution; what I propose here is the examination of the seminal theological event that made the theory of evolution inevitable as the dominant cosmological theory even among churchmen.
Evolution attacks creation. Creation as divine revelation explains it to us simply could not have occurred. Therefore, the Book of Genesis - the sure foundation upon which all Sacred Scripture rests - is either in error or speaks only in poetic and symbolic style.
The first attack on the divinity of Genesis happened long before Darwin. It occurred in the early 17th century when three Roman Pontiffs (Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII) all condemned Galileo's heliocentric theory as formally heretical. The Church had always held that the earth was at rest in the center of cosmos as the theater of redemption in which God became incarnate of the Virgin Mary. The rest of the heavenly bodies rotated around the earth as Genesis 1,14 reveals. To this, Saint Robert Bellarmine testifies
Quote:"Second. I say that, as you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits expounding the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers. And if Your Reverence would read not only the Fathers but also the commentaries of modern writers on Genesis, Psalms, Ecclesiastes and Josue, you would find that all agree in explaining literally (ad litteram) that the sun is in the heavens and moves swiftly around the earth, and that the earth is far from the heavens and stands immobile in the center of the universe. Now consider whether in all prudence the Church could encourage giving to Scripture a sense contrary to the holy Fathers and all the Latin and Greek commentators."
- Letter to Foscarini, 1615
Evolution could not have gotten off the ground - at least as regards the theology of the Church - except first that faith in Genesis had been wounded by the heliocentrists. They - long before the evolutionists - accused the Church of error as regards the interpretation of the first chapters of Genesis. If the Church was wrong about so foundational a matter as the cosmological makeup of the universe, how could she be trusted with the weightier matters of Biblical interpretation?
However, Saint Robert Bellarmine points out a dogmatic hermeneutic here; where there is common agreement by the Church Fathers, there is no freedom to oppose their interpretation. This decree from Trent is renewed at Vatican I:
Quote:"The complete books of the old and the new Testament with all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said council [Trent] and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to be received as sacred and canonical.
These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their Author, and were as such committed to the Church.
Now since the decree on the interpretation of holy scripture, profitably made by the council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of holy scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy Mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of holy scripture.
In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers."
- Decree of the Vatican Council, 1869-1870
Here we face an immovable object; the Church formally forbids interpreting the Word of God against the consensus of the Fathers, which St. Robert says were agreed about the geocentric cosmological model. No Fathers ever considered that the earth rotates around the sun, especially as an insignificant and obscure planet in some remote location in the galaxies. The teaching was so firmly established that three Popes condemned the idea that earth rotates around the sun as heresy. In his 1885 book The Pontifical Decrees Against the Doctrine of the Earth’s Movement and the Ultramontane Defence of Them Rev. William W. Roberts argues that the Church exercised her charism of infallibility in the condemnations of heliocentrism. These condemnations occurred prior to Vatican I when Papal infallibility was defined, but the condemnations have never been retracted - nor could they be without destroying the integrity of the ecclesiastical magisterium.
A brief explanation about the science is perhaps helpful. As shocking as it may sound to the reader, there is no proof that the earth rotates the sun, nor is moving at all despite the claims that it is hurtling through space at a rate of 66,000 miles per hour while rotating at a speed of 1,004 miles per hour at the equator. All the experiments conducted to prove the motion of the earth failed. Albert Einstein developed two (opposing) theories of relativity to save the heliocentric system which at the end of the day simply renders the issue a 'tie': all motion is relative according to Einstein, and we cannot know whether the earth moves or the planets and stars do. And now the latest evidence from James Webb's telescope have scientists, astronomers, and cosmologists scrambling for explanations as what they previously held as fact is thrown into chaos.
They simply do not know all that they say they know and most people have blindly accepted what they say as though it were an article of faith.
Back to the roots of Modernism: it was this frontal assault by Galileo (utilizing the system distilled from others by Fr. Nicholas Copernicus) on the Church's authoritative interpretation of Genesis that resulted in his censure. Following Galileo others advanced the heliocentric theory each asserting that he found conclusive evidence for it. Finally the Catholic Church permitted the investigation of the heliocentric model in the late 19th century but never formally retracted the condemnations of Paul V, Urban VIII, and Alexander VII. The enemies of the Church used the Galileo affair as a battering ram against her as they do to this day. They accuse her of being anti-science, a position that is laughable now as the Church is infected with Modernism from head to foot. Just say the name "Galileo" and watch modern churchmen apologize profusely, back peddle with haste, and explain how we have now "repented" for the "unjust treatment" of Galileo Galilee.
This idea prevails to the present moment: the Church was wrong for 18 centuries in her authoritative interpretation of Genesis. The problem with this perception is that it contradicts the twice defined dogma of patristic biblical interpretation; it undermines the authority of previous Supreme Pontiffs who acted uniformly in condemning heliocentrism as heresy; and it opens the door for the Church to be accused on multiple fronts for false teaching based on anti-scientific exegesis.
Modernism wounds divine and Catholic faith with a malignantly inspired skepticism about the truth of revelation. It attacks the first words of Sacred Scripture in order to topple all that follows. It assumes a role above the science of divinity in order to criticize and ridicule it. But Modernism itself is condemned by the Church in the encyclical Pascendi Domenici gregis promulgated by Pope Pius X in 1907. It may surprise the reader to learn that St. Pius X is not quoted even once in the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II. John Paul II famously apologized for the Galileo affair explaining that "theologians had erred" in concluding that heliocentrism was formal heresy.
It is easy to be intimidated by Modernists today who reign in the Church Militant as the Arians did in the 4th and 5th centuries. They laugh in your face if you suggest the Catholic Church was right to condemn heliocentrism as heresy. They mock and scoff at the very idea that science could be wrong about anything. Yet until the churchmen - you and I - start to stand up for our faith as the martyr-Saints always have in the face of a world that is under the dominion of the devil, the false beliefs of the world will not only dominate profane thinking but continue to wound the faith of the Catholic Church.
Evolution must be confuted in our apologetics; but that is all activity above the ground level. To remove the roots of Modernism, we must believe what the Church has always taught and recover the teaching of the holy Fathers as regards our central place in the cosmos. This task is not for the faint of heart or those who desire the esteem of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: Telegraph-Home-Grown-Food.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/RZT5VLnk/Telegraph-Home-Grown-Food.png)
![[Image: Federal-Register-Informed-Consent.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/L4rFX7Yg/Federal-Register-Informed-Consent.png)
