DALLAS, Texas (LifeSiteNews) — One of the world’s most qualified and skeptical COVID-19 experts believes that people who have already recovered from COVID-19 should not take a vaccine against it.
“We do know that COVID-recovered patients have a higher side effect rate when they do get needlessly vaccinated,” Dr. Peter A. McCullough told LifeSiteNews, and cited research papers showing higher rates of vaccine injuries among the naturally immune.
“Really, under no circumstances should a fully-recovered patient receive a COVID-19 vaccine … and authorities should accept that.”
McCullough, who is a cardiologist, internist epidemiologist, academic researcher, and journal editor, sat down with LifeSiteNews last Friday to discuss his work with and for COVID-19 patients.
LifeSiteNews quizzed the doctor about his qualifications, and McCullough stressed the multi-disciplinary approach he has taken throughout his medical career.
“I’m one of a handful—I’d say probably less than 4% of cardiologists—that maintained my board certifications in internal medicine, and … I did three years of rural internal medicine after my residency at the University of Washington in Seattle,” he said.
“I handled common infectious diseases and always taught myself to be well-rounded. I’m a medical cardiologist,” he continued.
“I really focus comprehensively on patient care, and when COVID-19 hit, it really hit seniors, which is my patient population, with heart disease, lung disease and kidney [disease], so I felt very much in the crosshairs as a doctor to do everything I could to help patients with COVID-19.”
McCullough has directly managed the care of over a hundred COVID-19 patients, as well as advising on “many hundreds if not a thousand” cases worldwide.
The doctor has four under his direct care currently. In addition, he has seen young men who have had heart problems following COVID vaccination. As of July 15, there have been 2,800 certified incidences of post-vaccination myocarditis in the United States. McCullough himself has made several reports of myocarditis to, and discussed them with, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC).
Delta variant breaks through the current COVID-19 vaccines
subscribe to our daily headlines US Canada Catholic
Regarding the recent Washington Postarticle reporting that the vaccinated are just as likely as the unvaccinated to spread the Delta variant of COVID-19, McCullough said that the report is supported by previous research he has studied. He cited such well-known examples as the Texas Democrat lawmakers who flew together to Washington, DC, and, despite being vaccinated, got COVID-19.
“As a matter of fact, this week the health minister for New South Wales in Australia reported that the number of patients in Australian hospitals there with COVID-19 was over 300, and … all of those people were fully vaccinated, except for one,” the doctor told LifeSiteNews.
McCullough added that it appears that the Delta variant, which he said accounted for almost 100% of new COVID cases in north Texas, is resistant to the vaccines. What the authorities should do now, he said, is do a proper analysis of which vaccines really are most effective.
The expert has been struck by the data from Israel, which exclusively uses the Pfizer vaccine. Fully 80% of Israel’s population has been vaccinated, but in a July 24 report of the last 5000 cases, 84% of them had been previously vaccinated.
“So it appears in at least exclusively Pfizer vaccinated populations that we’re clearly seeing a uniform breakthrough of cases, or at least a uniform vaccination rate of those breaking through,” McCullough remarked.
In countries where a variety of vaccines have been tried, there are different results but still evidence of “breakthrough infections.” In the UK, of the over 200,000 people sick enough from the Delta variant to go to hospital, 42% had been previously vaccinated. Of that 200,000, 460 have died, 65% of them having been vaccinated.
“That’s a deathrate of less than 0.2%, so Delta is clearly a milder strain—or less fata strain, but the vaccination—one would have to look at those numbers and conclude that breakthrough is readily accomplished with the Delta variant in forms of vaccination in the UK,” McCullough said.
Both the UK and the USA have been administering a variety of vaccines, and so patients have been asking McCullough which one is most effective against the Delta strain.
“We critically need that analysis from our leaders,” he said.
Speaking as a doctor, McCullough said that he has looked at studies of a vaccine called Novavax that does not use mRNA technology but is antigen-based, and he’s very encouraged by it.
According to the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute, Novavax is not produced using cell lines derived from the cells of aborted children. It appears, however, that some tests of this vaccine have involved the controversial cell lines.
“I [saw] rates of vaccine effectiveness over 2 to 5 months of 90%,” McCullough stated, but he cautioned that the studies were carried out before the Delta variant became dominant. Nevertheless, he is still hopeful that Novavax could offer a “broader amount“ of protection and with less risk of vaccine injury.
“It would be my understanding as a doctor, that this could be less likely to have these internal organ effects that we’re seeing with the other vaccines.”
Meanwhile, fewer people have been taking Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna and other vaccines than you may think.
“We have less than 20% of the population that has taken any vaccine at all,” McCullough said.
“There are countries that are showing a lot of discernment and reservations, including Japan.”
Other countries have “drawn some lines,” he added, noting that the UK and Germany are not permitting the vaccination of children.
In the United States, 48% of individuals have vaccinated, and therefore 52% have not.
“Vaccine centres have been very, very under-utilized over the past few months,” McCullough told LifeSiteNews.
“There’s great concern in America about the efficacy and safety of the vaccines. Our rate of vaccination has slowed to a halt.”
The current vaccines ‘are not sufficiently fit for human use’
The doctor stated that there has never been an official briefing from the US CDC and FDA on vaccine safety and efficacy. Although over 400,000 “safety events” have been reported to the CDC and the VAERS numbers are available, and the CDC produces a “variant report”, there is no advice about which vaccine is better.
McCullough believes that the current vaccines are “not sufficiently fit for human use” and they should no longer be administered.
“I’m in line with the evidence-based consulting group in the United Kingdom, and they’re the principal consultant to the World Health Organization,” he told LifeSiteNews.
“Their official report to the MHRA, the regulatory body in England, is actually not to move forward with the current vaccines, that they’re not sufficiently fit for human use and, in the absence of any of data and analyses, they should… close down the program. “
McCullough suggested that the next phase of the vaccination program will be to roll out the two-dose Novavax and other antigenic vaccines, in place of the mRNA vaccines, ones that currently have a better “safety profile and a broader coverage.” Nevertheless, he also reflected that the Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines all had a good safety profile in the short-term.
“Now, that we get these out in the broad population, that’s when we see the concerning events including death and then non-fatal injuries,” he said.
Who, then, should get vaccinated? From the beginning of the roll-out, McCullough has seen that patients aged over 50 have a rate of hospitalization and death of over 1%, with the rate increasing with patient age. Therefore, McCullough thinks that the over-50s are a group for whom a safe vaccine should be considered. He also sees 50 as the landmark age for the importance of early treatment of the disease and has written two papers about it.
Stopping COVID-19 over your bathroom sink
Many people have been downing Vitamin D and over-the-counter medication in the hopes of warding off the coronavirus. McCullough told LifeSiteNews that there are “very interesting” nasal and oral hygiene protocols to prevent becoming ill with COVID-19. One can find medical advice about tooth-brushing, swishing and spitting with various solutions, including “anti-infective yellow Listerine mouthwash,” he said.
“Also there’s oral povidone-iodine that has been tested in clinical trials, successful,” he continued.
McCullough explained that the American Dental Association approves this dilute bleach as an anti-infective in the mouth, so long as it is just swished around and spat out [not swallowed], twice a day for other viruses. The early-treatment expert also said that there are anti-infective nasal sprays that could be used to guard against the coronavirus, as well as doses of oral ivermectin and oral hydroxychloroquine.
“It’s got a nice offering of prophylactic protocols. In the United States, it is offered through telemedicine services. The lead one is MyFreeDoctor.com.”
McCullough acknowledged that he was hesitant when he first heard former President Donald Trump mention bleach as a prophylactic against COVID-19, but assured LifeSiteNews that he is impressed by the lack of COVID-19 transmission in dental offices, especially as dentists are near mouths and noses “all day long.”
Regarding early treatment of COVID-19, the doctor is still enthusiastic about monoclonal antibodies, which have emergency use authorization, especially the current Regeneron product. This was the treatment that President Trump received when he contracted COVID-19 in October 2020.
McCullough believes elderly patients who have just contracted COVID-19 should begin their early treatment by taking a monoclonal antibody infusion in hospital, which lasts for over an hour. The U.S. government has purchased five million doses of the treatment, he added, and it is being underused.
“It’s the best way to treat a high-risk case,” the doctor said, and added it was suitable also for those who have been “fully-vaccinated” but will get the virus anyway. Once the high-risk patient has had the monoclonal antibody infusion, then treatment with hydroxychloroquine (“supported by 200 studies”) and ivermectin (“supported by 60 studies”) can be “layered in.”
He also mentioned other drugs that are supported by coronavirus treatment studies, including the humble aspirin.
“In total it’s four to six drugs,” McCullough said.
“The doctor decides based on how far along the patient is into the illness, and what the symptoms are.”
Timing is important. McCullough said that the biggest mistake he sees is people reaching for monoclonal antibody infusions when the infection is so far advanced that the patient has low oxygen saturation. At that point, he explained, there is a problem with blood clotting, and the patient needs a large dose of aspirin and anti-coagulant injections.
This variety of treatment may astound COVID-recovered people who called their doctors for help and were told just to self-isolate and drink a lot of fluid. McCullough said that many doctors are reluctant to prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine because they fear “reprisal.”
“They’re actually afraid of having their medical licenses reviewed for trying to care for COVID-19 patients and help them,” he said.
However, McCullough has learned from other doctors who treat patients without either drug, for they “simply time the illness,” prescribe anti-inflammatories, and use blood-thinning agents.
“The bottom line is that they can still successfully treat COVID,” he said.
The doctor continued: “You know, 85% of the hospitalizations and deaths don’t have to happen.”
He believes that the “worst thing” in the case of a high-risk elderly COVID-19 patient is not to treat them at all and leave them to wait at home until they are so sick they need to be hospitalized.
Good news for the healthy under-50s
But COVID-19 is not a threat to the majority of the population. McCullough told LifeSiteNews that the coronavirus has affected less than 1% of most populations. Doctors know who the high-risk people are: the over-50s and people with multiple medical problems.
Many young people who get COVID-19, particularly the Delta variant, which McCullough believes is the mildest strain, come through it “very easily,” he said, and get a “robust, complete and durable” natural immunity. The doctor says that natural immunity works better than the vaccines: the reinfection rate is negligible.
“Natural immunity is the best of all forms of immunity,” McCullough declared and said that those who have recovered from COVID-19 are “not of any harm to anyone else, and they don’t have to be careful.”
However, they do have to be careful not to get vaccinated. McCullough cited studies showing that people who have recovered from COVID-19 have a high chance of side-effects if they are vaccinated against it. He believes that naturally immune people should under no circumstances accept a COVID-19 vaccine. The doctor also stated that authorities should exempt naturally immune people from vaccination demands. — Article continues below Petition — PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus 1053086 have signed the petition.Let’s get to 1100000! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Sadly, McCullough has not escaped the punishments meted out to doctors who question the mainstream COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination narratives. Although he has been a leader in all the medical centers he’s served in over the course of his career, McCullough has suffered the loss of contracts and a professorship. Currently he is even being sued by Baylor, who claims he has been misusing his professional titles and, “in a sense,” represents Baylor and Texas A&M College of Medicine.
“My response to that is I’ve been very judicious in how I present myself in my spoken words and written words. I’ve never falsely claimed a prior title,” he said.
Given the amount written by and about McCullough on the internet, with thousands and thousands of hits, it is impossible for him to erase every mention of his old titles and positions from the internet. He also has no control over how television media describes him in banners that appear onscreen
“That’s actually the genesis of the lawsuit which is now financially and professionally damaging for me,” he said.
“I’m being professionally damaged and humiliated largely for my hard work in trying to save lives from COVID-19 and my careful review of the data with respect to the vaccine.”
Trans YouTube star arrested for raping 79-yr-old mom, to be jailed with female inmates
We have decided that women are collateral damage as we rebuild society according to the ever-evolving ideology of gender activists. Screenshot, Henrico County (Virginia) Jail
LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.
GREENE COUNTY, Virginia (LifeSiteNews) – Those of you who have been following the transgender debate will know by now that one particularly insidious effect of our new collective insanity is that biological males—often rapists or murderers—are being locked up in female prisons if they identify as women. Or, perhaps more accurately, women are locked in with them. Women have already been sexually assaulted as a result.
A particularly egregious case is that of 39-year-old YouTuber Chris Chan, a man claiming (unconvincingly) to be a woman since 2014 and going by the name Christine Weston Chandler. The vlogger, who is best known for creating the comic series Sonichu, has 50,000 YouTube subscribers. He was recently arrested in Virginia for allegedly raping his 79-year-old mother, who has dementia.
The transgender YouTuber is currently being held without bond at the Central Virginia Regional Jail on suspicion of incest and rape—incest alone carries a potential jail sentence of 12 years. Chandler’s arrest came just days after a phone call was leaked on an instant messaging platform, on which a person believed to Chandler seemingly admitted to having sex with her elderly mother, claiming on the call that the relationship was consensual and ongoing.
Adding to a growing outbreak of female sex criminals, Chandler is listed as female in the police report—and will be housed with the female inmates.
This is increasingly common. Last month, feminist writer Julie Bindel recorded a horrifying story of one female inmate’s experience in the Daily Mail:
Her sense of shock, and the awful aura of menace that closed in on her, still haunt former prisoner Amy Jones. Jail should have been a place free from the predators who had sexually assaulted and raped her in her childhood, but the terrifying presence looming over her suggested anything but.
‘The look in her eyes was frightening,’ Amy says, her voice quiet but assertive. ‘She leered at me before lunging forward and grabbing my breasts hard. She squeezed them and I cried out in pain. I was terrified she would rape me.’
The prisoner who sexually assaulted Amy — we cannot legally identify her, so we shall call her J — is a transgender woman, with a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC), and therefore referred to by the female pronoun, but still had male genitalia.
Amy was equally well aware that J still had male genitalia because she often intimidated her and fellow female prisoners at HMP Bronzefield in Ashford, Middlesex, by exposing them. Moreover, J was serving time for a serious sexual assault on a child and was clearly a danger to other inmates. Yet she had secured a coveted job as a cleaner at the prison gym where Amy also worked. And it was while she was in the gym’s lavatory block that J assaulted her in 2017.
‘What were the officers even thinking, letting her clean toilets in which women would be in a state of undress and alone? Why was there a child sex offender with a penis cleaning the toilets of the gym in a women’s prison?’
This is happening because we have decided that women are collateral damage as we rebuild society according to the ever-evolving ideology of gender activists. This male rapist—who is referred to as female even by his cowed victim—even insisted on being able to shower with the women. Vulnerable women are being locked up with sexual predators, and there is almost no protest.
And now a man who allegedly raped his own mother will be locked up with female prisoners. Trans activists say this is right and just. It is not. It is wicked. — Article continues below Petition — SIGN THE PETITION: Bishops, please stop Fr. Martin’s LGBT advocacy 22237 have signed the petition.Let’s get to 22500! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Follow Jonathon
Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States.
He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.
Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.
Archbishop Viganò on what priests should do in light of Traditionis Custodes
‘Allow me to say first of all that in continuing to celebrate the Mass of Pope Saint Pius V no priest performs any act of disobedience, but on the contrary he exercises his right sanctioned by God, which not even the Pope can revoke.’
(LifeSiteNews) – In a new response to a question from LifeSite (see full text below), Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò insists that priests have a right to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, adding that at times they might have to continue to do so in hidden ways. But the way of the saints, he adds, would be to go into open disagreement and even “disobedience” should their local bishop forbid them to continue to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass. With this response, Archbishop Viganò acts as a pastor who tries to help priests and faithful in a very difficult situation.
On August 2, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò published a video and statement with his response to Pope Francis’s July 16 motu proprioTraditionis Custodes which aims at banning the Tridentine Mass, or Traditional Latin Mass, as it has been celebrated for centuries. In his response, the Italian prelate pointed out that this Pope shows himself to be a “anti-Catholic Pope” aiming at the undermining the Faith, rather than fostering it.
“Just when Bergoglio recognizes the Bishops as guardians of the Tradition, he asks them to obstruct its highest and most sacred expression of prayer,” Viganò writes.
He makes it clear that the Tridentine Mass is a superior rite in comparison to the Novus Ordo Mass and says that these two rites represent two different churches, thus negating the idea that there is a continuity between the Church before and after the Second Vatican Council. “Francis has once again disavowed the pious illusion of the hermeneutic of continuity, stating that the coexistence of the Vetus and Novus Ordo is impossible because they are expressions of two irreconcilable doctrinal and ecclesiological approaches,” the Italian prelate states.
subscribe to our daily headlines US Canada Catholic
Pointing out the differences between these two rites, he adds: “on the one hand there is the Apostolic Mass, the voice of the Church of Christ; on the other there is the Montinian ‘Eucharistic celebration,’ the voice of the conciliar church.”
In light of the importance of continuing to celebrate this beautiful traditional rite of the Mass, LifeSite reached out to Archbishop Viganò and asked him what he thinks priests should now concretely do, should their bishop deny them the right to celebrate this Mass.
“Allow me to say first of all,” the prelate answers, “that in continuing to celebrate the Mass of Pope Saint Pius V no priest performs any act of disobedience, but on the contrary he exercises his right sanctioned by God, which not even the Pope can revoke.”
He invites priests to reach out to their bishops and to make their hearts known to them and even to invite them to celebrate the ancient rite of the Mass, which possibly could then work a “miracle” in their own episcopal hearts.
Archbishop Viganò says that a priest has to make a decision as to how to proceed in light of where his own bishop stands with regard to the Mass of Ages. Some bishops might try to help these priests. In some cases, it might be better to continue the traditional Mass in hiding, but in other cases, a priest might have to resist his bishop, and the latter solution might very well be the response of the saints. The archbishop thus states:
The priest must therefore consider whether his action will be more effective with a fair and direct confrontation, or by acting with discretion and in hiding. In my opinion, the first option is the most linear and transparent, and the one that responds most to the behavior of the Saints, to which we must comply.
This answer might be important to some priests in the world, especially in light of what several Vatican sources have recently told LifeSite. As an upcoming report shows, several observers and experts are expecting that Pope Francis will soon make use of a “spy system” or “spy network” and especially of Cardinal João Braz de Aziz, the head of the Congregation for Religious, in order to pressure the bishops worldwide to comply with his new motu proprio. In light of this possible development, priests and faithful might do well to consider what they would do in this very case.
Below is Archbishop Viganò’s full statement:
August 5, 2021 In Dedicatione B.M.V. ad Nives
Dear Maike,
Regarding your request for clarification, I am sending you some considerations that I hope will make my thoughts more explicit. This is the reference sentence: “It will be our duty, whether as Ministers of God or as simple faithful, to show firmness and serene resistance to such abuse, walking along the way of our own little Calvary with a supernatural spirit, while the new high priests and scribes of the people mock us and label us as fanatics. It will be our humility, the silent offering of injustices toward us, and the example of a life consistent with the Creed that we profess that will merit the triumph of the Catholic Mass and the conversion of many souls”.
You ask me: “What shall priests and faithful do when the bishop clamps down on them? Shall they go into clandestinity, or shall they cut publicly off, in public disobedience?” Allow me to say first of all that in continuing to celebrate the Mass of Pope Saint Pius V no priest performs any act of disobedience, but on the contrary he exercises his right sanctioned by God, which not even the Pope can revoke. Whoever has the power to offer the Holy Sacrifice has the right to celebrate it in the ancient rite, as it was solemnly proclaimed by Saint Pius V in the Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum, promulgating the Tridentine Liturgy. This has been reiterated by the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum as an indisputable fact. Anyone who contravenes these provisions should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul (Quo Primum).
The response to any limitation or prohibition of the celebration of the traditional Mass must obviously take into account both the objective elements and the different situations: if a priest has as an Ordinary a sworn enemy of the ancient rite who has no qualms about suspending him a divinis if he were to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, public disobedience could be a way to make the abuse of the Ordinary clear, especially if the news is spread by the media: the Prelates are very afraid of media coverage about their actions, and sometimes they prefer to refrain from canonical measures just to avoid ending up in the newspapers. The priest must therefore consider whether his action will be more effective with a fair and direct confrontation, or by acting with discretion and in hiding. In my opinion, the first option is the most linear and transparent, and the one that responds most to the behavior of the Saints, to which we must comply.
Obviously there may be the case of a comprehensive Ordinary, who leaves his priest free to celebrate the Tridentine rite; speaking with an open heart to one’s Bishop is certainly important, if one knows that he can find in him a father and not an official. Unfortunately, we know well that most of the time it is a question of tolerance, and almost never of encouragement on the path of Tradition. In some cases, however, inviting one’s Ordinary to celebrate the Mass of St. Pius V himself can be a way to make him understand, by touching the deepest chords of his heart and his priestly soul, which are the treasures reserved for the Ministers of God who have the opportunity to offer the Holy Sacrifice in the apostolic rite. When this “miracle” happens, the Bishop becomes an ally of his priest, because in addition to the intellectual and rational aspect that makes the traditional Mass preferable, he experiences firsthand its spiritual and supernatural dimension, and how it affects the life of Grace of those who celebrate it.
I hope that my words will clarify the points that I had not developed in my previous speech.
Dr. Maike Hickson was born and raised in Germany. She holds a PhD from the University of Hannover, Germany, after having written in Switzerland her doctoral dissertation on the history of Swiss intellectuals before and during World War II. She now lives in the U.S. and is married to Dr. Robert Hickson, and they have been blessed with two beautiful children. She is a happy housewife who likes to write articles when time permits.
Dr. Hickson published in 2014 a Festschrift, a collection of some thirty essays written by thoughtful authors in honor of her husband upon his 70th birthday, which is entitled A Catholic Witness in Our Time.
Hickson has closely followed the papacy of Pope Francis and the developments in the Catholic Church in Germany, and she has been writing articles on religion and politics for U.S. and European publications and websites such as LifeSiteNews, OnePeterFive, The Wanderer, Rorate Caeli, Catholicism.org, Catholic Family News, Christian Order, Notizie Pro-Vita, Corrispondenza Romana, Katholisches.info, Der Dreizehnte, Zeit-Fragen, and Westfalen-Blatt.
‘This is a battle between Our Lord and the devil’: Doctor-nun slams forced vaccines, communism
Sister Deirde Byrne, M.D., a retired U.S. Army officer and graduate of Georgetown University’s School of Medicine, said the push to force everyone to receive abortion-tainted COVID-19 shots ‘has a diabolic flavor to it.’ Sr. Deirdre Byrne.PBS NewsHour / YouTube
WASHINGTON D.C. (LifeSiteNews) — Religious sister, general surgeon, and U.S. Army veteran Sister Deirde Byrne, M.D. took the nation by storm last year when she appeared at the Republican National Convention in full religious habit to give a stirring pro-life address while wielding her weapon: the rosary.
Now Byrne’s message for America is to pray and remain in a state of grace in the face of experimental COVID-19 vaccine mandates and a government she fears is headed toward communism.
“This battle is not between the right and the left, it’s not between conservatives and liberals or Republicans and Democrats,” the retired Army colonel, who spoke at today’s “Stop the Shot” conference, told LifeSiteNews in an exclusive interview.
She added that “this is a battle between Our Lord and the devil,” and warned that everyone must choose a side.
After having earned her M.D. from Georgetown University and serving as an officer with the U.S. Army Medical Corps, Byrne fulfilled her religious vocation by becoming a sister with the Little Workers of the Sacred Hearts in Washington, D.C.
Sister Byrne holds a board certification in family medicine and general surgery and is a fellow of the American College of Surgeons. She currently serves as the medical director of the Little Workers’ Physical Therapy and Eye Clinic and is a volunteer surgeon for the Catholic Charities Medical Clinic in the Mount Pleasant neighborhood of D.C.
Byrne, whose military service took her to Korea and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, and who worked as a missionary surgeon in Haiti, Sudan, Kenya, and Iraq, told LifeSite that “common sense” preventive measures and therapeutic drugs can sharply reduce hospitalizations and deaths for patients with COVID-19.
“If we treat them early – early is the ticket – with ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine,” Byrne said, “80% of the people will not have to go to the hospital.”
But Byrne lamented that the treatments have been largely ignored in favor of experimental “vaccines” which have become increasingly mandated.
“That’s the shame of it all, that because this is an emergency mandate of vaccination, they’re trying to push it on everybody,” Byrne said, noting that emergency vaccination would only be necessary if there were a lack of effective therapeutics.
“We have therapy, and it’s proven therapy, and the powers-that-be, the government leaders here in the states, are ignoring this data.”
subscribe to our daily headlines US Canada Catholic
Byrne said that at the start of the pandemic she became aware that people were being sent home after getting a positive COVID-19 test without being directed to safe and effective drugs to prevent serious illness.
“As things started to unfold people started to reach out to me and tell me they were sick. I said, ‘well, are you on any treatment?’”
When her patients said they were not taking any treatments, Byrne said she “got them started.”
“I just said, ‘let’s get going on this,’” she said. “So we just sort of take the bull by the horns, and if a patient comes in and we have a therapy, we give it to them.”
But Byrne, whose medical clout includes having provided emergency care to war-torn Kurdistan with the Global Surgical and Medical Support Group, a non-profit founded to bring medical care to conflict zones across the world, has not been able to say much about her successes.
Despite her experience with the efficacy of common, safe therapeutics, Byrne told LifeSite that COVID patients treated at her clinic must be assisted “on the side without making a lot of noise about it.”
She mentioned that hydroxychloroquine, a safe drug routinely used as a prophylaxis for malaria and found useful for early treatment of COVID-19, has been restricted by some government leaders like New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
According to Byrne, “These governmental officials are making medical decisions [for] people, not allowing them to make their own decision about hydroxychloroquine, which is such a benign drug.”
When the treatments provided by Byrne and her fellow doctors and nurses have made patients well, Byrne said, “We just smiled when we saw the person getting better.”
With consistent success with early treatment using safe and effective drugs, Byrne said the focus on experimental COVID-19 “vaccines,” developed or tested using aborted fetal tissue, to the exclusion of proven therapeutics, has “a bit of a diabolic flavor to it.”
Describing the unprecedented power seized by unelected government officials during the pandemic, Byrne suggested COVID-19 shots are being mandated for “total control.”
“They want to force an experimental compound that we really don’t know the long-term effects [of]. Then they want to, on top of that, make sure everyone has a [vaccine] passport,” she said. “So, it’s total control of a populace. And that’s communism. We’re headed that way.”
Byrne, whose military service saw her tending to the medical needs of people living under harsh and totalitarian regimes, described the inherent atheism of communistic and socialistic systems, saying “those people hate God, because the people are not subservient to the government, they’re subservient to God. So this is competition.”
“Christians, people of good will, faithful people, who love God, love Jesus, and want to just do all for Him, and would even die for Him, [are] a threat to communistic, socialistic regimes,” she said.
Byrne suggested that the push to impose COVID-19 shots and mandatory proof of vaccination is related to an inversion of traditional morality that has beset the world.
“They’re all interrelated,” Byrne said. “It’s not only this whole thing with the vaccine mandate but it’s also the desecration of the most Blessed Sacrament, the Eucharist. And just even allowing people who are in a mortal state of sin to receive our Lord. And this would encompass people who are in a public arena who are promoting abortions, or euthanasia, or transgenderism.”
“It’s a web,” Byrne continued. “They’re not separate issues. These are diabolic concepts or issues that are affecting us at every level, and we have to pray. That’s the only way we’re going to fight all these issues.”
Byrne urged everyone, particularly those of faith, to resist fear.
“There’s a lot of people who are afraid out there. And we just have to assure them, to tell them that God is there with them and not to be afraid,” she said. “But we can’t give what we don’t have.”
“Our mission is to love Christ and to be with him, and we have to bring as many as we can with us,” she explained.
Sister Byrne said everyone must partake of the sacraments and be in a state of grace. She cited St. Joan of Arc, saying that when her persecutors asked her whether she was in the state of grace, “her answer was just a prayer: ‘Lord if I’m in the state of grace please keep me there, if I’m not please put me there.’”
Finally Byrne warned that people must recognize the high stakes of the current moral and political situation in the U.S., particularly with regard to forced COVID-19 shots.
“If we are all forced to take an experimental vaccine – that has known high risk side [effects] for a disease that has low mortality – in which many religious and medical exemptions are being refused,” Byrne said, “we have lost what is most precious to all Americans, and that is our religious freedom.
Viganò: Deep State and Church will bring new world religion and order
Traditionis custodes: this is the incipit of the document with which Francis imperiously cancels the previous Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum of Benedict XVI. The almost mocking tone of the bombastic quotation from Lumen Gentium will not have escaped notice: just when Bergoglio recognizes the Bishops as guardians of the Tradition, he asks them to obstruct its highest and most sacred expression of prayer. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
Dico vobis quia si hii tacuerint, lapides clamabunt. I say to you that if these are silent, the stones will cry out. Lk 19:40
Traditionis custodes: this is the incipit of the document with which Francis imperiously cancels the previous Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum of Benedict XVI. The almost mocking tone of the bombastic quotation from Lumen Gentium will not have escaped notice: just when Bergoglio recognizes the Bishops as guardians of the Tradition, he asks them to obstruct its highest and most sacred expression of prayer. Anyone who tries to find within the folds of the text some escamotage to circumvent the text should know that the draft sent to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for revision was extremely more drastic than the final text: a confirmation, if ever it were needed, that no particular pressure was needed from of the historical enemies of the Tridentine Liturgy – beginning with the scholars of Sant’Anselmo – to convince His Holiness to try his hand at what he does best: demolishing. Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.[1]
The Modus Operandi of Francis
Francis has once again disavowed the pious illusion of the hermeneutic of continuity, stating that the coexistence of the Vetus and Novus Ordo is impossible because they are expressions of two irreconcilable doctrinal and ecclesiological approaches. On the one hand there is the Apostolic Mass, the voice of the Church of Christ; on the other there is the Montinian “Eucharistic celebration,” the voice of the conciliar church. And this is not an accusation, however legitimate, made by those who express reservations about the reformed rite and Vatican II. Rather it is an admission, indeed a proud affirmation of ideological adherence on the part of Francis himself, the head of the most extremist faction of progressivism. His dual role as pope and liquidator of the Catholic Church allows him on the one hand to demolish it with decrees and acts of governance, and on the other hand to use the prestige that his office entails to establish and spread the new religion over the rubble of the old one. It matters little if the ways in which he acts against God, against the Church and against the Lord’s flock are in stark conflict with his appeals to parrhesia, to dialogue, to building bridges and not erecting walls: the church of mercy and the field hospital turn out to be empty rhetorical devices, since it ought to be Catholics who benefit from them and not heretics or fornicators. In reality, each of us is well aware that Amoris Laetitia’s indulgence towards public concubinage and adulterers would hardly be imaginable towards those “rigid” ones against whom Bergoglio hurls his darts as soon as he has the opportunity.
After years of this pontificate, we have all understood that the reasons given by Bergoglio for declining a meeting with a Prelate, a politician or a conservative intellectual do not apply to the molester Cardinal, the heretic Bishop, the abortionist politician, or the globalist intellectual. In short, there is a blatant difference in behavior, from which one can grasp the partiality and partisanship of Francis in favor of any ideology, thought, project, scientific, artistic or literary expression that is not Catholic. Anything that even only vaguely evokes anything Catholic seems to arouse in the tenant of Santa Marta an aversion that is disconcerting to say the least, if only in virtue of the Throne on which he is seated. Many have noted this dissociation, this sort of bipolarity of a pope who does not behave like a Pope and does not speak like a Pope. The problem is that we are not faced with a sort of inaction from the Papacy, as could happen with a sick or very old Pontiff; but rather with a constant action that is organized and planned in a sense diametrically opposed to the very essence of the Papacy. Not only does Bergoglio not condemn the errors of the present time by strongly reaffirming the Truth of the Catholic Faith – he has never done this! – but he actively seeks to disseminate these errors, to promote them, to encourage their supporters, to spread them to the greatest possible extent and to host events promoting them in the Vatican, simultaneously silencing those who denounce these same errors. Not only does he not punish fornicating Prelates, but he even promotes and defends them by lying, while he removes conservative Bishops and does not hide his annoyance with the heartfelt appeals of Cardinals not aligned with the new course. Not only does he not condemn abortionist politicians who proclaim themselves Catholics, but he intervenes to prevent the Episcopal Conference from pronouncing on this matter, contradicting that synodal path which conversely allows him to use a minority of ultra-progressives to impose his will on the majority of the Synod Fathers.
The one constant of this attitude, noted in its most brazen and arrogant form in Traditionis Custodes, is duplicity and lies. A duplicity that is a facade, of course, daily disavowed by positions that are anything but prudent in favor of a very specific group, which for the sake of brevity we can identify with the ideological Left, indeed with its most recent evolution in a globalist, ecologist, transhuman and LGBTQ key. We have come to the point that even simple people with little knowledge of doctrinal issues understand that we have a non-Catholic pope, at least in the strict sense of the term. This poses some problems of a canonical nature that are not inconsiderable, which it is not up to us to solve but which sooner or later will have to be addressed.
Ideological extremism
Another significant element of this pontificate, taken to its extreme consequences with Traditionis Custodes, is Bergoglio’s ideological extremism: an extremism that is deplored in words when it concerns others, but which shows itself in its most violent and ruthless expression when it is he himself who puts it into practice against clergy and laity connected to the ancient rite and faithful to Sacred Tradition. Towards the Society of Saint Pius X he shows himself willing to make concessions and to establish a relationship as “good neighbors,” but towards the poor priests and faithful who have to endure a thousand humiliations and blackmail in order to beg for a Mass in Latin, he shows no understanding, no humanity. This behavior is not accidental: Archbishop Lefebvre’s movement enjoys its own autonomy and economic independence, and for this reason it has no reason to fear retaliation or commissioners from the Holy See. But the Bishops, priests and clerics incardinated in dioceses or religious Orders know that hanging over them is the sword of Damocles of removal from office, dismissal from the ecclesiastical state, and the deprivation of their very means of subsistence.
The experience of the Tridentine mass in priestly life
Those who have had the opportunity to follow my speeches and declarations know well what my position is on the Council and on the Novus Ordo; but they also know what my background is, my curriculum in the service of the Holy See and my relatively recent awareness of the apostasy and the crisis in which we find ourselves. For this reason, I would like to reiterate my understanding for the spiritual path of those who, precisely because of this situation, cannot or are not yet able to make a radical choice, such as celebrating or attending exclusively the Mass of St. Pius V. Many priests discover the treasures of the venerable Tridentine Liturgy only when they celebrate it and allow themselves to be permeated by it, and it is not uncommon for an initial curiosity towards the “extraordinary form” – certainly fascinating due to the solemnity of the rite – to change quickly into the awareness of the depth of the words, the clarity of the doctrine, the incomparable spirituality that it gives birth to and nourishes in our souls. There is a perfect harmony that words cannot express, and that the faithful can understand only in part, but which touches the heart of the Priesthood as only God can. This can be confirmed by my confreres who have approached the usus antiquior after decades of obedient celebration of the Novus Ordo: a world opens up, a cosmos that includes the prayer of the Breviary with the lessons of Matins and the commentaries of the Fathers, the cross-references to the texts of the Mass, the Martyrology in the Hour of Prime… They are sacred words – not because they are expressed in Latin – but rather they are expressed in Latin because the vulgate language would demean them, would profane them, as Dom Guéranger wisely observed. These are the words of the Bride to the divine Bridegroom, words of the soul that lives in intimate union with God, of the soul that lets itself be inhabited by the Most Holy Trinity. Essentially priestly words, in the deepest sense of the term, which implies in the Priesthood not only the power to offer sacrifice, but to unite in self-offering to the pure, holy and immaculate Victim. It has nothing to do with the ramblings of the reformed rite, which is too intent on pleasing the secularized mentality to turn to the Majesty of God and the Heavenly Court; so preoccupied with making itself understandable that one has to give up on communicating anything but trivial obviousness; so careful not to hurt the feelings of heretics as to allow itself to keep silent about the Truth just at the moment in which the Lord God makes himself present on the altar; so fearful of asking the faithful for the slightest commitment as to trivialize the sacred song and any artistic expression linked to worship. The simple fact that Lutheran pastors, modernists and well-known Freemasons collaborated in the drafting of that rite should make us understand, if not the bad faith and willful misconduct, at least the horizontal mentality, devoid of any supernatural impetus, which motivated the authors of the so-called “liturgical reform” – who, as far as we know, certainly did not shine with the sanctity with which the sacred authors of the texts of the ancient Missale Romanum and of the entire liturgical corpus shine.
How many of you priests – and certainly also many lay people – in reciting the wonderful verses of the Pentecost sequence were moved to tears, understanding that your initial predilection for the traditional liturgy had nothing to do with a sterile aesthetic satisfaction, but had evolved into a real spiritual necessity, as indispensable as breathing? How can you and how can we explain to those who today would like to deprive you of this priceless good, that that blessed rite has made you discover the true nature of your Priesthood, and that from it and only from it are you able to draw strength and nourishment to face the commitments of your ministry? How can you make it clear that the obligatory return to the Montinian rite represents an impossible sacrifice for you, because in the daily battle against the world, the flesh and the devil it leaves you disarmed, prostrate and without strength?
subscribe to our daily headlines US Canada Catholic
It is evident that only those who have not celebrated the Mass of St. Pius V can consider it as an annoying tinsel of the past, which can be done without. Even many young priests, accustomed to the Novus Ordo since their adolescence, have understood that the two forms of the rite have nothing in common, and that one is so superior to the other as to reveal all its limits and criticisms, to the point of making it almost painful to celebrate. It is not a question of nostalgia, of a cult of the past: here we are speaking of the life of the soul, its spiritual growth, ascesis and mysticism. Concepts that those who see their priesthood as a profession cannot even understand, just as they cannot understand the agony that a priestly soul feels in seeing the Eucharistic Species desecrated during the grotesque rites of Communion in the era of the pandemic farce.
The reductive vision of the liberalization of the mass
This is why I find it extremely unpleasant to have to read in Traditionis Custodes that the reason why Francis believes that the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum was promulgated fourteen years ago lay only in the desire to heal the so-called schism of Archbishop Lefebvre. Of course, the “political” calculation may have had its weight, especially at the time of John Paul II, even if at that time the faithful of the Society of Saint Pius X were few in number. But the request to be able to restore citizenship to the Mass which for two millennia nourished the holiness of the faithful and gave the sap of life to Christian civilization cannot be reduced to a contingent fact.
With his Motu Proprio, Benedict XVI restored the Roman Apostolic Mass to the Church, declaring that it had never been abolished. Indirectly, he admitted that there was an abuse by Paul VI, when in order to give authority to his rite he ruthlessly forbade the celebration of the traditional Liturgy. And even if in that document there may be some incongruent elements, such as the coexistence of the two forms of the same rite, we can believe that these have served to allow for the diffusion of the extraordinary form, without affecting the ordinary one. In other times, it would have seemed incomprehensible to let a Mass steeped in misunderstandings and omissions to be celebrated, when the authority of the Pontiff could have simply restored the ancient rite. But today, with the heavy burden of Vatican II and with the now widespread secularized mentality, even the mere liceity of celebrating the Tridentine Mass without permission can be considered an undeniable good – a good that is visible to all due to the abundant fruits it brings to the communities where it is celebrated. And we can also believe that it would have brought even more fruits if only Summorum Pontificum had been applied in all its points and with a spirit of true ecclesial communion.
The alleged ‘instrumental use’ of the roman missal
Francis knows well that the survey taken among Bishops all over the world did not yield negative results, although the formulation of the questions made clear what answers he wanted to receive. That consultation was a pretext, in order to make people believe that the decision he made was inevitable and the fruit of a choral request from the Episcopate. We all know that if Beroglio wants to obtain a result, he does not hesitate to resort to force, lies, and sleight of hand: the events of the last Synods have demonstrated this beyond all reasonable doubt, with the Post-Synodal Exhortation drafted even before the vote on the Instrumentum Laboris. Also in this case, therefore, the pre-established purpose was the abolition of the Tridentine Mass and the prophasis, that is, the apparent excuse, had to be the supposed “instrumental use of the Roman Missal of 1962, often characterized by a rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of Vatican Council II itself” (here). In all honesty, one can perchance accuse the Society of Saint Pius X of this instrumental use, which has every right to affirm what each of us knows well, that the Mass of Saint Pius V is incompatible with post-conciliar ecclesiology and doctrine. But the Society is not affected by the Motu Proprio, and has always celebrated using the 1962 Missal precisely by virtue of that inalienable right which Benedict XVI recognized, which was not created ex nihilo in 2007.
The diocesan priest who celebrates Mass in the church assigned to him by the Bishop, and who every week must undergo the third degree through the accusations of zealous progressive Catholics only because he has dared to recite the Confiteor prior to administering Communion to the faithful, knows very well that he cannot speak ill of the Novus Ordo or Vatican II, because at the first syllable he would already be summoned to the Curia and sent to a parish church lost in the mountains. That silence, always painful and almost always perceived by everyone as more eloquent than many words, is the price he has to pay in order to have the possibility of celebrating the Holy Mass of all time, in order not to deprive the faithful of the Graces that it pours down upon the Church and the world. And what is even more absurd is that while we hear it said with impunity that the Tridentine Mass ought to be abolished because it is incompatible with the ecclesiology of Vatican II, as soon as we say the same thing – that is, that the Montinian Mass is incompatible with Catholic ecclesiology – we are immediately made the object of condemnation, and our affirmation is used as evidence against us before the revolutionary tribunal of Santa Marta.
I wonder what sort of spiritual disease could have struck the Shepherds in the last few decades, in order to lead them to become, not loving fathers but ruthless censors of their priests, officials constantly watching and ready to revoke all rights in virtue of a blackmail that they do not even try to conceal. This climate of suspicion does not in the least contribute to the serenity of many good priests, when the good they do is always placed under the lens of functionaries who consider the faithful linked to the Tradition as a danger, as an annoying presence to be tolerated so long as it does stand out too much. But how can we even conceive of a Church in which the good is systematically hindered and whoever does it is viewed with suspicion and kept under control? I therefore understand the scandal of many Catholics, faithful, and not a few priests in the face of this “shepherd who instead of smelling his sheep, angrily beats them with a stick” (here).
The misunderstanding of being able to enjoy a right as if it were a gracious concession may also be found in public affairs, where the State permits itself to authorize travel, school lessons, the opening of activities and the performance of work, as long as one undegoes inoculation with the experimental genetic serum. Thus, just as the “extraordinary form” is granted on the condition of accepting the Council and the reformed Mass, so also in the civil sphere the rights of citizens are granted on the condition of accepting the pandemic narrative, the vaccination, and tracking systems. It is not surprising that in many cases it is precisely priests and Bishops – and Bergoglio himself – who ask that people be vaccinated in order to access the Sacraments – the perfect synchrony of action on both sides is disturbing to say the least.
But where then is this instrumental use of the Missale Romanum? Should we not rather speak of the instrumental use of the Missal of Paul VI, which – to paraphrase Bergoglio’s words – is ever more characterized by a growing rejection not only of the pre-conciliar liturgical tradition but of all the Ecumenical Councils prior to Vatican II? On the other hand, is it not precisely Francis who considers as a threat to the Council the simple fact that a Mass may be celebrated which repudiates and condemns all the doctrinal deviations of Vatican II?
Other incongruences
Never in the history of the Church did a Council or a liturgical reform constitute a point of rupture between what came before and what came after! Never in the course of these two millennia have the Roman Pontiffs deliberately drawn an idelogical border between the Church that preceded them and the one they had to govern, cancelling and contradicting the Magisterium of their Predecessors! The before and after, instead, became an obsession, both of those who prudently insinuated doctrinal errors behind equivocal expressions, as well as of those who – with the boldness of those who believe that they have won, propagated Vatican II as “the 1789 of the Church,” as a “prophetic” and “revolutionary” event. Before 7 July 2007, in response to the spread of the traditional rite, a well-known pontifical master of ceremonies replied piquedly: “There is no going back!” And yet apparently with Francis one can go back on the promulgation of Summorum Pontificum – and how! – if it serves to preserve power and to prevent the Good from spreading. It is a slogan which sinisterly echoes the cry of “Nothing will be as it was before” of the pandemic farce.
Francis’ admission of an alleged division between the faithful linked to the Tridentine liturgy and those who largely out of habit or resignation have adapted to the reformed liturgy is revealing: he does not seek to heal this division by recognizing full rights to a rite that is objectively better with respect to the Montinian rite, but precisely in order to prevent the ontological superiority of the Mass of Saint Pius V from becoming evident, and to prevent the criticisms of the reformed rite and the doctrine it expresses from emerging, he prohibits it, he labels it as divisive, he confines it to Indian reservations, trying to limit its diffusion as much as possible, so that it will disappear completely in the name of the cancel culture of which the conciliar revolution was the unfortunate forerunner. Not being able to tolerate that the Novus Ordo and Vatican II emerge inexorably defeated by their confrontation with the Vetus Ordo and the perennial Catholic Magisterium, the only solution that can be adopted is to cancel every trace of Tradition, relegating it to the nostalgic refuge of some irreducible octogenarian or a clique of eccentrics, or presenting it – as a pretext – as the ideological manifesto of a minority of fundamentalists. On the other hand, constructing a media version consistent with the system, to be repeated ad nauseam in order to indoctrinate the masses, is the recurring element not only in the ecclesiastical sphere but also in the political and civil sphere, so that it appears with disconcerting evidence that the deep church and deep state are nothing other than two parallel tracks which run in the same direction and have as their final destination the New World Order, with its religion and its prophet.
The division is there, obviously, but it does not come from good Catholics and clergy who remain faithful to the doctrine of all time, but rather from those who have replaced orthodoxy with heresy and the Holy Sacrifice with a fraternal agape. That division is not new today, but dates back to the Sixties, when the “spirit of the Council,” openness to the world and inter-religious dialogue turned two thousand years of Catholicity into straw and revolutionized the entire ecclesial body, persecuting and ostracizing the refractory. Yet that division, accomplished by bringing doctrinal and liturgical confusion into the heart of the Church, did not seem so deplorable then; while today, in full apostasy, they are paradoxically considered divisive who ask, not for the explicit condemnation of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo, but simply the tolerance of the Mass “in the extraordinary form” in the name of the much-vaunted multifaceted pluralism.
Significantly, even in the civilized world the protection of minorities is valid only when they serve to demolish traditional society, while such protection is ignored when it would guarantee the legitimate rights of honest citizens. And it has become clear that under the pretext of the protection of minorities the only intention was to weaken the majority of the good, while now that the majority is made up of those who are corrupt, the minority of the good can be crushed without mercy: recent history does not lack illuminating precedents in this regard.
The tyrannical nature of Traditionis custodes
In my opinion, it is not so much this or that point of the Motu Proprio that is disconcerting, but rather its overall tyrannical nature accompanied by a substantial falsity of the arguments put forward to justify the decisions imposed. Scandal is also given by the abuse of power by an authority that has its own raison d’etre not in impeding or limiting the Graces that are bestowed on its adherents through the Church but rather in promoting those Graces; not in taking away Glory from the Divine Majesty with a rite that winks at the Protestants but rather in rendering that Glory perfectly; not in sowing doctrinal and moral errors but rather in condemning and eradicating them. Here too, the parallel with what takes place in the civil world is all too evident: our rulers abuse their power just as our Prelates do, imposing norms and limitations in violation of the most basic principles of law. Furthermore, it is precisely those who are constituted in authority, on both fronts, who often avail themselves of a mere de facto recognition by the rank and file – citizens and faithful – even when the methods by which they have taken power violate, if not the letter, then at least the spirit of the law. The case of Italy – in which a non-elected Government legislates on the obligation to be vaccinated and on the green pass, violating the Italian Constitution and the natural rights of the Italian people – does not seem very dissimilar to the situation in which the Church finds herself, with a resigned Pontiff replaced by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, chosen – or at least appreciated and supported – by the Saint Gallen Mafia and the ultra-progressive Episcopate. It remains obvious that there is a profound crisis of authority, both civil and religious, in which those who exercise power do so contrary to those whom they are supposed to protect, and above all contrary to the purpose for which that authority has been established.
Analogies between the deep church and the deep state
I think that it has been understood that both civil society and the Church suffer from the same cancer that struck the former with the French Revolution and the latter with the Second Vatican Council: in both cases, Masonic thought is at the foundation of the systematic demolition of the institution and its replacement with a simulacrum that maintains its external appearances, hierarchical structure, and coercive force, but with purposes diametrically opposed to those it ought to have.
At this point, citizens on the one hand and the faithful on the other find themselves in the condition of having to disobey earthly authority in order obey divine authority, which governs Nations and the Church. Obviously the “reactionaries” – that is, those who do not accept the perversion of authority and want to remain faithful to the Church of Christ and to their Homeland – constitute an element of dissent that cannot be tolerated in any way, and therefore they must be discredited, delegitimized, threatened and deprived of their rights in the name of a “public good” that is no longer the bonum commune but its contrary. Whether accused of conspiracy theories, traditionalism, or fundamentalism, these few survivors of a world that they want to make disappear constitutes a threat to the accomplishment of the global plan, just at the most crucial moment of its realization. This is why power is reacting in such an open, brazen, and violent way: the evidence of the fraud risks being understood by a greater number of people, of bringing them together in an organized resistance, of breaking down the wall of silence and ferocious censorship imposed by the mainstream media.
We can therefore understand the violence of the reactions of authority and prepare ourselves for a strong and determined opposition, continuing to avail ourselves of those rights that have been abusively and illicitly denied us. Of course, we may find ourselves having to exercise those rights in an incomplete way when we are denied the opportunity to travel if we do not have our green pass or if the Bishop prohibits us from celebrating the Mass of all time in a church in his Diocese, but our resistance to abuses of authority will still be able to count on the Graces that the Lord will not cease to grant us – in particular the virtue of Fortitude that is so indispensable in times of tyranny.
The normality that frightens
If on the one had we can see how the persecution of dissenters is well-organized and planned, on the other hand we cannot fail to recognize the fragmentation of the opposition. Bergoglio knows well that every movement of dissent must be silenced, above all by creating internal division and isolating priests and the faithful. A fruitful and fraternal collaboration between diocesan clergy, religious, and the Ecclesia Dei institutes is something he must avert, because it would permit the diffusion of a knowledge of the ancient rite, as well as a precious help in the ministry. But this would mean making the Tridentine Mass a “normality” in the daily life of the faithful, something that is not tolerable for Francis. For this reason, diocesan clergy are left at the mercy of their Ordinaries, while the Ecclesia Dei Institutes are placed under the authority of the Congregation of Religious, as a sad prelude to a destiny that has already been sealed. Let us not forget the fate that befell the flourishing religious Orders, guilty of being blessed with numerous vocations born and nurtured precisely thanks to the hated traditional Liturgy and the faithful observance of the Rule. This is why certain forms of insistence on the ceremonial aspect of the celebrations risk legitimizing the provisions of the commissar and play Bergoglio’s game.
Even in the civil world, it is precisely by encouraging certain excesses by the dissenters that those in power marginalize them and legitimize repressive measures towards them: just think of the case of the no-vax movements and how easy it is to discredit the legitimate protests of citizens by emphasizing the eccentricities and inconsistencies of a few. And it is all too easy to condemn a few agitated people who out of exasperation set fire to a vaccine center, overshadowing millions of honest persons who take to the streets in order not to be branded with the health passport or fired if they do not allow themselves to be vaccinated.
Do not stay isolated and disorganized
Another important element for all of us is the necessity of giving visibility to our composed protest and ensuring a form of coordination for public action. With the abolition of Summorum Pontificum we find ourselves taken back twenty years. This unhappy decision by Bergoglio to cancel the Motu Proprio of Pope Benedict is doomed to inexorable failure, because it touches the very soul of the Church, of which the Lord Himself is Pontiff and High Priest. And it is not a given that the entire Episcopate – as we are seeing in the last few days with relief – will be willing to passively submit to forms of authoritarianism that certainly do not contribute to bringing peace to souls. The Code of Canon Law guarantees the Bishops the possibility of dispensing their faithful from particular or universal laws, under certain conditions. Secondly, the people of God have well understood the subversive nature of Traditionis Custodes and are instinctively led to want to get to know something that arouses such disapproval among progressives. Let us not be surprised therefore if we soon begin to see the faithful coming from ordinary parish life and even those far from the Church finding their way to the churches where the traditional Mass is celebrated. It will be our duty, whether as Ministers of God or as simple faithful, to show firmness and serene resistance to such abuse, walking along the way of our own little Calvary with a supernatural spirit, while the new high priests and scribes of the people mock us and label us as fanatics. It will be our humility, the silent offering of injustices toward us, and the example of a life consistent with the Creed that we profess that will merit the triumph of the Catholic Mass and the conversion of many souls. And let us remember that, since we have received much, much will be demanded of us.
Restitutio in integrum
What father among you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent instead? (Lk 11:11-12). Now we can understand the meaning of these words, considering with pain and torment of heart the cynicism of a father who gives us the stones of a soulless liturgy, the serpents of a corrupted doctrine, and the scorpions of an adulterated morality. And who reaches the point of dividing the flock of the Lord between those who accept the Novus Ordo and those who want to remain faithful to the Mass of our fathers, exactly as civil rulers are pitting the vaccinated and unvaccinated against one another.
When Our Lord entered Jerusalem seated on a donkey’s colt, while the crowd was spreading cloaks as He passed, the Pharisees asked Him: “Master, rebuke your disciples.” The Lord answered them: “I say to you that if these are silent, the stones will cry out” (Lk 19:28-40). For sixty years the stones of our churches have been crying out, from which the Holy Sacrifice has been twice proscribed. The marble of the altars, the columns of the basilicas, and the soaring vaults of the cathedrals cry out as well, because those stones, consecrated to the worship of the true God, today are abandoned and deserted, or profaned by abhorrent rites, or transformed into parking lots and supermarkets, precisely as a result of that Council that we insist on defending. Let us also cry out: we who are living stones of the temple of God. Let us cry with faith to the Lord, so that he may give a voice to His disciples who today are mute, and so that the intolerable theft for which the administrators of the Lord’s Vineyard are responsible may be repaired.
But in order for that theft to be repaired, it is necessary that we show ourselves to be worthy of the treasures that have been stolen from us. Let us try to do this by our holiness of life, by giving example of the virtues, by prayer and the frequent reception of the Sacraments. And let us not forget that there are hundreds of good priests who still know the meaning of the Sacred Unction by which they have been ordained Ministers of Christ and dispensers of the Mystery of God. The Lord deigns to descend on our altars even when they are erected in cellars or attics. Contrariis quibuslibet minime obstantibus [Anything to the contrary notwithstanding].
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
28 July 2021 Ss. Nazarii et Celsi Martyrum, Victoris I Papae et Martyris ac Innocentii I Papae et Confessoris
(LifeSiteNews) – In conversations with different sources – all of them Vatican experts or members of the Vatican who wished to remain anonymous – LifeSite has learned that there is an expectation that Pope Francis intends to implement his motu proprio essentially suppressing the Traditional Latin Mass with the help of a spy system and especially of the head of the Congregation of Religious, Cardinal João Braz de Aviz. Braz de Aviz has a record of harshly persecuting tradition-oriented religious communities, most prominently the Franciscans of the Immaculate. In his July 16 motu proprio (art. 7), the Pope gave the Congregation for Religious, as well as the Congregation for Divine Worship under Archbishop Arthur Roche, the duty to supervise the implementation of his instructions.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, in his new response to the July 16 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes also speaks of the persecution of faithful communities that has been taking place both under Braz de Aviz and Pope Francis. He refers here to the fact that Pope Francis has now placed the communities dedicated to the Traditional Latin Mass under the direct authority of Braz de Aviz, “as a sad prelude to a destiny that has already been sealed.”
“Let us not forget,” Viganò continues, “the fate that befell the flourishing religious Orders, guilty of being blessed with numerous vocations born and nurtured precisely thanks to the hated traditional Liturgy and the faithful observance of the Rule.”
Two sources told LifeSite that the Pope will use a “spy system” or “spy network.” As one Vatican source wrote: “They will use the spy system. There are everywhere overly zealous ones who will report to Rome that somewhere the Ancient Rite is being celebrated, or they will accuse those bishops who do not intervene.” The information gained by these “spies,” the source continued, will be used against those bishops who are anyway already being regarded as unpleasant.
“The greatest damage will be done by Cardinal Braz de Aviz and his secretary,” the source continued. They will accuse people of “being against the Second Vatican Council or against the Pope.”
As one well-experienced Vatican observer who asked to remain unnamed puts it: “I think the pope will punish in every way possible any bishop who defies him directly. He has used his spy networks to good effect during his entire career, and he has never ceased.” This source thinks that the Pope might even use accusations of cover-up of sexual abuse as a tool to silence the resistant bishops.
This source fears that the bishops of our day have already a weakened disposition to start with, and that they therefore might very well easily fall. “We have a mental illness in the Church right now that makes weak minded people want to prove their loyalty by committing ritual suicide.”
As an example, this source points to religious communities who have already eagerly implemented papal directives, even though they led to the destruction of their communities, thereby becoming “their own enemy in order to prove their obedience.” This source points out that it is not only Braz de Aviz, but also his secretary, who are behind many harsh measures taken against good communities.
As our friend and colleague, Marco Tosatti wrote in a 2017 First Things article about these two clergymen:
It seems that Rome keeps a particularly piercing eye on religious orders that revere tradition, and that happen to enjoy many priestly vocations. The eye belongs to two persons: João Cardinal Braz de Aviz, a Brazilian sympathizer of Liberation Theology; and Archbishop José Rodríguez Carballo, a Spanish Franciscan. The former is the prefect for the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life; the latter is its secretary.
Tosatti went on to describe the different cases in which Braz de Aviz and his secretary have destroyed good traditional communities. He mentioned the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (FFI), the Family of the Incarnate Word, and the Heralds of the Gospel.
About the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate, the Italian journalist wrote that they are a “relatively new order, rich in vocations both in Europe and in Africa, the FFI was inspired by St. Maximilian Kolbe and approved by John Paul II.” In 2013, the FFI was placed under the authority of a Vatican commissioner, and its founder, Father Stefano Manelli, has been segregated from his order, “in order to limit his influence,” as Tosatti wrote.
subscribe to our daily headlines US Canada Catholic
Adds the journalist: “The only known accusation against him and his followers is that of ‘Lefebvrist drift.’ One of the problems seems to be FFI’s love for Church tradition, and for the old form of the Mass. Vocations of both sexes to FFI dropped after this intervention by the Vatican.”
As one member of the FFI, Father Paolo M. Siano, said in 2018: “over these past six years I have witnessed the objective devastation of my Religious Family (Friars, Nuns, Laity) the persecution (still going on) of our Founding Father and our authentic FI [Franciscans of the Immaculate] charism approved by Pope St. John Paul II.”
About the Family of the Incarnate Word, Marco Tosatti reported in 2017:
There is the similar case of the Family of the Incarnate Word. This religious order, begun in Argentina in the 1980s, has more than one thousand members in twenty-six countries on five continents, including in regions where nobody else is willing to go. The Family has roughly 800 seminarians. Jorge Mario Bergoglio, then archbishop of Buenos Aires and president of the Argentine bishops’ conference, did not care for the Family. He made reference to it, while addressing the bishops: “In Latin America we happen to find in small groups, and in some of the new religious orders, an exaggerated drift to doctrinal or disciplinary security.” At one time, he blocked the ordination of the Family’s priests for three years. The founder, again, is more or less segregated from his order.
In 2017, there was also an impending apostolic visitation of the Heralds of the Gospel. Here, Tosatti tells us that “the Heralds are an association of pontifical right, begun in Brazil in the last years of the twentieth century, from a highly traditionalist order known as Tradition, Family, and Property. The Heralds have many priests, many seminarians, and great vitality. The reasons for the apostolic visitation are far from clear.”
As the Vatican Insider had it, the Heralds were believed to have some “occult doctrine” and therefore, their visitation was not part of a “witch hunt against those more traditional and conservative associations.” Comments Tosatti: “It seems likely that the Vatican anticipated criticism of this investigation and sought to silence it.” (See also Hilary White’s later 2019 analysis of the situation of the Heralds of the Gospel – who received special attention from Pope Benedict XVI – which gives more background information.)
Next to these cases mentioned by Tosatti, the Spanish website Infovaticana reports that Braz de Aviz is also responsible for the destruction of the Familia Christi, a small Italian priestly fraternity community which had been founded in 2014 by Ferrara Archbishop Luigi Negri whom Francis quickly removed once he reached his retirement age.
Next to these cases, Braz de Aviz is known for the following troubling facts:
During the Amazon Synod, he expressed support for the idea of ordaining married men to the priesthood.
In 2006, he participated, together with the founder of Liberation Theology, Leonardo Boff, in an interreligious event that was co-hosted by Freemasons.
Already in May of this year, Braz de Aviz made it public that the Pope is concerned that some young priests “go a bit far from the Second Vatican Council” and take “traditionalist positions.”
In 2019, when talking about the “transformation of the formation” of religious communities, the Brazilian stated: “Many things of tradition, many things that are from the past culture, are no longer useful.”
In light of these facts, let us listen here to more voices concerning the future of traditional communities. One Vatican observer told LifeSite that for now, during the summer, “nothing will happen,” and that it will be difficult to say what will happen. But it is clear that “the Vatican is a regime, and it is obvious that Bergoglio wants to eliminate the traditional Latin Mass.” This pope, the source went on, “has a deeply rooted ideological hatred” against this Mass, and he is an “aggressively autocratic man of power who does not accept opposition.”
“Therefore,” this Vatican expert continued, “I can well imagine that we have to prepare ourselves.”
The shocking news that Cardinal Wilton Gregory decided to cancel a Traditional Latin Mass at the National Shrine of the Basilica of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., that would have been celebrated by the recently retired nuncio of Switzerland, Archbishop Thomas Gullickson, might give us an idea what might soon come to many of us.
To prepare ourselves for the worst case – Rome’s clamping down on every bishop in the world who tries to preserve the traditional liturgy – we might listen to the British journalist and Catholic commentator Damian Thompson. He stated on Twitter on someone’s estimation that some bishops will maintain the status quo with regard to the traditional Mass: “Let’s hope so. But the head of the CDW [Congregation for Divine Worship, which was also appointed by the pope to supervise the implementation of his motu proprio] is Arthur Roche, a veteran enemy of the TLM who, despite his affable roly-poly appearance (he is an unlikely former champion ice-skater), is one of nature’s witch-hunters. There are few more unpleasant bishops in the entire Church.”
Abbé Claude Barthe, one of the organizers of the yearly Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage that drew thousands of Catholics to Rome, also has issued some warnings. He said in a new interview that this new motu proprio Traditionis Custodes “is of course very painful. It will hinder the diffusion of the traditional Mass. It will start new persecutions.”
Barthe declared that religious communities formerly under the protection of the Ecclesia Dei commission will be “affected.”
“They are also in the crosshairs … The document says it clearly, the Pope’s letter indicates it in a cynical way. It is a question of destroying the traditional celebration of the Mass by ensuring there will be no more priests to celebrate it.”
The French liturgy expert goes on to describe what will happen under the new leadership of Braz de Aviz:
The Congregation for Religious, presided by Cardinal Braz de Aviz, is very much aligned with Francis and is going to get work to put things in order. For example, they will make canonical visits to the seminaries to verify that the teaching given there is in conformity with Vatican II, and to ensure they study and celebrate the new liturgy there. In short: the goal will be to discourage vocations. When we object: “But you are going to cause these institutes’ vocations to dry up”, they answer, “But we don’t need these people, they are useless.” (That was the actual response of a certain person I shall not name!)”
Regarding the question as to what we need to do in preparation, we learned from Bishop Athanasius Schneider that he expects many traditional priests and laymen clandestinely continuing the traditional liturgy and devotions. What this specifically would entail, we would like to learn.
Archbishop Viganò, in his own assessment of the current situation after the motu proprio, wrote that “the Bishops, priests and clerics incardinated in dioceses or religious Orders know that hanging over them is the sword of Damocles of removal from office, dismissal from the ecclesiastical state, and the deprivation of their very means of subsistence.”
He pointed out that Pope Francis usually gets what he wants to achieve, and His Grace mentions, as an example, the recent synods, which the pope was able to use for his goals. “We all know,” writes the Italian archbishop, “that if Bergoglio wants to obtain a result, he does not hesitate to resort to force, lies, and sleight of hand: the events of the last Synods have demonstrated this beyond all reasonable doubt, with the Post-Synodal Exhortation drafted even before the vote on the Instrumentum Laboris [which is the preparatory text written before the synod starts].”
Further describing the pope’s methods, Viganò explained that “in order to prevent the ontological superiority of the Mass of Saint Pius V from becoming evident, and to prevent the criticisms of the reformed rite and the doctrine it expresses from emerging, he prohibits it, he labels it as divisive, he confines it to Indian reservations, trying to limit its diffusion as much as possible, so that it will disappear completely in the name of the cancel culture of which the conciliar revolution was the unfortunate forerunner.”
Pope Francis’s goal is “to cancel every trace of Tradition, relegating it to the nostalgic refuge of some irreducible octogenarian or a clique of eccentrics, or presenting it – as a pretext – as the ideological manifesto of a minority of fundamentalists.” This prelate is concerned about the “overall tyrannical nature accompanied by a substantial falsity of the arguments put forward to justify the decisions imposed.”
Archbishop Viganò also calls upon Catholics “to prepare ourselves for a strong and determined opposition, continuing to avail ourselves of those rights that have been abusively and illicitly denied us,” explaining that “our resistance to abuses of authority will still be able to count on the Graces that the Lord will not cease to grant us – in particular the virtue of Fortitude that is so indispensable in times of tyranny.”
He expects that not all of the bishops “will be willing to passively submit to forms of authoritarianism” and he points out that “the Code of Canon Law guarantees the Bishops the possibility of dispensing their faithful from particular or universal laws, under certain conditions.”
According to Archbishop Viganò:
It will be our duty, whether as Ministers of God or as simple faithful, to show firmness and serene resistance to such abuse, walking along the way of our own little Calvary with a supernatural spirit, while the new high priests and scribes of the people mock us and label us as fanatics. It will be our humility, the silent offering of injustices toward us, and the example of a life consistent with the Creed that we profess that will merit the triumph of the Catholic Mass and the conversion of many souls.
As LifeSite reported today, the Italian prelate further clarified his thoughts on what priests should do in circumstances where the Traditional Mass is being persecuted, stressing “that in continuing to celebrate the Mass of Saint Pius V no priest performs any act of disobedience, but on the contrary he exercises his right sanctioned by God, which not even the Pope can revoke.”
He invites priests to reach out to their bishops and to make their hearts known to them and even to invite them to celebrate themselves the ancient rite of the Mass, which possibly could work a “miracle” in their own hearts.
Archbishop Viganò says that a priest has to make a decision as to how to proceed in light of where his own bishop stands with regard to the Mass of Ages. Some bishops might try to help these priests. In some cases, it might be better to continue the traditional Mass in hiding, but in other case, a priest might have to resist his bishop, and the latter solution might very well be the response of the saints. States the archbishop:
The priest must therefore consider whether his action will be more effective with a fair and direct confrontation, or by acting with discretion and in hiding. In my opinion, the first option is the most linear and transparent, and the one that responds most to the behavior of the Saints, to which we must comply.
Dr. Maike Hickson was born and raised in Germany. She holds a PhD from the University of Hannover, Germany, after having written in Switzerland her doctoral dissertation on the history of Swiss intellectuals before and during World War II. She now lives in the U.S. and is married to Dr. Robert Hickson, and they have been blessed with two beautiful children. She is a happy housewife who likes to write articles when time permits.
Dr. Hickson published in 2014 a Festschrift, a collection of some thirty essays written by thoughtful authors in honor of her husband upon his 70th birthday, which is entitled A Catholic Witness in Our Time.
Hickson has closely followed the papacy of Pope Francis and the developments in the Catholic Church in Germany, and she has been writing articles on religion and politics for U.S. and European publications and websites such as LifeSiteNews, OnePeterFive, The Wanderer, Rorate Caeli, Catholicism.org, Catholic Family News, Christian Order, Notizie Pro-Vita, Corrispondenza Romana, Katholisches.info, Der Dreizehnte, Zeit-Fragen, and Westfalen-Blatt.
Le Conseil constitutionnel a rendu sa décision sur la loi étendant le passe sanitaire avec notamment l’obligation vaccinale pour les soignants. L’essentiel du texte a été validé, excepté l’isolement obligatoire et la rupture anticipée d’un CDD ou intérim.
Le Conseil constitutionnel a validé dans sa quasi-totalité l’extension du passe sanitaire. Vous devez être déçu…
Oui, c’est un jour de honte pour nos institutions, pour le respect de notre Constitution et pour le Conseil constitutionnel. Nous sommes devenus une république bananière. Je suis effaré par une décision qui, sur le plan juridique, est incompréhensible pour moi.
La possibilité de licenciement pour les personnes sans passe sanitaire a été retoquée, c’est un progrès…
Oui, une miette est donnée… mais la liberté de circuler n’est-elle pas aussi importante que la liberté de travailler ? Bien sûr, je m’en félicite, mais ce n’est pas suffisant et je ne comprends pas le Conseil constitutionnel, au regard de sa précédente jurisprudence. Quand vous pensez que des terroristes islamistes à qui la majorité voulait imposer un bracelet électronique ont été sauvés par le Conseil constitutionnel qui a annulé la loi… Donc, le terroriste islamiste a plus de droits devant le Conseil constitutionnel que des millions de Français.
Comptez-vous vous opposer à la mise en place du passe sanitaire, totalement validé par la loi ?
Je pense que seule la pression populaire permettra de demander le retrait du passe sanitaire. Cette pression peut s’organiser de deux façons : d’abord en manifestant très nombreux dès samedi et ensuite en favorisant les commerces qui ne respecteront pas la règle, en donnant une prime à ceux qui ont le courage de dire : on n’accepte pas la discrimination, on n’accepte pas l’entrave à la liberté, on ne peut pas accepter la levée du secret médical. Il y a des moments, dans l’histoire d’un pays et d’un peuple, où il faut savoir agir pacifiquement pour défendre la raison.
Le Conseil constitutionnel valide l’extension du passeport sanitaire, y compris pour les soignants qui pourront voir leur contrat suspendu, et censure l’isolement obligatoire des malades et la rupture de certains contrats de travail :
« En prévoyant que le défaut de présentation d’un passe sanitaire constitue une cause de rupture anticipée des seuls contrats à durée déterminée ou de mission, le législateur a institué une différence de traitement entre les salariés selon la nature de leurs contrats de travail qui est sans lien avec l’objectif poursuivi ».
Il est plus dur, en France, de rompre un CDD que de protéger la liberté de déplacement et le secret des activités…
Quant à Macron, fidèle VRP du lobby pharmaceutique, il a annoncé ce matin qu’il faudra sans doute s’injecter une 3e dose…
Most people have NEVER heard of the Beaufort Gyre, a massive wind-driven current in the Arctic Ocean that actually has far more influence over sea ice than anything we can throw into the atmosphere. The Beaufort Gyre has been regulating climate and sea ice formation for millennia. Recently, however, something has changed; it is not something that would create global warming but threatens a new Ice Age.
There is a normal cycle that appears to be about 5.4 years where it reverses direction and spins counter-clockwise, expelling ice and freshwater into the eastern Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic. The 5.4-year cycle is interesting for it is two pi cycle intervals of 8.6. The immediate cycle has suddenly expanded to two 8.6-year intervals, bringing it to 17.2 years as we head into 2022.
What you must understand is that this Beaufort Gyre now holds as much freshwater as all of the Great Lakes combined. Why is that important? Saltwater freezes at a lower temperature than the 32 degrees F at which freshwater freezes. The difference between the air temperature and the freezing point of saltwater is bigger than the difference between the air temperature and the freezing point of fresh water. This makes the ice with salt on it melt faster, which is why we salt the roads in an ice storm.
Now, think of the Beaufort Gyre as a carousel of ice and freshwater. Because it is now spinning both faster and in its usual clockwise direction, it has been collecting more and more freshwater from the three main sources:
Melting sea ice
Runoff from the Arctic Ocean from Russian and North American rivers
Lower saltwater coming in from the Bering Sea
Indeed, Yale has warned that this current could “Cool the Climate in Europe,” which is precisely what we are witnessing. Cyclically, the Beaufort Gyre will reverse direction, and when it does the clear and present danger will be the natural expulsion of a massive amount of icy fresh water into the North Atlantic. Remember now, freshwater freezes faster than saltwater.
This is not a theory. We have previous records of reversals in this cycle of the Beaufort Gyre from the 1960s and 1970s, where there was a surge of fresh Arctic water released into the North Atlantic that resulted in the water freezing. There has been a lot of work done on this subject, which, of course, is ignored by the climate change agenda that only seeks to blame human activity. Nevertheless, AAAS, of which I am a member, states plainly:
“Arctic sea ice affects climate on seasonal to decadal time scales, and models suggest that sea ice is essential for longer anomalies such as the Little Ice Age.”
Socrates has been given just about every possible database I could find over the past 50 years. Because of the extended 17.2-year cycle in the Beaufort Gyre, the risk that a larger than normal expulsion of freshwater into the Atlantic can disrupt the Gulf Stream, which is the sole reason why Europe has been moderate in climate. But that has NOT always been the case. We know that the Barbarian invasions into Rome during the 3rd century were primarily driven by a colder climate in the north. The invasion of the Sea Peoples ended the Bronze Age and those from the north migrated into the South storming Mesopotamia and Northern Africa.
CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL
It is just not created by humans.
Perhaps we are now at the tipping point and they cannot keep saying that the extremely cold winter is also caused by CO2 and global warming. The collapse of the gulf stream has nothing to do with CO2. This may result in a major confrontation that these people have been seriously wrong and what they are doing to the economy in trying to shut down fossil fuels at this point in time could result in tens of millions of deaths if the gulf stream collapses.
Interrogé par CNN au sujet de ses relations avec Jeffrey Epstein, accusé de trafic de mineurs et retrouvé pendu dans sa cellule, Bill Gates a reconnu avoir commis une erreur en lui donnant «de la crédibilité».
Commentant mercredi 4 août son divorce sur CNN, Bill Gates est revenu sur ses relations avec le financier Jeffrey Epstein, accusé d’exploitation sexuelle de mineures. Alors que plusieurs médias américains suggèrent que la femme de Gates a été préoccupée par les liens que son mari entretenait avec l’homme d’affaires, le fondateur de Microsoft reconnaît que passer du temps avec Epstein a été «une énorme erreur».
«C’était une énorme erreur de passer du temps avec lui, de lui donner la crédibilité d’être là […]. J’ai commis une erreur», a-t-il reconnu auprès du journaliste de CNN qui a d’ailleurs rappelé que lorsque Gates a commencé à fréquenter Epstein en 2011, ce dernier avait déjà été reconnu coupable d’incitation à la prostitution de mineures.
Le fondateur de Microsoft a précisé que le seul but de ses rencontres avec Epstein était de collecter plus d’argent afin de le verser à la résolution de problèmes de santé à l’échelle mondiale.
Ainsi, Gates avoue avoir eu «plusieurs dîners avec lui» en espérant qu’Epstein contribue à la cause défendue par sa fondation, notamment en collectant des «milliards dans un but philanthropique» grâce à ses contacts. Des rencontres qui ont pris fin lorsque Gates a compris que les propos du financier «ne deviendraient pas réalité».
L’affaire Epstein
L’homme d’affaires américain a été pour la première fois accusé en 2008 d’incitation à la prostitution de mineures. À l’époque, la défense d’Epstein a négocié un accord pour qu’il ne passe que 13 mois en prison, et ce dans des conditions assez favorables, rappelle le New York Times.
En juillet 2019, Jeffrey Epstein a été de nouveau arrêté et incarcéré dans l’attente d’un nouveau procès pour trafic de mineures. Selon l’acte d’accusation rendu public, il était cette fois accusé d’avoir «exploité et abusé sexuellement des dizaines de filles mineures entre 2002 et 2005».
Quelques semaines seulement après son arrestation, le 10 août 2019, l’homme a été trouvé pendu dans sa cellule. Sa mort a provoqué de nombreuses théories complotistes sur les réseaux sociaux, notamment en raison de ses liens amicaux avec des personnalités importantes telles que Donald Trump, Bill Clinton ou encore le prince Andrew, suggérant qu’Epstein aurait pu payer pour avoir des informations les compromettant.
Les Gates divorcent
Le divorce du couple Gates, qualifié par Bill de «triste tournant» et finalisé lundi 2 août après 27 ans du mariage, a fait couler beaucoup d’encre. Néanmoins, Bill et Mélinda Gates continueront leur partenariat au sein de la fondation du même nom qu’ils ont fondée en 2000.
Dr. Peter McCulloughJim Fetzer / BITCHUTE
Screenshot, Henrico County (Virginia) Jail
Sr. Deirdre Byrne.PBS NewsHour / YouTube
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
/image%2F1044304%2F20210806%2Fob_23449c_00epgates1-facebookjumbo-v3.jpg)
naufrage/sauvetage 
