s has been noted so many times on this site, we live in a world of illusions created by the adversary to distract us from the real battle that he is waging to take our souls down into hell for all eternity with him. This battle for our souls is the only one that should matter to us as we have no “friends” in the world of Modernity who can “rescue” us from the consequences that must befall men and nations that are in states of utter and complete rebellion against Christ the King and His Holy Church.
There is no relief to be found from the constant conflict and agitation generated by the endless variety of false opposites that exist in the symbiotic worlds of Modernity and Modernism, both of which are founded on one lie diabolical lie after another. Needless conflict is ever-present in the world, and it is ever-present in the counterfeit church of concilarism.
Obama the Lawless Will Not Leave the Stage
To wit, the lawless statist who is completing his second term as the forty-fourth President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, by issuing a flurry of executive orders and regulations designed to hamstring his successor is promising to continue to defend his agenda of rebellion against the laws of God and the just laws of men after his term expires on Friday, January 20, 2017:
We’ve made extraordinary progress as a country these past eight years. And here’s the thing: none of it was inevitable. It was the result of tough choices we made, and the result of your hard work and resilience. And to keep America moving forward is a task that falls to all of us. Sustaining and building on all we’ve achieved – from helping more young people afford a higher education, to ending discrimination based on preexisting conditions, to tightening rules on Wall Street, to protecting this planet for our kids – that’s going to take all of us working together. Because that’s always been our story – the story of ordinary people coming together in the hard, slow, sometimes frustrating, but always vital work of self-government.
It’s been the privilege of my life to serve as your President. And as I prepare to take on the even more important role of citizen, know that I will be there with you every step of the way to ensure that this country forever strives to live up to the incredible promise of our founding – that all of us are created equal, and all of us deserve every chance to live out our dreams. And from the Obama family to yours – have a happy and blessed 2017. (Obama Says He Is Sticking Around To Keep Agitating.)
In other words, the current caesar will break ranks with his predecessors, most of whom have kept quiet about their successor’s policies, by doing the only thing that he has ever done in his adult life: serve as a “community organizer,” which means that he will continue to serve as an instrument of agitation in his post-presidential years. Gee, what a surprise.
Obama’s post-presidential agitation in behalf of ObamaCare, illegal immigration, unrestricted baby-killing, whether by chemical or surgical means, climate change and income “equality” will keep those who believe that their mission in life is to defend Donald John Trump’s policies to the point of keeping quiet about such things as claiming that Jerusalem is the “eternal capital of Israel” quite busy these next four years. Thus it is that adherents of the false opposites of the naturalist “left” and “right” will continue to treat their anointed secular saviors as practically infallible as they are said to be “better” than the available alternatives. Those who are caught in the diabolical vise will never be convinced that the battles that they fight are all based upon one set of naturalistic lies after another.
Obama's Alliance With Jorge and His Band of Revolutionary Fiends
What makes this situation all the more diabolical is that Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro will be enabled in his opposition to President Donald John Trump’s policies by many of the conciliar “bishops” of the United States of America and by almost all of the apparatchiks who populate the “ce-ment palace” that serves as the headquarters of the United States Conference of Catholic “Bishops” (USCCB) in Washington, District of Columbia. All manner of pro-abortion, pro-“population control,” pro-perversity, pro-environmentalist, pro-feminist, and other socialist advocacy groups, many of which are funded by the billionaire Jewish agnostic named George Soros, have deep ties with the apparatchiks within the USCCB, and they will coordinate their efforts with Obama/Soetoro and his Congressional allies to prevent any erosion of the “gains” our delusional caesar states have been made in the past eight years of his lawless administration.
Unlike the situation that obtained during the administration of President Ronald Wilson Reagan from January 20, 1981, to January 20, 1989, as the then named National Conference of Catholic “Bishops”/United States Catholic Conference (NCCB/USCC) served as a willing arm of the organized crime family of the naturalist “left,” which led many of us to write those letters to Rome to complain about the “bad” bishops and their lefty accomplices at the USCC, Obama/Soetoro and his pals in the USCCB and will have a very outspoken ally in the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. The false “pontiff” has already shown himself to be a friend of every enemy of Christ the King and His immutable truths on the face of the earth now (and even those no longer alive such as Martin Luther, John Hus, “Bishop” Tony Palmer, Mario Matthew Cuomo, Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz, Georg Hegel, etc.), and he will gladly serve as an enabler of the “stop Trump” movement.
Although he makes gratuitous references to the unborn now and again, Jorge Mario Bergoglio almost never uses the word “abortion” nor does he denounce those who support the slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means, and he is more than amply demonstrated his admiration of pro-abortion officials in public life, to say nothing of his admiration for the work of an actual baby-killer, Emma Bonino, who is called the Margaret Sanger of Italy:
He also named former foreign minister Emma Bonino, ex-Italian president Giorgio Napolitano, and Lampedusa Mayor Giusi Nicolini as the country's "forgotten greats" for their selfless dedication to building bridges with Africa, to serving Italy, and to upholding the rights of refugees. (See Jorge Praises Feminist Pro-Abortion Radical Emma Bonino as one of Italy’s “Great Ones”.)
ROME, May 1, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Armed with a home-made abortion device, operated by a bicycle pump, Emma Bonino, Italy’s newly appointed Foreign Minister, started her career in the early 1970s as an illegal abortionist and radical feminist.
Emma Bonino, a member of the Italian Radical party, made her mark in Italian politics by founding the Information Centre on Sterilization and Abortion (CISA) in 1975, which advanced the campaign to legalise abortion in 1978. Bonino has boasted that she and her group committed 10,141 illegal abortions. However, she avoided prosecution for the illegal abortions by being elected to public office, thereby gaining parliamentary immunity.
Today, as a leading member of Italy’s new cabinet, she is in a position to champion the pro-abortion and anti-family doctrines of the Italian Radical Party on a transnational level.
In that position Bonino, a strong supporter of the “European Project” of a federalist European superstate, will have inordinate influence at the European and international level. “More than one diplomat is dismayed at having Bonino as their boss,” Barreiro added.
When the dust settled on Italy’s chaotic general election in February, the nation found itself with no government and a hung parliament. The crisis was not resolved until last week when Enrico Letta was confirmed as President of the Council of Ministers of Italy. His 22-member cabinet was sworn in on April 28th.
After her unsuccessful bid in 2010 for the governorship of Lazio, the region of the Roman capital, Bonino resurfaced in February this year, running for President of the Republic, supported by then-Prime Minister Mario Monti. After the re-election of Giorgio Napolitiano as head of state, many Italians were surprised to see her appointment as Foreign Minister.
Critics on the right have been perplexed by Bonino’s inclusion in the cabinet and in such a prominent post, saying that her inclusion is mark of “inconsistency” in the present government.
Bonino’s appointment, Barreiro said, is “a problem of coherence”. “If you look at the coalition that has voted to put her in, it’s made of Catholics,” he said.
A member of the International Bilderberg Group and a protégé of billionaire internationalist George Soros, Bonino was a Member of the European Parliament and of the Italian Senate, and served as Minister of International Trade from 2006 to 2008. She served on the executive committee of the International Crisis Group that created the International Criminal Court.
During her time as a Deputy, Bonino campaigned for loosening of divorce laws, and the legalization of abortion and drugs. As a leading anti-clericalist, she has been a fervent adversary of the influence of the Catholic Church in Italian politics.
The Italian Radical Party, to which Bonino belongs, has been a fixture on the extreme left of Italian politics since its founding in 1970s. Described as “libertarian” in the American model on economic issues, its social policies include support for abortion, same-sex “marriage,” legal euthanasia, artificial insemination, embryonic stem cell research, abolition of capital punishment and the legalization of “soft drugs.”
Msgr. Barreiro, a lawyer and former diplomat at the UN, noted that many in Italy have questioned the huge influence of the Radicals on politicians of other parties.
“The Radicals have an enormous influence but with very few votes. They have an undue ability to put pressure on other politicians that is totally disproportionate to their numbers,” he said.
Bonino’s past as an abortionist has not failed to keep up with her. An editorial in Romagiornale.it responded to her bid for the presidency in early April with, “A woman who has trampled all moral and juridical law, including the suppression of more than 10,000 lives, can fill the role of the highest office of the Italian State? This question is a must in the days of the end of the mandate of [President] Napolitano.”
(Bonino is an abortion worshipper and has admitted to conducting 10,141 abortions! Both links found on the most recent Novus Ordo Watch Wire Digest.)
That is quite an impressive pro-abortion resume, and one that can lead this poor woman to one place only if she does not repent before she dies: eternal damnation. Bergoglio may praise such a killer because of her alleged work with refugees, but such praise will damn them both to hell for all eternity as he, believing himself to be the Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ on earth, has a duty to condemn her baby-killing, the debt of which she owes God, of course, is not canceled out by any good she may have done for "humanitarian" reasons.
Once again, contrast Bergoglio's words of praise for pro-abortion politicians for their alleged "good works" of statism and open borders with how Pope Pius XI described such individuals in Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930:
Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)
Even the thought of using such language is foreign to the "merciful" mind of the wicked Modernist from Argentina.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his fellow Jacobins/Bolsheviks within the counterfeit church of conciliarism believe that while the slaughter of the innocent preborn is regrettable, the more urgent threats to their mythical “better” world are to be found in such things as open borders, youth unemployment, opposing the death penalty—both as a precept of the Natural Law and in in its imposition upon those convicted of heinous crimes after due process of law, protecting the environment, showing “mercy” to unrepentant sinners who desire to be reaffirmed in their lives of impurity, whether natural or unnatural, and ending “income inequality.”
Just Giving Voice Universally to the Bernardin Message of Thirty Years Ago
In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is merely giving voice on a universal level to what the “bad” “bishops” of the 1980s sought to promote in the United States of America as they de-emphasized opposition to abortion by advancing the “consistent ethic of life” as a means of enabling and empowering the merchants of death in both organized crime families of naturalism, especially that of the “left,” the Democratic Party. Indeed, it was the nefarious Joseph “Cardinal” Bernardin who gave the “consistent ethic of life,” known also as the “seamless garment,” its first episcopal boost (Bernardin was a true bishop, but not a true members of the College of Cardinals of the Catholic Church) in an address he delivered at Fordham University, Borough of The Bronx, City of New York, New York, on December 6, 1983:
The substance of a Catholic position on a consistent ethic of life is rooted in a religious vision. But the citizenry of the United States is radically pluralistic in moral and religious conviction. So we face the challenge of stating our case, which is shaped in terms of our faith and our religious convictions, in non-religious terms which others of different faith convictions might find morally persuasive. . . . As we seek to shape and share the vision of a consistent ethic of life, I suggest a style governed by the following rule: We should maintain and clearly communicate our religious convictions but also maintain our civil courtesy. We should be vigorous in stating a case and attentive in hearing another's case; we should test everyone's logic but not question his or her motives. ("A Consistent Ethic of Life: An American-Catholic Dialogue".).
Contrast the late "Cardinal" Bernardin's rejection of opposing various evils on the basis of the Catholic Faith with Pope Leo XIII's specific injunction to speak authentically as Catholics at all times and without any equivocation whatsoever:
The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. So soon as Catholic truth is apprehended by a simple and unprejudiced soul, reason yields assent. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)
Truth be told, of course, even "Cardinal" Bernardin was not mouthing anything substantively new.
As has been demonstrated on this site, then Governor Alfred E. Smith in New York, a Democrat, promoted the American concept of 'freedom of conscience" in a pluralistic society (see Cut From the Same Cloth) in 1927, a year before he became the first Catholic nominated for the presidency of the United States of America by a major political party. Francis Cardinal Spellman, the Archbishop of New York, from 1938 to 1967, effectively told the Puerto Rican bishops in 1960 to stay out of a referendum on making contraceptives legal in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico:In 1960, the Puerto Rico hierarchy decided to make one last concerted effort to drive the Sangerite forces from the island. The Catholic resistance was led by two American Bishops--James F. Davis of San Juan and James E. McManus of Ponce. The Catholic Church in Puerto Rico helped to organize a national political party--the Christian Action Party (CAP). The new political front was composed primarily of Catholic laymen and its platform included opposition to existing permissive legislation on birth control and sterilization.
When increasing numbers of CAP flags began to fly from the rooftops of Puerto Rico's Catholic homes, the leaders of the opposition parties, who favored turning Puerto Rico into an international Sangerite playground for massive U.S.-based contraceptive/abortifacient/sterilization experimental programs, became increasingly concerned for their own political futures. Then unexpected help arrived in the unlikely person of His Eminence Francis Cardinal Spellman of New York.
One month before the hotly contested national election, Spellman arrived in Puerto Rico ostensibly to preside over two formal Church functions. While on the island, Spellman agreed to meet with CAP's major political rival, Governor Luis Munoz Marin, leader of the Popular Democratic Party (PDP) and a supporter of federal population control programs for Puerto Rico.
In an interview that followed his meeting with Munoz, Spellman, known for years as FDR's errand boy with a miter, claimed that politics were outside his purview. The cardinal's statement was interpreted by the press as an indictment of the partisan politics of Bishops Davis and McManus. To underscore his message, as soon as Spellman returned to the States he made a public statement in opposition to the latest directives of the Puerto Rico bishops prohibiting Catholics from voting for Munoz and his anti-life PDP cohorts. Catholic voters in Puerto Rico should vote their conscience without the threat of Church penalties, Spellman said.
Boston's Cardinal Cushing, John F. Kennedy's "political godfather," joined Spellman in expressed "feigned horror" at the thought of ecclesiastical authority attempting to dictate political voting. "This has never been a part of our history, and I pray God that it will never be!" said Cushing. Cushing's main concern was not the Puerto Rican people. His main worry was that the flack caused by the Puerto Rican birth control affair might overflow into the upcoming presidential campaign and hurt John Kennedy's bid for the White House.
The national election turned out to be a political disaster for CAP. Munoz and the PDP won by a landslide. Bishop Davis was forced to end the tragic state of confusion among the Catholic laity by declaring just before the election that no penalties would be imposed on those who voted for PDP.
Two years later, with the knowledge and approval of the American hierarchy and the Holy See, the Puerto Rican hierarchy was pressured into singing a secret concordat of "non-interference" in government-sponsored birth control programs--a sop being that the programs would now include instruction in the "rhythm method." While insisting on their right to hold and express legitimate opposition to such programs, the Puerto Rican bishops promised they would "never impose their own moral doctrines upon individuals who do not accept the Catholic teaching."
When the Sangerite storm hit the mainland in the late 1960s, AmChurch would echo this same theme song, opening the floodgates to a multi-billion dollar federal-life-prevention (and destruction) program. (Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, pp. 647-649)
It was five years after this travesty that “Cardinal” Cushing told a Boston radio station that he could not interfere with the “consciences” of state legislators as they considered whether to support or to oppose a bill in the Massachusetts General Court (the state legislature of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts). This made it far easier for the Kennedys and the Careys and Cuomos and the Bidens and the O’Neills, among others, to support the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn in the 1970s with the full support of the ultra-progressives in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, one of whose leaders, Archbishop Joseph Bernardin, another true bishop, invented the “consistent ethic of life” (“the seamless garment) slogan to provide pro-abortion Catholics with the cover of “respectability” as long as they opposed the death penalty and supported one statist measure after another to confiscate wealth and then to redistribute it to the poor while “empowering” illegal immigrants at the same time:
Early in the summer of 1965, the Massachusetts legislature took up a proposal to repeal the state's Birth Control law, which barred the use of contraceptives. (As a matter of historical interest, the repeal effort was sponsored by a young state representative named Michael Dukakis, who would be the Democratic Party's candidate for the US presidency 23 years later.) In a state where Catholics constituted a voting majority, and dominated the legislature, the prospects for repeal appeared remote. Then on June 22, Cardinal Cushing appeared on a local radio program, "An Afternoon with Haywood Vincent,” and effectively scuttled the opposition.
Cardinal Cushing announced:
“My position in this matter is that birth control in accordance with artificial means is immoral, and not permissible. But this is Catholic teaching. I am also convinced that I should not impose my position—moral beliefs or religious beliefs—upon those of other faiths.”
Warming to the subject, the cardinal told his radio audience that "I could not in conscience approve the legislation" that had been proposed. However, he quickly added, "I will make no effort to impose my opinion upon others."
So there it was: the "personally opposed" argument, in fully developed form, enunciated by a Prince of the Church nearly 40 years ago! Notice how the unvarying teaching of the Catholic Church, which condemned artificial contraception as an offense against natural law, is reduced here to a matter of the cardinal's personal belief. And notice how he makes no effort to persuade legislators with the force of his arguments; any such effort is condemned in advance as a bid to "impose" his opinion.
Cardinal Cushing conceded that in the past, Catholic leaders had opposed any effort to alter the Birth Control law. "But my thinking has changed on that matter," he reported, "for the simple reason that I do not see where I have an obligation to impose my religious beliefs on people who just do not accept the same faith as I do."
(Notice that the Catholic position is reduced still further here, to a matter of purely sectarian belief—as if it would be impossible for a non-Catholic to support the purpose of the Birth Control law. The cardinal did not explain why that law was enacted in 1899 by the heirs of the Puritans in Massachusetts, long before Catholics came to power in the legislature.)
Before the end of his fateful radio broadcast, Cardinal Cushing gave his advice to the Catholic members of the Massachusetts legislature: "If your constituents want this legislation, vote for it. You represent them. You don't represent the Catholic Church."
Dozens of Catholic legislators did vote for the bill, and the Birth Control law was abolished. Perhaps more important in the long run, the "personally opposed" politician had his rationale. (Cushing's Use of The "Personally Opposed" Argument.)
The Argentine Apostate's Constant Warfare Against the Gravity of Killing The Innocent Preborn
Today’s Pontius Pilates such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his fellow revolutionaries had lots and lots of help from true bishops and true priests in the 1960s abd 1970s as their consciences were massaged to make it possible for them to a blind eye as Catholics in public support each of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, and it is entirely unsurprising, therefore, that Bergoglio is said to be considering removing the penalty of automatic excommunication incurred by women who kill their babies by surgical means:
“Archbishop” Vincent Paglia is the current leader of the Vatican’s “Pontifical Academy for Life”. Until September 1 of this year, he headed the “Pontifical Council for the Family”, which was then absorbed into the new “Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life” as a part of Francis’ ongoing reform of the Roman Curia. On Nov. 23, 2016, the Italian newspaper Il Resto del Carlino published an interview with “Abp.” Paglia, in which he was asked this very question: “But is it possible that in the near future the excommunication for abortion will be overcome?”
Archlayman Paglia answered as follows:
Yes, this cannot be excluded…. Whether it will be Francis himself who abrogates the canon, I do not know; one would need to ask him. What is certain is that the Code [of Canon Law] has been revised dozens of times in the last decades. It would not be surprising, therefore, that the progress of life should lead to an updating [aggiornamento] of canon law. This lies in the nature of reality; the tradition of the Church is a living body, not a blocked code [of regulations].
(Interview with “Abp.” Vincent Paglia; in Giovanni Panettiere, “L’arcivescovo e l’aborto perdonato «anche la scomunica può saltare»”, Il Resto del Carlino, Nov. 23, 2016; our translation.)
In short, the head of the Vatican’s “Pontifical” Academy for Life thinks it is quite possible that Francis will abrogate altogether the law that currently prescribes an excommunication latae sententiae (meaning it is incurred automatically, without a declaration or other intervention of church authority) for committing an abortion! That’s certainly one way to deal with that pesky problem of having to give special faculties to confessors to work around canon law: Simply change the law so that procuring an abortion no longer incurs automatic excommunication in the first place. Presto! (Novus Ordo Watch Wire: Francis Might Abolish Excommunication for Abortion.)
The blogger at Novus Ordo Watch Wire went on to reveal a story that has been circulating to effect that the dogmatic evolutionists of the counterfeit church of conciliarism are considering “tolerating” the surgical execution of innocent preborn children during the first trimester of their lives. It is interesting, however, that rumors concerning “pastoral adjustments” in Catholic moral teaching (administration of what purports to be Holy Communion to divorced and civilly “remarried” Catholics, permission granted for the baptism of the children of those of the same gender who are said to be “married” to each other, an approach of “gradualness” to “accompany” fornicators, sodomites, transvestites, and those who have had undergone surgical mutilation in an attempt to “change” their gender, etc.) have a way of being rather prophetic.
The speculation of the Novus Ordo Watch Wire blogged is not far-fetched as Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear in the past by his words and actions that he thinks that the “decision” to carry a child to term is “difficult” for women to make, and some conciliar officials have gone so far as to state that there are circumstances in which what they believe that the killing of preborn children can be justified.
Among so many other examples that could be given, Lombardi even used the phrase “therapeutic abortion” to justify “Archbishop” Salvatore Rino Fisichella’s criticism in 2009 of a conciliar “bishop” of Recife, Brazil, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho who had excommunicated the butchers who killed the twin babies of a nine year-old girl who been assaulted by a relative:
ROME, February 16, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Archbishop Rino Fisichella, the head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life (PAV), has told the Associated Press that he has no intention of stepping down after five senior members of the Academy issued a statement last week expressing their loss of confidence in his leadership.
“I won’t respond to these people. Too much space already has been given to them,” Fisichella told AP.
Fisichella’s response follows comments late last week from Fr. Frederico Lombardi, the head of the Holy See Press Office and a subordinate of the cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone, who told media that the statement has not been received by either the pope or Bertone. Lombardi, who has gone on record supporting Fisichella, told the Catholic News Agency that issuing the statement to the press was an “astonishing” move.
The author of the statement, Luke Gormally, an Ordinary Member of the Academy and the former director of the Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics in London, told LSN that he did not intend to pursue the matter any further.
Gormally told LSN, “Certainly, for the immediate future I have no further action in mind.”
The five signatories to the statement say they believe that Archbishop Fisichella’s speech at the Academy’s plenary meeting made it clear that he does not grasp the meaning of the Catholic Church’s absolute prohibition on the killing of unborn children.
His speech, they said, “had the effect of confirming in the minds of many academicians the impression that we are being led by an ecclesiastic who does not understand what absolute respect for innocent human lives entails.” They called this an “absurd” situation.
Fisichella, they said, maintained that the article he wrote last year, which appeared to condone the abortion of the twin children of a nine-year-old rape victim in Brazil, had been “vindicated” by a clarification issued in July 2009 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF).
Fisichella wrote in his article, published in the Vatican’s newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, that the doctors who aborted the twins did not deserve excommunication and accused the pro-life local bishop of Recife, Brazil, Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, of acting hastily and failing to meet the pastoral needs of the girl.
“There are others who merit excommunication and our pardon, not those who have allowed you to live and have helped you to regain hope and trust,” hewrote.
These assertions were roundly refuted at the time by a statement from the Brazilian diocese detailing the assistance that the girl and her family had been receiving from the local priest and the diocese before she was spirited away by a pro-abortion group for the abortion. This response was never given space in either the secular press or in L’Osservatore Romano and no official response to it was ever publicly made by any office of the Vatican, although Bishop Cardoso was later honoured for his actions by the pro-life group Human Life International.
Gormally told LSN today that his statement had originally been meant only as his own response to LSN’s request for information on the outcome of the PAV plenary meeting, but that later other members expressed an interest in signing. The group later released it to other news outlets.
He said he is “content” with the situation as it is and said that the statement has achieved what it set out to do by clarifying for the public what he believes the true situation is with the Academy. The statement said that within the Vatican Curia, it is “widely perceived” that Fisichella is an “inappropriate” president of the Academy.
Gormally told AP that an article by Catholic News Service, in which Fisichella had declared that there was “harmony” at the PAV plenary meeting, had been a work of deliberate “disinformation.” The statement, he said, had corrected this situation.
On Friday, February 19, Vatican Spokesman Fr. Frederico Lombardi said the statement by the five PAV members “was received neither by the Holy Father, nor by the cardinal Secretary of State, who would seem to be the natural recipients,” nor, he said, had it been presented at the plenary assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life, “which would have been the natural place to address the matter.”
“It’s a bit strange that persons who are members of an academy address a request of this kind without addressing it to the competent authorities. It’s astounding and seems incorrect that such a document should be given public circulation,” Lombardi said.
However, Fr. Lombardi himself has had a hand in the growth of the controversy surrounding the PAV and Archbishop Fisichella’s article.
On March 21 2009, just days after Fisichella’s article was published, Fr. Lombardi, while accompanying the pope on a visit to Africa, told media that in his speech to Angolan dignitaries Benedict XVI had in no way intended to condemn “therapeutic abortion.” In his speech, Pope Benedict had observed, “How bitter the irony of those who promote abortion as a form of maternal healthcare!”
Lombardi, aware of the growing scandal surrounding Fisichella’s statements, hastened to assure journalists that the comments had nothing to do with the Brazilian case, and openly endorsed Fisichella’s assertions.
He said, “In this regard the considerations of Archbishop Rino Fisichella apply, when he lamented in L’Osservatore Romano the hasty declaration of excommunication by the archbishop of Recife. No extreme case should obscure the true meaning of the remarks by the Holy Father, who was referring to something quite different … The Pope absolutely was not talking about therapeutic abortion, and did not say that this must always be rejected.”
Fr. Lombardi later declined LSN’s direct request for a clarification of his remarks. (Vatican Archbishop, Spokesman Come Out Swinging against Pro-Life Critics; see also So Long to the Fifth Commandment, the Statement of those "Pontifical Academy for Life" members who criticized Fisichella, Dr. Marian Therese Horvat's The Holy See Abandons its Pro-Life Position, and Rotten To The Very Roots.
It is never permissible to directly intend to kill an innocent human being under any circumstances.
To elaborate on this for bit before turning to his spinning for “Pope Francis’s” most recent and most outrageous interview to date, it should be pointed out that “Pope Benedict XVI” did not contradict Salvatore Rino Fisichella seven years ago or the great moral theologian at the Press Office of the Holy See, “Father” Federico Lombardi.
Mind you, the killing of the nine year-old girl’s twin babies in 2009 was not a debatable interpretation of what constitutes the double-fold effect that justifies the undertaking of a particular course of action, morally licit in and of itself, that has foreseen but unintended evil consequences. This was not even a debate, for instance, over what constitutes truly extraordinary means to sustain human life. This was a matter moral black and moral white that wound up being obfuscated by illogic and sentimentality and emotional hand-wringing.
The fact that two officials of the conciliar Vatican could make it appear that it is ever morally licit to directly and equivocally attack an innocent human life in order to exculpate those who kill such life speaks to us yet today, seven years later, as proof that the men who masquerade as "Vatican officials" are apostates who have long defected on very clear matters of objectively morality just as much as they have defected from articles contained in the Deposit of Faith. As is patently evident by now, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has given full rein to those who base courses of moral conduct on the casuistry of sentimentality and pure emotionalism, not according to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.
<p style='margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1.5em; font-family: Garamon