The cardinals are forbidden to reveal anything that was said.

But behind closed doors, the preparations for the conclave – which starts on Wednesday – are already mired in scandal.

Aside from doubts about the true age of Philippe Ouedraogo, a cardinal from Burkina Faso whom some claim is 80, meaning he’s too old to vote, and concerns about the presence of the Peruvian cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani, who faces sexual abuse allegations (which he denies), several cardinals have torn into the legacy of the late Pope Francis.

‘We have listened to many complaints against Francis’s papacy in these days’, one unnamed cardinal told America Magazine, a Jesuit publication.

In any case, we can be certain that Monday’s debate was haunted by a series of jaw-dropping scandals whose details are unknown to the vast majority of the 400,000 Catholics who attended Pope Francis’s funeral a week ago.

If they had known, the crowds would have been much smaller.

For the common denominator of these scandals – whose victims included 20 Slovenian nuns who claim to have been raped, Argentinian seminarians grotesquely assaulted by their bishop and a Belgian teenager subjected to incestuous assault by his uncle, a bishop – is that Francis went to bizarre lengths either to conceal or excuse these crimes.

The ‘people’s Pope’ was elected in 2013 on a promise to hold the Church accountable for clerical sex abuse.

And it’s true that he did establish new rules designed to punish bishops found guilty.

But the first Argentinian pontiff did not practise what he preached.

Continue reading at the Daily Mail

Sex Abuse Researcher Richard Sipe has died. The researcher of the Webpage BishopAccountability that points out Bergoglio´s cover-up of pedophiles as cardinal and president of the episcopal conference in Argentina

Bergoglio's Homosexual Subversion Already Began in Buenos Aires

Cdl. Bergoglio Protected Homosexual Bishop in Argentina

Bergoglio covered up pedophile priests as Cardinal and president of the Argentine Episcopal Conference. 

⚑ Bergoglio covered up and protected the homosexual predator Juan Carlos Maccarone within the Catholic University of Argentina (UCA) 

Bergoglio Accused of Sex Abuse Cover-Up in Argentina in 2002

In his book on Heaven and Earth, Bergoglio lied when he denied the existence of cases of sexual abuse that he covered up in his diocese

Bergoglio was the confessor of homosexual predators Gustavo Zanchetta and Julio César Grassi

Bergoglio approved the Argentine Leonardo Sandri who covered up pedophile Marciel Maciel as Vice Dean of the College of Cardinals

Francis Knew His Protégé Took Nude Selfies, Abused Seminarians; But Promoted Him to Top Vatican Post

Victims of homosexual predator Zanchetta say Bergoglio spits in their faces.

Homosex Victim: Francis knew that Zancheta was sexually abusing us.

Dr. Janet Smith – Is Sexual Abuse Cover-Up Now a Prerequisite for Becoming Archbishop of Washington DC?

The New York Times recently ran a three-part series “On the Embryo Question.” Part II was titled, “Should Human Life be Optimized?” The online version features photos and clips of babies and toddlers who were conceived on the basis of genetic selection. In one, a playful girl appears to be crawling through the screen toward the reader. An arrow points to her with the caption, “Her mother screened for gender and health during I.V.F.”  

Far from optimizing human life, these practices actually render it more and more precarious for all of us.  

“Anything But Sorry” 

In 2017, the Canadian Down Syndrome Society released a series of short films as part of its “Anything But Sorry” campaign. In the most-highly viewed video, young adults with Down Syndrome propose a range of humorous congratulatory messages interspersed with mild profanity in order to make the case that the only truly “bad word” with which to welcome a baby into the world is “sorry.” And, in another video in this series, several parents of children with Down Syndrome recall the times they were told “sorry” by well-meaning doctors and loved ones. The parents discuss the impact this had on them and their families.  

We can ask ourselves: if those with Down Syndrome and their families insist that every child deserves a warm welcome, then why have so many been met with expressions of regret?  

How Will This Be? 

For most of us, our first experience of responsibility was of being our parents’ responsibility. We tend to think that responsibility begins when a person is rational and can be held accountable for his actions, when an act is freely chosen and concerns some morally relevant matter. But of course, there was for each of us a much earlier experience that involved being the object of our parents’ responsibility to take care of us. We can learn a lot about the nature of responsibility from the parent-child relationship. But first, we have to ask: why are parents responsible after all? 

The bioethicist Hans Jonas explained, “In its most original and massive sense, responsibility follows from being the cause of existence.” Moral responsibility derives from someone’s, through his or her own action, being the cause of some morally significant result. From parental responsibility, we have all other kinds of responsibility that are analogous insofar as every person is a parent of his or her actions. In fact, the very meaning of the word “parent” comes from parere which means “to bring forth, give birth to, produce.” Every action brings something new into the world; every choice is like a birth, and every action the cause of something new. This matters because birth, like every human action, brings with it something both expected and unexpected. 

When a woman discovers she is pregnant, she almost always knows how it happened but she cannot know exactly how it will go. As Jonas’s friend, political theorist Hannah Arendt, writes, “It is in the nature of beginning that something new is started which cannot be expected from whatever may have happened before. This character of startling unexpectedness is inherent in all beginnings and in all origins.” Children are always surprising, and often, above all, to their parents. Each child’s uniqueness is literally and figuratively brought home to the awestruck parents. Yet the undeniable surprise that comes with each new child does not usually prevent parents from wanting to know something about what to expect which is perhaps why one of the bestselling pregnancy books of all time bears the title What to Expect When You’re Expecting. It might give little reassurance to new parents to find a book instead titled What Cannot Be Known Because It Is Totally Unexpected. But any parent will admit countless surprises along the way about how things turn out.  

To act is always a risk. As Arendt explains,  

The reason why we are never able to foretell with certainty the outcome and end of any action is simply that action has no end. The process of a single deed can quite literally endure throughout time until mankind itself has come to an end. 

In this sense, there is no acting without consequences. The actions we choose have some influence on what the consequences may be, but they can never prevent there being any consequences altogether. This is because our actions always take place within relationships, within a broader community of persons.   

In Anthony Doerr’s 2014 novel All the Light We Cannot See, he gives this moving description of a father’s humble awe at his responsibility for his teenage daughter Marie-Laure, who became blind at age six: 

There is a humility of being a father to someone so powerful, as if he were only a narrow conduit for another, greater thing. That’s how it feels right now, he thinks, kneeling beside her, rinsing her hair: as though his love for his daughter will outstrip the limits of his body. The walls could fall away, even the whole city, and the brightness of that feeling would not wane. 

The fact that the consequences of human actions and new life reverberate in ways we could neither plan for nor expect could be debilitating. Daniel LeBlanc could not have known that he would be constructing a model, a miniature of the entire city so that his sightless daughter could learn to navigate it amid the Nazi occupation of France. Such is the risk of life. And the risk of a love that could “outstrip the limits of his body” is what made it worth it.  

Literature is helpful because it illustrates to us the truth that every character and person comes to be known through their actions, that at once constitute and reveal the kind of person they are. How we live out our responsibility is the basis for character development and meaning, in both a literary and a moral sense. 

In some ways, we live in a time that acknowledges greater responsibility of parents than ever before. A combination of scientific knowledge, technological developments, and material prosperity leads us to have a sense of mastery over life’s circumstances. Today, having children is often seen as a life choice, one decision among others that can be desired, intended, and planned. So entrenched and widespread is this view that even those who do not avail themselves of any artificial interventions concerning fertility are often seen as having every outcome result from their sheer willfulness or desire. The reality, of course, is quite different. More often than not, new life has the character of the unexpected, of great surprise mixed with longings, disappointments, anxieties, and hopes. 

Having a child is overwhelming enough, but what about under highly unexpected circumstances or with the onslaught of specific knowledge about potential risks and challenges? Prenatal testing has been among the factors that seem to paradoxically give parents increased knowledge about unknowns. Genetic information has given parents the impression that they can know and control for what to expect about their child when, in fact, the birth of any child will undeniably lead to surprises that cannot be expected because of the uniqueness of this new person who has never before existed. 

All of this is complex because there is a sense in which the child is loved unconditionally and there is also the fact that a child can only be loved in the particular conditions in which we find ourselves— –in the reality of this unique person’s actual existence, and not in some ideal or abstraction that does not exist. The uncertainty of action is a part of the human condition we cannot eliminate. Attempting to eliminate the human condition only serves to rupture the particular conditions we have been given in which to live and to love.  

“I Never Wish I Wasn’t Born.” 

In an article on “The Art of Disability Parenting,” an interviewer asked six mothers around the world what it is like raising children with disabilities. In these short vignettes, the mothers say things like, “It’s impossible for outsiders to imagine the daily effort it takes to care for a child with profound disabilities” and “Ever since Patrick was born and we found out that he would have lifelong challenges due to a chromosomal condition, I go through times where I feel a sort of tension, a space between guilt and grief that explains the hurt but doesn’t put shame anywhere near an innocent child.” 

Most parents do not anticipate having a child with a disability. Since parents naturally want the best for their children, it can be distressing to learn that a child is especially susceptible to suffering. This is particularly prominent in prosperous societies where we have the sense that so much is within our control. 

With the rise of genetic testing and screening, many parents report feelings of guilt over passing on genetic conditions to their children. “Genetic guilt” might be the term. This guilt is heightened when a genetic risk factor is ascertained through prenatal testing. There are online support groups for every community and the discussions that happen there deserve our attention and reflection.  

For example, the BRCA genetic mutations dramatically increase the likelihood of developing breast and ovarian cancer. The more we learn about the hereditary nature of this condition, the more people express feelings of guilt for handing on the genetic predisposition to their children amid the increased availability of genetic testing and screening. 

Consider some of the posts in a BRCA Facebook group about contending with such genetic knowledge: 

Does anyone else feel guilt? I think about my kids testing positive for BRCA1 and 2 and then my grandchildren and I literally cry my eyes out. I know I didn’t necessarily give it to them but I can’t get the thought out of my head. 

I haven’t quite handled the guilt of knowing my 3 kids now have to be tested. 

I know it isn’t something I can control but I feel so much guilt. 

The only thing I got from my genetic counselor was guilt for choosing to have kids.

My fertility doctor really pushed me to go the IVF route to avoid passing the BRCA mutation to my baby. 

I truly feel like crap as a mom for giving her the gene[tic mutation]. 

I definitely don’t want to pass on this gene[tic mutation] to my children but I also don’t know if I want to do IVF. Am I [wrong to] want to have kids the natural way? 

What are we to make of this? And how can we best accompany those who experience these feelings? Many commenters beneath these posts affirm the feelings while simultaneously trying to reassure these parents they are not in fact guilty. But can we explain why they are not? 

I am particularly struck by the variations on the theme of what one woman who is a BRCA mutation carrier expressed in her comment beneath a post on genetic guilt. She wrote, “I never wish I wasn’t born.” This testimony is instructive because we know it is a consistent trend that people rate other people’s quality of life lower than the people do themselves. Many estimate, “I could never live with this or that condition.” 

Granted, disability and genetic risk, like the risk posed by the BRCA gene, are not entirely alike. But feelings of guilt and regret can exist in both circumstances.  

Catherine Frazee, a leading disability scholar in Canada, calls herself a “fugitive from the laws of genetic science” because she was born just after the invention of amniocentesis. In her fascinating book, Dispatches from Disabled Country, she insists, “Bad things happen to disabled people. Disability isn’t one of them.” She continues:  

In every barrier that we encounter, disabled people are reminded that we are unexpected. In every stare that follows us, in every moment of awkward silence that surrounds us, disabled people are reminded that we are the other. In every gush of admiration, disabled people are reminded that we are what nondisabled people feel lucky not to be. 

Returning to the themes of responsibility and guilt, Hannah Arendt makes a crucial and convincing distinction between the two. She says, “There is such a thing as responsibility for things one has not done; one can be held liable for them. But there is no such thing as being guilty or feeling guilty for things that happened without oneself actively participating in them.” By the procreative act, parents are responsible for being the cause of their child’s existence whenever fertilization takes place. Given the nature and purpose of the sexual act, it always has a morally significant dimension. Yet, despite the fact that children receive their genetic makeup from their parents and equally owing to the nature of the reproductive act, parents cannot be said to actively participate in any morally relevant sense in their child’s genetics. The introduction of IVF and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) has, understandably, obfuscated this distinction. By speculatively selecting certain embryos over others, parents and doctors now seem to be “actively participating” in determining the genetic future of any eventual children. And such selections have implications beyond the families who choose to attempt them. As Leon Kass put it, “A child with Down’s syndrome or hemophilia or muscular dystrophy born at a time when most of his (potential) fellow sufferers were destroyed prenatally is liable to be looked upon by the community as one unfit to be alive, as a second (or even lower) class human type.” This also contributes to parents’ sometimes “feeling guilty” for their child’s genetic condition, despite these parents’ not having caused it in any morally relevant or active sense. 

There is a difference between seeking to improve a child’s health and wanting to accept only healthy children. There is a difference between wanting the best for children and wanting the best children. It is crucial for us to be able to distinguish justifiable interventions to improve health from immoral calculations to discard life. The fundamental difference lies in respecting the new person as a good in him or herself, not as incidental to achieving some idealized product, nor as a project of their parents’ making. Because genetics is in the realm of science, this information gives us the illusion of being able to know and control the future. But of course, it is mere happenstance that we have knowledge of certain genetic and chromosomal conditions and not of others. We also know from tragically many cases that prenatal screening can be flat out wrong, leading parents and doctors to draw life-altering conclusions based on ambiguous information. As emotionally difficult, ethically complex, and scientifically uncertain as genetic knowledge can be, it will be an increasingly prevalent factor in modern life. How do we meet these challenges and respond rightly to reality? Can genetic information be used for the good of the person, rather than only being a threat to him or her or a basis for unjust discrimination? 

If Knowledge Is Power, Then What Is This Power For? 

A common genetic disorder in North America is cystic fibrosis (CF). Those living with CF experience a range of symptoms and complications, mainly concerning the function of their lungs. Once again, it is worthwhile to read the discussion threads on dedicated social media pages of this community to consider the impact of genetic knowledge and genetic guilt on decision-making. Consider this mother’s post:  

Looking for help. I am 12 weeks pregnant and we just found out that both my husband and I are CF carriers. I had an uncle who had CF and passed away in his 20s but we were completely surprised that my husband was a carrier. Anyway, the OBGYN said she’s referring us to a genetic OBGYN counselor to get further testing (CVS or amniocentesis) to see if the baby has CF. At that point, as she put, “we have a decision to make” if it comes up positive. This question does not come from a place of malice, but I’m looking for some insight from people with CF. You know the trials and tribulations you’ve gone through for so long. If you knew a baby had CF, would you still bring it into this world KNOWING it would have the same struggles? Once again, I apologize if I come off naive or insensitive . . . I really don’t mean to. 

The post provoked no fewer than 187 responses. Like this mother, many are quite literally crowdsourcing genetic counseling and bioethical reflection on social media. Such posts, which are common, show how people grapple with complex decisions in sincere ways that also display a certain audacity to raise questions they might not ask in other settings. 

So what did the commenters have to say? There are a few comments from family members and those living with CF saying that they would not want to bring someone with CF into the world. On the ten-thousand-member CF Facebook page, these comments are undeniably the outliers. By and large, the main tenor of the posts and comments is about how life is worthwhile in spite of the difficulties. Many people living with CF and family members of those with CF commented with photos so to say, “Look at me now!” Here are some of the comments:  

Here’s my 8-month-old CFer! I wouldn’t change one thing. CF is just one thing about him. He still is so many other things & has a whole life ahead of him! There hasn’t been a better time for CF with all the medicines and treatments. I would never ever change a thing! Feel free to message me if you’d like.  

My CFer is nine years old, never been hospitalized, plays competitive soccer on 2 different teams. Aside from her breathing treatments she’s a completely normal kid. When I was pregnant I had no idea my Cosette had CF and I’m so very glad. She’s amazing and even though our life isn’t “normal”, it’s OUR “normal” and I’ve never regretted it once. Everyone has to make their own decision but with all the medications out right now CF is becoming more and more manageable and they are living long and healthy and amazing lives. 

I have a younger brother and a younger cousin who have it as well and seeing how they have benefitted from new medical advances is something I really try to get others to see. People with CF are still normal folks, even though the internet portrays CF as hopeless (which I can’t stand) btw. Of course, any time you hear your child might not be 100% healthy, it’s scary. However, it’s something that’s worth fighting for and not giving up on! 

Absolutely! The CF world has changed drastically and keeps advancing. I just turned 31 on Tuesday, and I wasn’t supposed to see 17. Yes, I did have a double lung transplant at 27, but even going through some trials and battles, I still feel I’m winning! 

It is notable how many comment with encouragement and hope concerning new medications, technological advances, treatments, and especially the benefits of early diagnosis and interventions for improving the person’s condition, lifestyle, and longevity. Often it is those who are affected by certain conditions who become the best advocates for contributing to scientific improvements and medical advances. This is because there is an obvious incentive for those whom these challenges concern personally to be motivated and invested in making improvements for others like themselves or their loved ones who face these conditions. 

Genetic knowledge and prenatal screening should always be directed to the good of the person. And, it is never in the person’s interest not to exist. The sheer existence of any person reveals that this person is wanted, that he or she has a reason for being in the world. We know intuitively that no one deserves to be excluded from the human family. This is why some of the most successful campaigns concerning genetic testing and screening have been conducted under the auspices of ensuring genetic nondiscrimination. We can see how much we need each person and community in the world and observe how they are the concrete answers to people’s probing questions. If ever we accept a criterion under which any person or demographic should not exist, then our own lives and worth becomes insecure. How we accept and receive others amid the uncertainties and risks of life affects the extent to which we can accept ourselves.  

Accepting Our Children, Accepting Ourselves  

Most people do not have much difficulty accepting their strengths. Our insecurities usually stem from contending with our (often-frustrating) vulnerabilities. We are prone to idealism, comparison with others, and sensitivity to their judgments about us. Perhaps for these reasons Henri Nouwen diagnosed self-rejection as the greatest trap. Nouwen described self-rejection as whenever we say to ourselves, “If people really knew me, they wouldn’t love me.” Our limitations can make us feel deficient, inadequate, and even unlovable. But, as scholar Stephan Kampowski points out, “Love is nothing that can be manufactured or technologically enhanced.” By accepting the limitations and fragility of our lives, we discover the actual conditions in which we are specifically invited to love. Saying “no” to these conditions, or attempting to overcome them, only restricts the horizon of our capacity to love. 

A person can better admit his own weaknesses and limitations if he can receive those of another. And a person can only receive life in all its risk and uncertainty with a healthy degree of self-acceptance. A particularly articulate account of this experience can be found in historian Sarah C. Williams’s reflection on the nine months she and her family had with her daughter Cerian:  

When I first found out about Cerian’s deformity and made the choice to carry her to term, it felt like the destruction of my plans and hopes. It went against what I wanted. It limited me. But it was in this place of limitation that God showed me more of his love. Up until this point, the clamor of my desires and wishes had made me like a closed system centered in on myself, on my needs, flaws, and attributes. My life, even at times my religion, had revolved around achievement, reputation, and winning respect and approval from others. I had busied myself with [the] perfect home, perfect children, perfect job, all the things I wanted. I knew I had lost something deep and precious, but I didn’t know what it was. And the more I felt the lack of it, the harder I tried to find it through effort. During the nine months I carried Cerian, God came close to me again unexpectedly, wild and beautiful, good and gracious. I touched his presence as I carried Cerian and as a result I realized that underneath all my other longings lay an aching desire for God himself and for his love. Cerian shamed my strength, and in her weakness and vulnerability, she showed me a way of intimacy. The beauty and completeness of her personhood nullified the value system to which I had subscribed for so long. 

[…] Limitation, finitude, suffering, weakness, disability, and frailty can be gifts. Far from robbing us of our humanity, these things are needed if we are to be human. Without them, we strip ourselves of the opportunity to confer dignity on each other regardless of our physical and mental condition and we lose sight of the essential given-ness of human life. Ultimately, personhood is not a work of self-definition and self-creation. Instead, it is a gift. 

Williams does not conceal her grief and lamentation over her daughter’s diagnosis. She admits the shattering of her hopes and plans and then tells us that her daughter’s weakness shamed her strength and caused her to reconsider her values. By accepting her child, she came to a new and greater acceptance of herself than she ever imagined. Accepting our children (and accepting all the others in our lives who “shame our strength”) is the path to self-acceptance, to our sheer existence being enough to tell us that we are wanted.  

Life: Precarious and Precious

There are many challenges we face in accepting new life, particularly when given a preview through genetic testing of the potential challenges and vulnerabilities a loved one may suffer. From the perspective of those living with various conditions and their families, we find an overwhelming insistence on the value of existence and appreciation of life. While parents sometimes express feelings of guilt for handing on genetic predispositions or for knowing prenatally that their child may suffer because of a chromosomal condition, parents cannot actually be said to be guilty for their children’s genetic makeup because they are not actively responsible for causing it. Parents are responsible for causing their children’s existence and then are responsible for welcoming their children amid the particular circumstances in which they are called to love them. 

Keeping the person at the center of concern maintains our focus on his or her good rather than on our own fears and insecurities. And, each time we practice accepting another in the fullness of their fragility, we come to a healthier, more honest acceptance of ourselves, too.  

Image by Ermolaev Alexandr and licensed via Adobe Stock.

Most members of the mainstream media, now more accurately described as the “legacy media,” live in a bubble.

They only know others who think just like they do, and because of this, they think they are in the right. Anyone who disagrees with them must be an outlier or a fanatic. They are rewarded for this kind of groupthink and for the skewed representations they write, produce, or film.

The Poynter Journalism Prizes are coveted awards among journalists and are given to reporters who most often report from their uber-liberal-bubble perspective. Skewed reporting on a number of issues reaps the greatest prizes and none are higher than the Batten Medal.

According to Poynter, “The contest’s most prestigious prize, the Batten Medal…awards exceptional journalism that makes a difference to the lives of people and their communities.”

According to Poynter.com, this year’s prize was “Awarded to Kavitha Surana, Cassandra Jaramillo and Lizzie Presser of ProPublica for Life of the Mother, an investigative series that exposed the devastating consequences of restrictive abortion laws since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Readers were introduced to Amber Thurman and Candi Miller, two Georgia women who died after they were unable to access legal abortions and timely medical care in their state.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

“Judges said the series from the Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom revealed for the first time the stories of women whose deaths could have been prevented.”

Yes, the deaths of Amber Thurman and Candi Miller could have been prevented but the fault lies not with pro-life laws.

In Amber Thurman’s case, the fault lies with known complications of the abortion pill which can and are missed. In addition, delayed care and decisions, allegedly made by hospital staff, likely contributed to Amber’s death.

Who is to blame for the loss of life? The abortion groups and entities who send out mifepristone/misoprostol abortion pills through the mail or hand them out in person and then send a client on her way with very little to no screening. They don’t think—or care—about the consequences.

The fault lies with reporters like those at ProPublica who engage in fearmongering to score political points. These articles and reports scare women like Candi Miller, who had medical conditions that meant she should not have taken mifepristone, “the abortion pill.”

These reports scare women who may, like Candi Miller, wait too long to be seen by doctors after taking the abortion pills because they think they will get in trouble with the law.

Both lives could have been saved but ProPublica’s report spread misinformation and contributed to the scare tactics used by the abortion industry. So yes, these reporters made a “difference” in their communities but a negative one—one that reinforces the lies women being told by Big Abortion.

Lies that tell them their baby is not really a baby and taking a pill is “easy and simple.”

Lies that can put them in the hospital because the “rare” complications cited by the abortion industry are more common than the abortion industry admits. They like to pretend that one half of one percent of women have complications after taking mifepristone.

But a recent report shows that number to be 22 times higher than the reported .5 percent. This puts far more women at risk needing medical intervention after a chemical abortion.

The mainstream media and publications like ProPublica have done and continue to do serious harm to women. But don’t expect them to admit it—not when they are being awarded for it by their peers.

The post The Liberal Media Rewards Itself for Lying About Abortion appeared first on LifeNews.com.

In his new memoir, actor and producer Kelsey Grammer details the regret he experiences over the abortions of two of his children. Referring to the first one, he writes, “Though I have supported it in the past, the abortion of my son eats away at my soul.”

Grammer recently published Karen: A Brother Remembers, a memoir about his younger sister, who was raped and murdered, People Magazine reported. In the memoir, he writes about his experiences involving the two abortions.

In 1974, Grammer’s girlfriend became pregnant. He wrote that he was willing to take care of his son, but his girlfriend did not want to, so he did not pressure her to keep the baby.

Click here to sign up for pro-life news alerts from LifeNews.com

“I supported the idea that a woman has the right to do what she wants with her own body. I still do,” he writes. “But it’s hard for me. Still is.”

Six months before his own sister died, Grammer writes that he “volunteered to have my son’s body vacuumed out of his mother’s. I regret it. That’s all I meant to say.”

He also criticized the doctors who perform abortions, writing, “the doctor, or so-called doctors, who have executed generations of children in this manner — I have no idea how they call themselves doctors. Something about the ‘first, do no harm’ thing. But I offer no controversy.”

Grammer also wrote that doctors pressured him to abort one of the twins — a little boy and girl — that he and his current wife, Kayte Walsh, were expecting.

The boy’s amniotic sac ruptured at 13 weeks.

“Doctors advised us his continued growth without the safety of his amniotic fluid would surely kill him and probably take Faith too,” Grammer writes. “It did not repair.”

He added that he and his wife prayed about the decision and followed the doctor’s advice.

“We killed our son so Faith might live. We wept as we watched his heart stop,” Grammer recalls in the memoir. “It is the greatest pain I have ever known. Kayte’s scream was enough to make a man mourn a lifetime.”

LifeNews Note: Grace Porto writes for CatholicVote, where this column originally appeared.

The post Kelsey Grammar Slams Abortion: It Has “Executed Generations of Children” appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Episode 78: Smart City Digital Prison
May 7 2025

___________________________________
More Vids!
+BN Vids Archive! HERE!
___________________________________
Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!
Br Nathanael Fnd Is Tax Exempt/EIN 27-2983459

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, POB 547, Priest River, ID 83856
E-mail: brothernathanaelfoundation([at])yahoo[dot]com
Scroll Down For Comments

An undercover investigation by the pro-life group Live Action has revealed that Planned Parenthood is prescribing cross-sex hormones to minors with minimal oversight.

The investigation involved a Live Action investigator posing as a 16-year-old female. During a virtual appointment, the investigator received a same-day testosterone prescription after a brief consultation, with little screening to assess the minor’s mental health or long-term risks.

Lila Rose, president of Live Action, shared the findings on X, stating, “Planned Parenthood told our ‘16-year-old’ female investigator she could receive testosterone quickly, easily & with little screening.”

Rose called for Congress to defund the abortion giant, which receives nearly $700 million in federal funding annually.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

“These dangerous drugs can sterilize, stunt growth and leave lifelong scars. This is not healthcare. It is child abuse, and it must be stopped,” she said.

Planned Parenthood has expanded into the mutilation of children with hormones, offering hormone therapy nationwide, according to its website. While the radical pro-abortion organization states that hormone therapy for those under 16 requires parental consent, the investigation suggests lax enforcement of this policy.

Critics argue that such treatments, which can lead to irreversible effects like infertility, exploit vulnerable minors.

Here’s more on the undercover investigation:

In several instances, Planned Parenthood assured the caller that she could choose to meet with a provider virtually and have access to cross-sex hormones as quickly as the same day, despite the person posing as a minor saying they had just begun considering changing her sex. Facilities in Minnesota and Oregon stated they could schedule the minor within days or on the same day.

Five facilities stated that no prior therapy, mental health clearance or prior documentation was needed for her to obtain cross-sex hormones.

“Planned Parenthood receives more than $700 million in taxpayer dollars every year. That is a catastrophe, and it must end,” said Rose. “It’s time for Congress and the president to act and defund this abusive corporation of the $700 million they receive from taxpayers every year.”

The post Planned Parenthood Caught Handing Out Sex Change Hormones to Kids appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Interview by Matt Gaspers This year marks the eighth anniversary of The Dictator Pope, a groundbreaking exposé in which you explain how Pope Francis’s election was sought and achieved by the St. Gallen Mafia, a group of progressive prelates led by Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini (d. 2012). How successful do you think Francis was in implementing what you call “the Martini Agenda” in your book?[1]…

Source

Five years ago, the highest court in Germany declared that committing suicide is a fundamental right — for everybody and for any reason — and that being assisted or assisting others in the act are ancillary rights associated with that liberty. In other words, death on demand. Now the Supreme Court of Estonia appears to have followed the same course.

Here’s the context: A man who provided a suicide machine to those who wanted to kill themselves was acquitted of any culpability. He was charged, among other crimes, with providing health services without a license. But the Court ruled — quite logically and correctly — that helping someone commit suicide is not health care. From the ERR News story:

The Supreme Court noted that Tammert’s actions did not serve any of the legally required purposes of providing healthcare services. Current law does not recognize as treatment any activity that intentionally harms health. Therefore, causing death cannot be considered the provision of a healthcare service.

I wish our courts understood that assisted suicide — despite its being called euphemistically “medical aid in dying” — isn’t health care. It is simply suicide, or helping someone commit suicide.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

If the Estonian court had left it at that, it would be one thing. But it ruled that committing suicide is a right, as is assisting and being assisted in doing so:

The Supreme Court further emphasized that every competent individual has the right to end their life voluntarily. Criminal liability for assisting in such an act can only arise if the person is unable to carry it out themselves or lacks full understanding of the significance of their actions.

The court called on the Estonian parliament to issue regulations to guide nonmedical suicide facilitation. In other words, once again: death on demand.

At least these rulings candidly cut through the toxic smoke so often generated by assisted-suicide advocates who claim that the death agenda is about terminal illness or, indeed, physical illness or disability at all.

Here is the debate we should be having.

• Should suicide be a right?
• If people want to be dead, should they have a right to be assisted in terminating their lives?
• Are there any limits to personal autonomy?

Bottom line: The high court rulings in Estonia and Germany demonstrate that the real goal — or, at least, the destination — of assisted suicide advocacy is a right to death by any competent person for any cause and assisted by anyone.

So, let’s stop pretending that any of this is about medicine or health care. That conceit merely corrupts the medical profession.

And let’s face the fact that, to an increasing degree, the West is no longer an anti-suicide culture.

LifeNews.com Note: Wesley J. Smith, J.D. is Chair and Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism. Wesley is a contributor to National Review and is the author of 14 books, in recent years focusing on human dignity, liberty, and equality. Wesley has been recognized as one of America’s premier public intellectuals on bioethics by National Journal and has been honored by the Human Life Foundation as a “Great Defender of Life” for his work against suicide and euthanasia. Wesley’s most recent book is Culture of Death: The Age of “Do Harm” Medicine, a warning about the dangers to patients of the modern bioethics movement. He blogs at Human Exeptionalism.

The post Estonia Court Declares a Right to Kill Yourself in Assisted Suicide appeared first on LifeNews.com.

After a long wait among the crowds in St Peter’s Square, so much so that rumours started to build, black smoke finally emerged from the chimney on the Sistine Chapel at approximately 9 p.m. local time in Rome.

The signal of black smoke served to show that the 133 cardinal-electors had failed to elect a new pope in the first ballot of the conclave.

Black smoke billowing from the chimney indicates that no decision has been reached and that the required two-thirds majority hasn’t been achieved.

Once white smoke emerges that will be the signal that the next leader of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics has been chosen.

Photo: This photograph shows black smoke rising from the chimney of the Sistine Chapel signalling that cardinals failed to elect a new pope in the first ballot of their conclave, Vatican, 7 May 2025. (Photo by TIZIANA FABI/AFP via Getty Images.)

The post Black smoke after first ballot first appeared on Catholic Herald.

The post Black smoke after first ballot appeared first on Catholic Herald.

A push to defund Planned Parenthood through a budget reconciliation bill is facing resistance from three House Republicans, threatening a key pro-life priority.

The reconciliation bill, which allows legislation to pass with a simple majority in both chambers, is seen as a critical opportunity to strip federal funding from Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business. The abortion company received nearly $700 million in taxpayer funds in its 2022-2023 fiscal year, killing 392,715 babies in abortions, according to its annual report.

Pro-life advocates argue that redirecting these funds to community health centers would better serve women’s health care needs without supporting an industry they view as responsible for ending unborn lives.

However, three House Republicans are reportedly hesitant to support including the defunding measure in the reconciliation package, citing concerns over political backlash or the measure’s fit within the bill’s fiscal focus. This hesitation has sparked frustration among pro-life leaders who see 2025 as a pivotal year, with Republican control of the House, Senate, and White House aligning for the first time in years.

Thr three reportedly imclude Reps. Mike Lawler, Jen Kiggans and Brian Fitzpatrick.

Click Like if you are pro-life to like the LifeNews Facebook page!

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.10"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

House Speaker Mike Johnson has voiced support for defunding Planned Parenthood, stating on Fox News that he is “working to build the votes” needed to pass such a measure through reconciliation.

At the annual gala of the pro-lifen group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America last week, Johnson pledged that the reconciliation bill “is going to redirect funds away from ‘big abortion.’”

However, with a narrow Republican majority, even a small number of holdouts could derail the effort, as no pro-life Democrats are expected to support the measure.

“We need simplicity in this bill,” Fitzpatrick said.

“I think there’s other policy areas that we need to focus on,” he continued.

After news surfaced before this report that the three lawmakers were opposed to defunding Planned Parenthood, a spokesperson for Kiggans said the congresswoman’s position was taken “out of context.”

“Congresswoman Kiggans is proudly pro-life and firmly opposes any federal funding for abortion, ” the spokesperson said in a statement. “She attended a closed-door policy discussion with House leadership and Republican colleagues focused on Medicaid reform within the broader reconciliation process. The Congresswoman supports thoughtful, targeted Medicaid reforms that strengthen the program, preserve its integrity, and ensure it serves those who it was originally intended to help.”

Pro-life groups, including Students for Life of America and Family Research Council, have intensified lobbying efforts, with hundreds of activists visiting Capitol Hill in recent weeks to press lawmakers. A coalition of over 150 national and state pro-life organizations has called for action, emphasizing that Planned Parenthood’s federal funding, primarily through Medicaid, must be redirected.

Critics of Planned Parenthood point to reports of mismanagement and ethical concerns, including a New York Times investigation highlighting botched abortions and unsafe conditions at some facilities.

The reconciliation bill’s broader scope, which includes tax cuts, energy policy, and border security measures, has added complexity to the negotiations. Some Republicans, like Rep. Andy Harris, chair of the House Freedom Caucus, have previously questioned whether defunding Planned Parenthood fits the bill’s cost-saving goals, though cutting $700 millions appears to be an obvious savings.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wants the big budget reconciliation plan extending President Donald Trump’s tax cuts sent to his desk — ready for signature — by July 4. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) would like it even sooner: Memorial Day. This tight timeline is forcing Congress into high-stakes negotiations to unify on a budget. Meanwhile, Representative Mary Miller (R-Ill.) is waging a fierce campaign among her Republican colleagues to make defunding Planned Parenthood a non-negotiable piece of the final proposal.

On Monday, Miller sent a passionate letter to Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, obtained by Breitbart News. In it, she urged Guthrie to “use every legislative option available to cease all federal funds going to Planned Parenthood,” exposing the organization’s deep entanglement in abortion and transgender treatments. “Abortions and transgender treatments have exploded in clinics across the country,” she wrote.

Citing the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Miller highlighted that “abortions made up 97.1% of Planned Parenthood’s pregnancy services from 2021-2022, performing nearly 400,000 abortions.” She also underscored the crisis in her home state, noting, “In 2023, my home state of Illinois performed 72,143 abortions, the most in our history since the state started reporting abortion totals in 1973.” Miller laid bare Planned Parenthood’s financial empire, stating, “Due to a lack of decisive Congressional action, Planned Parenthood has become a federally funded health network with private assets valued at $2.5 billion. Recent numbers show that Planned Parenthood received nearly $700 million in taxpayer revenue from 2022-2023.”

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Her letter concluded with a call to action: “It is essential that we protect taxpayer dollars and stop funding this organization. President Trump has already issued an Executive Order that implements such a plan. Therefore, I urge you to do everything possible to ensure Planned Parenthood never receives another penny of taxpayer dollars.”

Speaking to Breitbart, Miller doubled down, declaring, “Planned Parenthood is a multi-billion-dollar abortion business that continues to receive millions in federal funding.” She praised Trump’s leadership, stating, “President Trump had it right when he issued an Executive Order to cut off taxpayer dollars from abortion providers like Planned Parenthood,” and insisted, “it’s time for Congress to make that policy permanent. I urge the Energy and Commerce Committee to ensure that not another dime of American tax dollars goes to this murder-for-profit organization.”

Miller’s crusade is part of a broader Republican offensive. In late March, pro-life advocates and lawmakers united for the Big Abortion Lobby Day, pressing Congress to shield taxpayer dollars from funding abortion. Several GOP lawmakers, including Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), have repeatedly echoed the same demands as Miller, introducing legislation to defund Planned Parenthood and advocating for its inclusion in the reconciliation package.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) signaled strong intent to confront “big abortion” in the budget reconciliation, according to Fox News. Two sources close to the House Energy and Commerce Committee told reporters that defunding Planned Parenthood is under serious consideration as lawmakers seek $1.5 trillion in spending cuts to offset Trump’s tax priorities. “[I]t’s been discussed,” Guthrie confirmed. “We are working on a lot of different options, but that’s been discussed.” And it’s not just Republicans who are calling for this action. An army of pro-life Americans are chiming in as well.

In March, when Miller shared a post about her push to defund abortion businesses, those in the comments expressed their shared passion to defund Planned Parenthood. “Cut them off forever,” one wrote. “How did taxpayers ever get forced to pay for someone else’s abortion in the first place?” another questioned. “Defund planned parenthood.” For pro-lifers near and far, one comment hit the nail on the head: “The American people don’t want to pay for abortion.”

Thune, speaking to Breitbart, outlined the sweeping scope of the reconciliation agenda, emphasizing its alignment with Trump’s campaign promises. “[T]he objective in reconciliation is border security, it’s national security, it’s rebuilding the military,” he said. “It’s tax relief. … It’s cutting spending. And it’s creating energy dominance for this country. Those are all agenda items the president campaigned on, the American people voted for, and we need to deliver on.” He acknowledged the complexity, noting, “there are a lot of moving parts around it. … But … I always believe you underpromise and over-deliver. So, as we look at what we have to get done, we want to be sure it gets done right.”

According to Mary Szoch, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity, including the defund abortion agenda is worth every ounce of effort. As she put it, “American taxpayers do not want their tax dollars paying for the killing of unborn children. This makes sense — who wants their hard-earned money used to kill a human being?”

“Moreover,” she continued, “Planned Parenthood specifically is guilty of not only killing millions of unborn children, but they are also guilty of being one of the largest providers of hormones to minors who are experiencing gender dysphoria.” Ultimately, Szoch concluded, “This organization should not receive any money from taxpayers. Thank goodness for the work of pro-life congressmen and women who are trying to protect American taxpayers from unwillingly taking part in this evil.”

The post Three House Republicans Reportedly Holding Up Bill to Defund Planned Parenthood appeared first on LifeNews.com.

When do the cardinals vote in the conclave?

The Conclave to elect a new pope begins on May 7. 

White smoke from the Sistine Chapel’s chimney indicates the election of a new pope. Black smoke from the chimney indicates a new pope has not been elected. The election occurs multiple times daily until the College of Cardinals selects a new Pontiff with at least two-thirds of the vote.

Here is the approximate Conclave schedule below:

Wednesday, May 7

1:00 pm ET (7 pm Rome time)

Thursday, May 8 and Friday, May 9

4:30 am ET (10:30 am Rome time)

6:00 am ET (Noon Rome time)

11:30 am ET (5:30 pm Rome time)

1:00 pm ET (7:00 pm Rome time)

Important note: These times are approximate and are subject to change.

As we await the announcement for the Catholic Church’s new pope, let us recite this prayer by Father Chad Ripperger, consecrating the papal conclave to the Immaculate Heart of Mary:

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wants the big budget reconciliation plan extending President Donald Trump’s tax cuts sent to his desk — ready for signature — by July 4. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) would like it even sooner: Memorial Day. This tight timeline is forcing Congress into high-stakes negotiations to unify on a budget. Meanwhile, Representative Mary Miller (R-Ill.) is waging a fierce campaign among her Republican colleagues to make defunding Planned Parenthood a non-negotiable piece of the final proposal.

On Monday, Miller sent a passionate letter to Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, obtained by Breitbart News. In it, she urged Guthrie to “use every legislative option available to cease all federal funds going to Planned Parenthood,” exposing the organization’s deep entanglement in abortion and transgender treatments. “Abortions and transgender treatments have exploded in clinics across the country,” she wrote.

Citing the Charlotte Lozier Institute, Miller highlighted that “abortions made up 97.1% of Planned Parenthood’s pregnancy services from 2021-2022, performing nearly 400,000 abortions.” She also underscored the crisis in her home state, noting, “In 2023, my home state of Illinois performed 72,143 abortions, the most in our history since the state started reporting abortion totals in 1973.” Miller laid bare Planned Parenthood’s financial empire, stating, “Due to a lack of decisive Congressional action, Planned Parenthood has become a federally funded health network with private assets valued at $2.5 billion. Recent numbers show that Planned Parenthood received nearly $700 million in taxpayer revenue from 2022-2023.”

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

Her letter concluded with a call to action: “It is essential that we protect taxpayer dollars and stop funding this organization. President Trump has already issued an Executive Order that implements such a plan. Therefore, I urge you to do everything possible to ensure Planned Parenthood never receives another penny of taxpayer dollars.”

Speaking to Breitbart, Miller doubled down, declaring, “Planned Parenthood is a multi-billion-dollar abortion business that continues to receive millions in federal funding.” She praised Trump’s leadership, stating, “President Trump had it right when he issued an Executive Order to cut off taxpayer dollars from abortion providers like Planned Parenthood,” and insisted, “it’s time for Congress to make that policy permanent. I urge the Energy and Commerce Committee to ensure that not another dime of American tax dollars goes to this murder-for-profit organization.”

Miller’s crusade is part of a broader Republican offensive. In late March, pro-life advocates and lawmakers united for the Big Abortion Lobby Day, pressing Congress to shield taxpayer dollars from funding abortion. Several GOP lawmakers, including Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), have repeatedly echoed the same demands as Miller, introducing legislation to defund Planned Parenthood and advocating for its inclusion in the reconciliation package.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) signaled strong intent to confront “big abortion” in the budget reconciliation, according to Fox News. Two sources close to the House Energy and Commerce Committee told reporters that defunding Planned Parenthood is under serious consideration as lawmakers seek $1.5 trillion in spending cuts to offset Trump’s tax priorities. “[I]t’s been discussed,” Guthrie confirmed. “We are working on a lot of different options, but that’s been discussed.” And it’s not just Republicans who are calling for this action. An army of pro-life Americans are chiming in as well.

In March, when Miller shared a post about her push to defund abortion businesses, those in the comments expressed their shared passion to defund Planned Parenthood. “Cut them off forever,” one wrote. “How did taxpayers ever get forced to pay for someone else’s abortion in the first place?” another questioned. “Defund planned parenthood.” For pro-lifers near and far, one comment hit the nail on the head: “The American people don’t want to pay for abortion.”

Thune, speaking to Breitbart, outlined the sweeping scope of the reconciliation agenda, emphasizing its alignment with Trump’s campaign promises. “[T]he objective in reconciliation is border security, it’s national security, it’s rebuilding the military,” he said. “It’s tax relief. … It’s cutting spending. And it’s creating energy dominance for this country. Those are all agenda items the president campaigned on, the American people voted for, and we need to deliver on.” He acknowledged the complexity, noting, “there are a lot of moving parts around it. … But … I always believe you underpromise and over-deliver. So, as we look at what we have to get done, we want to be sure it gets done right.”

According to Mary Szoch, director of Family Research Council’s Center for Human Dignity, including the defund abortion agenda is worth every ounce of effort. As she put it, “American taxpayers do not want their tax dollars paying for the killing of unborn children. This makes sense — who wants their hard-earned money used to kill a human being?”

“Moreover,” she continued, “Planned Parenthood specifically is guilty of not only killing millions of unborn children, but they are also guilty of being one of the largest providers of hormones to minors who are experiencing gender dysphoria.” Ultimately, Szoch concluded, “This organization should not receive any money from taxpayers. Thank goodness for the work of pro-life congressmen and women who are trying to protect American taxpayers from unwillingly taking part in this evil.”

LifeNews Note: Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand, where this originally appeared.

The post Republicans Must Make Defunding Planned Parenthood Part of Reconciliation Bill appeared first on LifeNews.com.

New analysis from the Charlotte Lozier Institute estimates there are 15 community health centers offering women’s health care for every Planned Parenthood facility in the United States. That’s over 8,800 community women’s health providers compared to just 579 in-person and virtual Planned Parenthood locations.

HELP LIFENEWS SAVE BABIES FROM ABORTION! Please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

The research examined 5,500 federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) which are community-based health care providers vetted and funded by the federal government to provide comprehensive health care services to low-income, vulnerable and underserved populations. It also examined 3,300 rural health clinics (RHCs) which are located in rural areas that are particularly vulnerable to health care shortages. These RHCs qualify for federal government funding to make health care available to Medicare and Medicaid recipients in underserved areas.

Tessa Cox, senior research associate at CLI, and one of the lead researchers in this analysis, said:

“With research showing that nearly 70% of women who had abortions described them as unwanted or inconsistent with their preferences and values, we know that many women are looking for better options. Community health centers give those options, providing care in underserved communities and filling critical health care gaps. Women deserve comprehensive care from providers who offer real health care, not abortion.”

Planned Parenthood’s motto is “care, no matter what,” but according to their 2022-2023 report, they only have a few options to resolve a woman’s pregnancy: prenatal services, adoption, miscarriage care, and abortion. Their own reporting shows 97% of the time, she’s sold an abortion. Since 2010, Planned Parenthood’s total cancer screening and prevention services have dropped by 71%, including declines of 72% for breast exams and 74% for pap tests, and prenatal services are down 80% from a record high in 2009.

Despite rapidly declining non-abortion services, Planned Parenthood reported receiving $699.3 million in the form of government grants, contracts and Medicaid reimbursements (34% of its total revenue) in 2022-2023.

Karen Czarnecki, executive director of CLI, said:

“This report makes one thing abundantly clear: Women aren’t receiving comprehensive medical care at Planned Parenthood, despite what the abortion lobby claims, because their business is abortion. Women, especially ones in underserved areas, deserve access to quality health care. Planned Parenthood isn’t meeting the needs of these women, especially considering recent reports of botched services.”

CLI’s full analysis, including maps and a state-by-state breakdown, is available at LINK.

The post Community Health Centers Outnumber Planned Parenthood 15-1, Offer Better Health Care Without Killing Babies appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The head of Catholics in England and Wales has taken the solemn oath of secrecy inside the Sistine Chapel as the conclave to select the successor to Pope Francis begins.

Cardinal Vincent Nicholas, Archbishop of Westminster and President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, is one of three English cardinals among the total of 133 cardinal electors who will choose the next head of the Roman Catholic Church.

The cardinal electors all recite the oath, promising that if elected pope, they would faithfully fulfill the ministry of universal pastor of the Church, that they will follow the rules of the conclave scrupulously and keep secret the results of the votes.

Only one round of voting will take place on Wednesday night, with four ballots on each subsequent day, two in the morning and two in the afternoon, until a new pope is selected. If the cardinals have not elected a new pope after 12-13 ballots, they will take a break for a day of prayer and reflection before continuing.

A nun in St Peter’s Square as cardinals begin their conclave to elect a new pope, Vatican, 7 May 2025. (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images.)

The past two conclaves, in 2005 and 2013, were short, with a pope elected on the fourth and fifth ballots, resulting in a new pope within two and a half days.

Though most cardinals have insisted that they believe this year’s conclave will also be short, many observers have speculated that it could also last longer, given that there are more cardinals, and many do not know each other.

In this regard, the pre-conclave general congregation meetings have been essential, allowing the cardinals a chance to get to know one another and jointly discuss their vision for the Church, and the profile of the new pope.

Once the doors to the Sistine Chapel close, cardinals will effectively be entirely shutoff from the rest of the world, with phone jamming systems and Wi-Fi blockers in place.

They will also have no newspapers or television news available while they remain closed in together in the Santa Marta residence, to allow for complete privacy and to prevent the interference of any external factors that might sway the voting process.

Cardinals’ deliberations end as conclave and discernment begins

Photo: Faithful watch a giant screen displaying cardinals taking oath of secrecy inside the Sistine chapel, at St Peter’s Square on the first day of the conclave to elect the next pope, Vatican, 7 May 2025. (Photo by STEFANO RELLANDINI/AFP via Getty Images.)

The post Cardinal Nichols takes solemn oath of secrecy before first conclave vote first appeared on Catholic Herald.

The post Cardinal Nichols takes solemn oath of secrecy before first conclave vote appeared first on Catholic Herald.