Distinction Matter - Subscribed Feeds

“And the enemies of the Lord … shall come to nothing and vanish like smoke” (Ps 36:20)

Lying in State, the Body of Francis Appears to be Turning Dark

(image: Antonio Masiello/Getty Images – cropped)

The body of the late Jesuit apostate Jorge Bergoglio (‘Pope Francis’) has been lying in state inside an open coffin in St. Peter’s Basilica since Tuesday, April 22. Tens of thousands of mourners have been paying their respects.

On Friday evening at 8:00 pm local time, the casket will be sealed. The funeral will take place on Saturday at 10:00 am, followed by a procession to the Basilica of St.… READ MORE

The picture above is the niche at St. Mary Mary wherein Antipope Bergolio will be interred in the ground beneath that slab.

Flashback (sorry, tldr, but worth it):

Visibility: God is not a jerk, the signs are literally everywhere, WAKE UP

Originally posted February 19, 2021

Miss B. has been writing about the satanic pectoral cross that is being used by Antipope Bergoglio as he rules over the anti-church. Closer inspection of said cross reveals more interesting details by the day.

It is the same cross used by the satanic pedo sodo Cardinal Bernardin back in the 1970s-90s, and this hardly seems a coincidence. It was Bernardin who ritualistically raped an 11 year old girl, known as “Agnes,” at a satanic black mass conducted by his bishop John Russell inside St. Mary’s church in Greenville, South Carolina in 1957. Agnes’ story, including her polygraph test results, can be found in Randy Engel’s The Rite of Sodomy, beginning on page 910.

Six years later, just six days into the pontificate of Pope Paul VI of odious memory, another black mass was conducted for the enthronement of Satan at the Vatican, inside the Pauline Chapel, on the Feast of SS Peter and Paul, 29 June 1963. It is at this event where Malachi Martin uses creative license to place Agnes’ rape in Windswept House. This black mass/enthronement was, at the time, the crowning achievement of the Sodo-Masonic infiltration, where they intended and “prayed for” the true Catholic Church to be subsumed by the anti-church, as the “Universal Church of Man” (Windswept House, beginning on page 16).

It makes one wonder if the events in Greenville were in fact an enthronement of Satan in the United States of America. The timing seems about right, doesn’t it? Bernardin went on to become a bishop at the age of 38, head of the USCCB, and finally Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago in 1982. He ruled the American Church and hand picked practically every bishop until his death in 1996.

Fast-forward to 2019-21. Moloch-worshiping “catholic” faux POTUS in DC, subject of Cardinal Archbishop Wilton Gregory, who himself was personally chosen and consecrated a bishop at the age of 36 at the hands of Bernardin. Arch-heretic antipope squatting on the Chair of St. Peter. Lies and blasphemies on a daily basis. Diabolical inversion of truth regarding all manner of the moral law. Pachamama enthroned… demon worship inside St. Peter’s and on the high altar itself. Then shortly thereafter, the true and pure unblemished sacrifice was taken away altogether; there has not been Mass said on that altar – the pope’s altar – in nearly a year. Do you think that too might be a visible sign of something being very, very wrong? https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/a-symbolic-sign-after-the-pachamama-worship-at-st-peters-papal-altar-unused-for-months-now

I am mirroring, below, all three posts from Miss B. regarding the pectoral cross, with permission. I only have two items to add to the backward/inverted leg/foot demon motif: Scroll down to the image of the full cross. First, take a look at the “sheep” on the far left of the cross. I smell bacon. Second, turn the image upside down. Look at the tunic, below the belt. Is that a hand grasping a phallus?

Folks, read it all. Click the links. It’s all out in the open.

The Satanic Bernardin-Bergoglio Pectoral Cross: “Why are the feet facing different directions?” Because the figure isn’t Christ… it is the ANTICHRIST

Now THIS is extremely creepy.

An eagle-eyed reader sent a very short email regarding the posts on the Bernardin-Bergoglio super-creepy pectoral cross. “Why are the feet facing different directions?”

I made the Scooby-Doo inquisitive noise and pulled up my picture and zoomed in on the legs and feet of the figure, and sure enough, absolutely no mistake, the leg on our left is facing backward – you can clearly see the musculature of the calf shows that the view is from the rear, you can see the anatomy of the knee is from the rear, and the foot itself is the view of the Achilles’ tendon and heel. The leg and foot on our right is clearly front-facing, as it should be.

So I start looking up “backward leg or foot” and… guys, it’s NEVER good. It is a UNIVERSAL motif of the demonic. As in, inversion, mirror images, the sowing of confusion, deception, leading people astray, especially children, oftentimes to ritual death. Just a few of the demonic “backwards leg/foot” entries include:

Tata Duende (Mayan demon, child kidnapper)

Churel (South Asian demon, vampiric, hunts young men especially)

Pichal Peri (Himalayan demon)

Curupira (Brazilian demon)

Bhoots (Indian demon-ghosts)

Ciguapa (Dominican Republic demon)

Again, the common linkage with the motif of one or both legs/feet being reversed is that of DECEPTION and leading victims astray by confusion. Is the demon coming or going? Which way is it facing? The demon has a superficial initial appearance of normalcy, but is actually an inversion or MIRROR IMAGE.

If this isn’t apropos of the Bergoglian Antipapacy and the Antichurch of which he is the public face, I don’t know what is.

So now we not only see why the Bernardin-Bergoglio “pectoral cross” has a figure with a reversed leg and foot, but we also see the significance to the Luciferian cabal of usurpers at war with Jesus Christ and His Holy Church.

The figure on the Bernardin-Bergoglio pectoral cross isn’t Christ. It is the ANTICHRIST.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on February 19, ARSH 2021 by Ann Barnhardt.

More Photo Evidence on the Satanist Cardinal Bernardin, His Creepy Pectoral Cross That Antipope Bergoglio Also Wears, and the Satanic Grand Orient

Original post here.

Now, add:

https://oto-uk.org

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on February 18, ARSH 2021 by Ann Barnhardt.

Remember Antipope Bergoglio’s creepy pectoral Cross? Well, it’s EXACTLY the same Cross worn by the Satanist pedophile rapist, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin

Okay. Bernardin was the American satanist who was shot straight to the top of the American church and decided who was elevated to the episcopacy in the US from the late 1960s until his death in ARSH 1996.

Bernardin was the man depicted in the opening chapter of Malachi Martin’s “Windswept House” who co-presided with Bishop John Russell over the black Mass in South Carolina that was performed concurrently with a black Mass in the Pauline Chapel inside the Vatican to “enthrone satan” in the late 1950s. The child who was raped in the South Carolina black Mass, “Agnes”, corresponded with me in ARSH 2014 and confirmed that Bernardin co-presided over the South Carolina black Mass and raped her at the “consecration” equivalent. Agnes’ father was a satanist in South Carolina and provided her to the coven and was present when she was ritually raped.

Bernardin has been recruited by satanists out of the gay bar scene in Charleston when he was a pre-med undergrad at USC. The satanists placed him into seminary and saw to it that he shot straight to the top of the American church. Bernardin was made a bishop at age 38, and at age 40 was the head of the US bishops’ conference, a position of power which he retained until his death, and his coven of protégées still control to this day.

Bernardin was a key supporter of Saul Alinsky, and Bernardin paid for Barack Obama (Barry Soetoro) to be brought to Chicago and be trained in Alinskyism.

Read my piece from ARSH 2012, “The Bernardin-Alinsky-Obama Nexus” here.

Antipope Bergoglio has worn a creepy pectoral Cross with Christ (?) depicted with arms crossed since his elevation in Buenos Aires. On the left is Bergoglio before usurping the Petrine See, and on the right is after the usurpation, with a new silver version of the same Cross:

It is thought that this is actually a satanic icon, rooted in “Osiris”, and that the odd “dove” at the top is actually a goat head with horns, stylized so as to be claimed to be “a dove”. The face of the man looks like an evil death mask.

Not coincidentally, in December of ARSH 2019, a Pachamama worship ritual was performed at a televised Vatican “Christmas concert”, led by an Amazonian witch. These were the last days before the global putsch of the Covid political religion and the global interdict of the Catholic Church. This screen cap is literally of the Pachamama worship ritual inside the Paul VI hall inside the Vatican:

But here’s the new info, sent in by an eagle-eyed reader. This pectoral cross that Antipope Bergoglio wears is EXACTLY the same as that worn by the Satanist Cardinal Bernardin:

Interestingly, Wilton Gregory, the black sodomite hand-picked by the faggot Cardinal Donald Wuerl, himself a protégée of Uncle Ted McCarrick, to replace Wuerl in Washington DC, was Bernardin’s protégée (and assumed sodomy partner.) Here is a picture of the known satanist and child rapist Bernardin consecrating Wilton Gregory a Bishop at age 36, on Halloween ARSH 1983, and a picture of Gregory serving Bernardin’s Mass. You can see the edge of Bernardin’s pectoral Cross. Given Wilton Gregory’s flaming homosexuality and intimate connection with Bernardin, it is not at all unreasonable to suspect Wilton Gregory of being connected to Satanism. Which makes him just perfect to be the Cardinal Archbishop of Washington DC.

Editor’s Note: This essay is part of a week-long series of essays at Public Discourse reflecting on Pope Francis’s pontificate, his legacy, and the Catholic Church’s future.

Witnessing the tireless dedication of Pope Francis over the last twelve years to those most in need—the poor, the sick, the rejected, those suffering in body and spirit—was an extraordinary gift to me. After his passing, I found myself thinking: How often today does God bless his people with a shepherd, particularly one with significant health challenges, who devotes such intense energy and affection to all that seek his attention?

I have no idea how Catholic prelates can prepare for the task of governing such a large organization in our complex and tumultuous world. Buenos Aires is not an easy place to be bishop: when asked why he never visited his homeland after his election, Pope Francis would joke, “I spent 76 years in Argentina. That’s enough, isn’t it?” But it was his home, and when he became Bishop of Rome, he came to a very different place, both in the culture of its people and in the particular issues that the Church faced there. What a profound cross it must have been for him to be suddenly, and unexpectedly, catapulted from being a subway-riding bishop on the verge of retirement, to steering the universal Church through the perilous waters of sex scandals and the Vatican’s grave financial difficulties. 

Even apart from the perennial challenges of governance, contemporary popes face the perennial task of confronting the needs of the wounded modern world—“smelling of the sheep,” as Francis would say—without becoming of the world. I especially appreciated the pope’s focus on fighting clericalism and raising up the laity and their contributions to the Church. On one hand, clergy need to learn how to leave in the laity’s hands the political and other temporal responsibilities that are the latter’s proper domain; on the other hand, the laity should often be called to assist the clergy in matters of the latter’s own proper responsibilities of Church government. Harmonizing these apparently dueling needs is no easy task; it is especially difficult when coupled with the challenge in any large organization—like the Church—of finding and training the right people to assume positions of leadership.

Pope Francis also devoted much of his pontificate to the challenge of implementing a culture of love in support of the truth in contemporary culture—a culture that does not grasp what authentic love is, because we treat love as a commodity. Many people—young people especially—are eager for caritas in veritate, and the pope sought to teach it to them through many of the themes of his pontificate: accompanying others, recognizing the concrete circumstances that we fallen human beings can find ourselves in, and always being witnesses to God’s infinite mercy. 

Learning to Find Friends in Unexpected Places

The occasion of the pope’s passing gives us a chance to reflect on the lessons he has left us on how to give witness to truth and love in the modern world. What is the path forward—for the Church and for all people of goodwill? Following the pope’s example, we should ask how God is calling ordinary men and women to engage with the world today—a world in which people, particularly young people brought up amid a culture of chaos and confusion, are calling out for meaning and purpose. The question is especially urgent for those of us, like myself, who grew up in very different circumstances, often with more support than what many young people today have. I was blessed to be raised by a hard-working father who revered his wife, and a loving and deeply God-fearing mother, who both generously gave themselves to me and my six siblings. Not everything was great: I was raised in a small, poor town in Mexico’s Sonoran desert—now the cradle of the Caborca drug cartel. But on the whole, I had a very happy childhood. My young adult years were similarly fortunate. I earned advanced degrees, moved to the United States where I enjoyed enormous opportunities, and, thanks to the intervention of a friend and one of my brothers, I was rescued from going down the wrong path. I found a better way to which God was calling me, in Opus Dei. 

The spirit of Opus Dei, a part of the Catholic Church, encompasses many ideals, one of which is the commitment to finding God in the parts of life where he might at first seem most distant. Pope Francis himself expressed this ideal very well in an audience of his I attended in November 2014:

When the Lord invites us to become saints, he doesn’t call us to something heavy, sad . . . quite the contrary! It’s an invitation to share in his joy, to live and to offer with joy every moment of our life, by making it become at the same time a gift of love for the people around us. If we understand this, everything changes and takes on new meaning, a beautiful meaning, a meaning that begins with little everyday things. For example: a lady goes to the market to buy groceries and finds a neighbour there, so they begin to talk and then they come to gossiping and this lady says: “No, no, no I won’t speak badly about anyone.” This is a step towards sainthood, it helps you become more holy. Then, at home, your son wants to talk a little about his ideas: “Oh, I am so tired, I worked so hard today. . . .”—“But,” [you tell yourself,] “you sit down and listen to your son, who needs it!” . . . [T]his is a step towards sainthood. . . .  These are little things, but many little steps to sanctity. Every step towards sainthood makes us better people, free from selfishness and being closed within ourselves, and opens us to our brothers and sisters and to their needs.

Eventually I came to see that one area of secular life where people needed more help finding God’s truth was, paradoxically, in academia—in institutions of higher education ostensibly devoted to truth. I made my way to Princeton, New Jersey, where I helped start the Witherspoon Institute and the Foundation for Excellence in Higher Education (FEHE). I saw these as means to help students and professors rediscover higher education’s vocation to truth-seeking—and perhaps, from knowing the truth, to eventually find its Author. 

But I soon discovered another truth that Pope Francis recalled frequently throughout his papacy: that even those who seemed far from God, at least outwardly, could teach me a thing or two. One such person was my good friend, Princeton Professor Robert “Bob” Hollander. I got to know Bob through our common interest in tennis, which we regularly played together. I learned much from him during our after-game conversations about many things unrelated to religion. Bob eventually told me he was atheist, which for a young, zealous Christian like me was unacceptable. At first I asked myself, “Do I want to spend so much of my time with a heathen?” But I resisted my initial impulse to quit our friendship, and years later I came to realize what a good decision that was. Bob eventually had a profound, positive impact on me, because he helped me understand friendship better, thereby bringing me closer to the truth and to God. More practically, he gave me invaluable counsel at crucial moments, without which Witherspoon and FEHE might never have come to be.

Not many years after I came to the Princeton area and befriended Bob, I read an article that discussed Princeton University’s desire to expand its humanities offerings. I saw this as an opportunity for me to start contributing directly to higher education, by finding money to support Princeton’s effort. I was an engineer by training, not a humanist, so I could contribute little in the way of academic expertise; but I did have a lot of experience raising money for nonprofit work, from my time in Opus Dei. I went to Bob with an idea and a proposal: What if I could obtain a grant to support a postdoctoral fellowship at Princeton’s Humanities Council? Would Princeton be interested? Bob’s response was immediate: We can make this happen. 

And it did happen, but by a path that I would not have expected. Bob helped organize a lunch with Alexander Nehamas and Carol Rigolot—respectively the Chair and Executive Director of Princeton’s Humanities Council—along with Bob, and myself, to talk about the possible grant. I felt myself surrounded by people who were, in Pope Francis’s words, “on the margins” of God’s Kingdom—people who were quite secular and perhaps even in personal disagreement with Christian teachings. At the time Opus Dei was known for being “ultraconservative,” and therefore I felt the need to mention this fact to them, in case they feared it might cause controversy. 

But my fear turned out to be unfounded. Nehamas and Rigolot welcomed the proposal for the fellowship, which was filled first by the late Michael Sugrue in the 1997–98 academic year. Nehamas found Sugrue to be “an exceptional teacher-scholar,” and he and others expressed sincere gratitude to me for helping bring him to Princeton. The experience was such a success that the Humanities Council eventually developed the fellowship into Princeton’s Society of Fellows, which today offers some of the most prestigious and sought-after opportunities in the academy. By taking this risk, Bob and I helped spur a renewal of humanities teaching at Princeton.

I later asked Bob why people who did not share my fundamental beliefs about truth would have gone along with my idea. He thought they simply didn’t care what I believed. He quipped after one of our tennis matches, “Luis, you are not a threat around here because you are Mexican, you are an engineer, and you didn’t go to Princeton.” I laughed hard. All the same, I think that particular experience revealed something that Pope Francis had been trying to remind us of: that the desire for truth is in everyone, and that if we present our interest in truth joyfully, even those who disagree with us might still recognize us as friends.

The things I learned from this experience planted the seeds in my mind for bigger projects. Five years later, in 2003, Robert P. George and I launched the Witherspoon Institute. Our idea was to sponsor teaching and research that we thought was urgently needed in academia but did not yet fit into its priorities. A particular area of concern to us was research on the importance of the traditional structure of the family to the well-being of children and all of society. Perhaps the most famous such project that we sponsored was the 2012 New Family Structures Study of Mark Regnerus. Through the use of good-faith and reason-based empirical methods, Regnerus did an enormous service to our understanding of the family, despite suffering a great deal of ideologically motivated backlash, thanks to Witherspoon’s support. And despite criticism, the research still stands today. Over time more and more people are coming to recognize its truth.

In 2013, Robby George and I founded the Foundation for Excellence in Higher Education (FEHE) to help students pursue truth through authentic friendship and robust intellectual life. Among the numerous related projects in which I have been involved, none gives me greater satisfaction than the Stanford Civics Initiative (SCI), which I helped Josiah (“Josh”) Ober to found and develop. Although in the end my contribution to the project was minor, I’ve been blessed by the deep and lasting friendship I developed with Josh as a result—a friendship as unexpected as that which I made with Bob.

I would have been able to do none of these things had I not, as Pope Francis exhorted us, taken the chance to befriend a man like Bob, even though on the surface we might have seemed unsuited for one another. Bob gave me practical guidance without which my ideals would not have become a reality. But more importantly, he reminded me that even people who seem far from God still bear the dignity of being made in God’s image. Even though they may not recognize God—or at least appear not to do so—they are still made for him, and for truth, which they are always seeking in one way or another. I think that the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus articulated this point quite well:

For paradise we long. For perfection we were made . . . This longing is the source of the hunger and dissatisfaction that mark our lives . . . This longing makes our love and friendship possible, and so very unsatisfactory. Hunger is for . . . nothing less than perfect communion with the . . . one in whom all the fragments of our scattered existence come together . . . we must not stifle this longing. It is a holy dissatisfaction. Such dissatisfaction is not a sickness to be healed, but the seed of a promise to be fulfilled.

The desire for truth can become a powerful bond of friendship—“intellectual friendship” as we say at Witherspoon and FEHE—as my friendship with Bob showed me. The experience also taught me to expand my heart, to understand better the mystery of what it means to be a person. Without this man, an atheist, I would have been a lesser human being. And, of course, Bob benefited from my friendship in turn: not just by the friendship itself, but from participating in the good it did for higher education—whether directly, in the Society of Fellows, or indirectly in the projects to which the Society gave rise: Witherspoon and FEHE. And then there were the occasional discussions about religion that we would have after tennis. I still maintain the hope that, when he died, the memory of those conversations helped him, in some mysterious way, to go to God. 

Building Blocks for Civic Engagement in a Secular World

Pope Francis, it seems to me, was trying throughout his pontificate to urge Christians to find their “Bob” who might be out there—someone who, despite appearing to be far from God, is still searching for truth and friendship, has much truth to impart in turn, and has much good to do in the world that he might not do without our help. Bob taught me a great deal, but two things seem especially worth noting, since they were also close to the pope’s heart. They are what I call building blocks for civic engagement in our secular world. 

The first is that which the Church proclaimed in Dignitatis Humanae and reaffirmed under Pope Francis. That every human person, even if he is an atheist like Bob, has an ineradicable dignity, because he is a being 

“endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility.” At the same time every person is “impelled by nature” to seek truth, and we should strive not to let appearances distract us from this deeper reality. And yet, “[t]he truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it makes its entrance into the mind at once quietly and with power.” Therefore man cannot fulfill his “moral obligation to seek truth” unless he be free, “[enjoying] immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom.” 

In other words, the best context for bringing others to truth is precisely through the kind of intellectual friendship that Bob and I had. 

The second truth is something I learned through my work with Witherspoon and FEHE (which were inspired by what Bob and I achieved at Princeton University): namely, how vital the man-woman traditional family structure is for society. I also realized how important intellectual friendship was for defending the family. On one hand, the best way to make the case for the family is by appealing to truths that all people can understand—in this case, the truths of social science—and we must be confident that people will respond to truth. At the same time, that truth has to be presented well, by being framed in love. We need to be patient with those who disagree on fundamental truths about marriage and family, and we must strive to express ourselves in ways that will win them over. We need to show them that we care about these truths not to impose ourselves on others, but to serve others out of love. We must show our interlocutors that we love and respect them because they, like all people, are God’s children, just as I tried to draw Bob to God above all by being his friend.

Truth and charity should go hand in hand. One cannot love others unless that love is grounded in truth, just as love cannot make a family unless it be grounded in the truths of human nature. At the same time, the deeper one understands the truth, the more one loves it and other people—who are made for truth—and the more easily one can express truth winsomely, because of one’s confidence in its truth. 

It is not enough to have the truth and to be able to argue logically for it, although all that is necessary. As Pope Francis reminded us, it is also vitally important to teach truth by the example of one’s love for others—by “accompanying” them along the difficult journey of life, as the pope liked to say. If we are to move forward toward a more just society, we must learn to accompany one another along the difficult, often surprising, and deeply rewarding path toward truth.

For his willingness to answer God’s call and the call of the Church, and for his faithful service until the end, I am grateful to Pope Francis.

Image by Gabriel Sozzi and sourced from Wikimedia Commons.

If you were to believe pro-abortionists—but who would? —they have assumed the mantle of being “on the side of science.” This one-sided meme is as preposterous as it unscientific.

Whose principles are in harmony with basic biology and specifically human embryology? Ours, of course.

It’s simple. Each of us began our individual lives as human being at conception when sperm and egg united to form a new single-celled organism (the zygote) — a member of our species at the earliest stage of development.

To argue against this you have to pretend, among other things, that human life doesn’t really begin until implantation, which is a political, not a biological, conclusion.

The following is a perfect illustration of the pro-abortion insistence that time (and science and technological advances) stand still.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

When pro-abortion Law Prof. Mary Ziegler once wrote (as she did for The New York Times) that “The Abortion Wars Have Become a Fight Over Science,” she was trying to finesse the reality of fetal pain and the eminently defensible conclusion that abortion can cause “severe emotional disturbances” in some post-abortion women or increase their chances of “sterility.”

Ziegler writes, “Some insisted that fetal viability came earlier than the 24-to-28-week time frame set in Roe,” as if to suggest that believing preemies can be saved earlier and earlier in pregnancy is equivalent to believing the earth is flat.

Tellingly, the link in her 2021 story was to a 1979 Supreme Court decision! Has nothing happened in neonatal intensive care units in over 40 years, let alone since?!

Ziegler also opinions

This year’s skirmish wasn’t actually unusual, however. Rather, it was revealing of a larger shift in the terms of the abortion debate. Over the past few decades, the abortion wars have become as much a fight about science and medicine as they are about the law and the Constitution.

But, of course.

We are far more capable than we were decades and decades ago of understanding the agony that a pain-capable child will experience as she is torn about. We know a hundredfold more about the unborn child’s journey to birth and the remarkable interactions between mother and child.

The science of ultrasound, once extremely primitive, is now in 4-D and in color. We can see unborn children frolicking (so much for blobs of tissue).

We know that when it comes to abortion and anything touching on it, the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society and the American Psychological Association may be “well-established” but (contrary to Ziegler) they are anything but “non-partisan.”

A test of any scientific group’s commitment to the evidence will likely be how it handles the fact that chemical abortions can be reversed, if the second of the two drugs is not taken. However, if, as I suspect, resistance will only harden, no amount of evidence will ever convince pro-abortionists that abortion pill reversal is anything other than “junk science.”

But their resistance is equivalent to trying to make time stand still.

The truth is the “underlying science” is on our side and not our benighted opposition’s.

LifeNews.com Note: Dave Andrusko is the editor of National Right to Life News and an author and editor of several books on abortion topics. He frequently writes Today’s News and Views — an online opinion column on pro-life issues.

The post If You Think Human Life Does Not Begin at Conception, You’re Anti-Science appeared first on LifeNews.com.

On Tuesday April 22, Attorney General Pam Bondi chaired the first meeting of the Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias emanating from Federal government.

AG Bondi summarized the inaugural meeting, “As shown…Biden’s DOJ abused and targeted peaceful Christians while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses.” Bondi declared, “we have ended those abuses….” At a recent White House pre-Easter service with Franklin Graham, President Trump mentioned the anti-Christin bias manifesting in the U.S. saying, “You don’t hear about that very much, but there is anti-Christian bias.”

Please subscribe to the LifeNews YouTube channel for the latest pro-life videos.

CEO of the brutally firebombed pro-life pregnancy center known as CompassCare, Rev. Jim Harden was the first to identify and denounce Biden’s pattern of anti-Christian violence and collusion of government bad actors in those attacks in and following June of 2022, calling for investigation into the FBI for slow-walking investigations into pro-abortion domestic terror. Rev. Harden then predicted that Biden’s DOJ and FBI would join the attacks on peaceful pro-lifers—which began shortly thereafter with the dawn, SWAT-style raid of Mark Houck’s home.

Rev. Harden says, “Once we began to see the obvious pattern of pro-abortion anti-Christian persecution emerging, we starting tracking it on a time-line. The time-line is certainly not exhaustive.” However, Harden continued, “The coordinated anti-Christian violence and lawfare emanating from private and public actors is disturbingly ironic when viewed in the context of a nation founded on a Constitutional Rule of Law with Freedom of Religion listed as first on the Bill of Rights.”

The Task Force members represent a Presidential tour de force, including among others Secretary of State Marco Rubio, HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., and Defense Secretary Pet Hegseth. The Task Force was initiated by President Trump’s Executive Order 14202 on February 6, 2025. The Executive Order states in part, “the [Biden] Administration engaged in an egregious pattern of targeting peaceful Christians, while ignoring violent, anti-Christian offenses.”

This included the unconstitutional conviction and jailing of peaceful pro-lifers while “at the same time…pro-life centers sought justice for violence, theft, and arson perpetrated against them, which the Biden Department of Justice largely ignored.” The EO went on to cite the surging number of attacks on pro-life churches and pregnancy centers by 8-fold through 2023. One of the Task Force functions is to “identify deficiencies in existing laws and enforcement…[contributing] to unlawful anti-Christian governmental or private conduct…[recommending] appropriate actions that agencies may take to remedy failure to fully enforce the law against acts of anti-Christian hostility, vandalism, and violence.”

After three years of ongoing private and government attacks against his organizations in New York, and AG Bondi’s assurance that the attacks emanating from within the Federal government have ceased, Rev. Harden makes the following suggestions: New FBI Director Kash Patel to initiate a nationwide investigation into pro-abortion Antifa now manifesting itself again through Tesla protests. Provide AG Bondi the names for indictment of the Antifa pro-abortion terrorists that firebombed CompassCare. AG Bondi and her team review his 5-Point Plan to Prosecute Corruption in Federal Law Enforcement, his 7-Point Sex Trafficking Opposition Plan and his 9-Point Plan to Protect Women and Children from Abortion Fraud and Injury.

CompassCare helps women have their babies in five pro-life medical offices across New York State and Telecare around the world. CompassCare is a non-profit raising awareness and funds through the annual Walk for Life on May 3, 2025. Become a lifesaver. Go to CompassCareWalk.com today.

The post Trump, Bondi to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias Against Peaceful Pro-Life Americans appeared first on LifeNews.com.

The ACLJ is taking action to defend the constitutional rights of a peaceful pro-life advocate who was threatened with criminal charges for simply exercising his First Amendment freedoms in Carbondale, Illinois.

On April 16, our client Brandon, a sidewalk counselor and founder of Gospel for Life, was peacefully advocating for life with pro-life signs in the public area near an abortion clinic. As part of his outreach, he used small temporary signs similar to a yard-sale sign that read “Please don’t abort your baby” or “Free baby supplies” to women in crisis pregnancies.

That’s when Carbondale officials stepped in – not to protect free speech, but to suppress it.

A city employee, under direction from the city attorney, ordered our client to remove the signs, claiming they violated a local sign ordinance. When Brandon respectfully explained that the signs were legal and he had a right to engage in constitutionally protected speech, the city employee responded bluntly: “No, you don’t.”

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you want to help fight abortion, please donate to LifeNews.com!

Despite Brandon’s full compliance with Carbondale Ordinance 15.4.10.8 – including placing the signs more than 20 feet from any curb – the city escalated the situation. Police officers were called in. Threats of citation and criminal charges followed. Brandon’s pastor called us for help, and we were able to intervene immediately on behalf of our client and prevent an arrest or a citation from being issued.

However, more troubling, when Brandon tried to follow up the next day and inquire about obtaining a sign permit as a nonprofit, he was told by the same city employee who threatened to pull up his signs that no such permit existed – despite the ordinance explicitly providing for one. This was not only misleading but also a blatant misrepresentation of the law.

Let’s be clear: The First Amendment protects the right to speak out in public spaces – especially on matters of public concern. The courts have consistently struck down vague ordinances and arbitrary enforcement that chill free speech. Carbondale’s actions here are not only unconstitutional – they’re dangerous.

As we outlined in our formal demand letter to the City Attorney, we are calling for:

• Written assurance that Brandon may continue his peaceful pro-life advocacy, including the use of compliant temporary signs;
• Access to the proper permitting process for nonprofits as outlined in the city’s own ordinance; and
• Confirmation that signs promoting free resources from pro-life Pregnancy Resource Centers will not be misclassified as “commercial.”

The ACLJ is committed to standing with sidewalk counselors, pro-life advocates, and every American whose constitutional rights are under attack. Brandon was not disrupting traffic, blocking access, or inciting unrest. He was offering compassion, hope, and alternatives – something the First Amendment was designed to protect.

We will not let cities like Carbondale, Illinois, weaponize vague laws or bureaucratic red tape to silence and retaliate against the pro-life message. If the city does not immediately cease it’s unconstitutional activity, we will file a lawsuit.

Stand with us. Share this story. And pray for continued courage for pro-life heroes like Brandon.

LifeNews Note: Jordan Sekulow is the Executive Director of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ).

The post Man Threatened With Criminal Charges for Holding Pro-Life Sign appeared first on LifeNews.com.

Good morning to you all, and a continued Happy Easter! Christus Surrexit! Surrexit Vere!

I apologize yet again, to those very few who enjoy reading here, for light blogging in the extreme lately. If you only knew how the current state of national policies is increasing my workload…

Long days, long, long days. Stuporous nights.

Anyway, to the post. The title of this post is a callback to an ancient local Catholic blog that adopted the puntastic name you see up top. It also describes the content herein. No one asked, so here are some of my random things to say about the upcoming conclave and pope business stuff:

1. I’ll move past the fact that with things being so crazy and unreal these days my first thought was that it was super convenient to use JD Vance’s visit to Bergoglio as a means to definitively fix the time of his death. As in, he didn’t die long ago when no one had any proof of life for like a fortnight in the hospital. JD saw him! All the appointments made after hospitalization were A-OK, super humble as usual. Perry Mason stuff. I say I am moving past it because who is to say who’s been making the appointments all along? And they sure are from the same spirit that animates them all. In other words, maybe one day we will learn but right now there are bigger fish to fry.
2. As any Catholic would for any soul that leaves this life, even one who appears quite vile, I pray for repentance, mercy and salvation. Heck, it was my last blog post. But this post that describes the “traditionalist response” to Bergoglio’s death is beyond dreck. I read an excerpt of the piece at another site and stifled a gag reflex. And then I realized that it was from T.S. Flanders at OnePeterFive. So “traditionalist” was just an expression one uses without knowing its meaning, I guess.
3. Ann Barnhardt’s novena to St. Catherine of Siena for a restoration of the papacy and a holy and true pope is a very good intention to a very good saint. I recommend it to everyone. Mundabor’s prayer for us to be given an “unmerited break” is spot-on as well.
4. Archbishop Vigano, who, if we really do get an unmerited break, seems like an excellent choice to be pope, gave an interview that went unpublished, so he is publishing the questions and answers at his X site. Here is one that gets to things pretty well:

“What will be the future of the Church now that Pope Francis has died?”

“The death of Bergoglio crystallizes, so to speak, a situation of widespread illegitimacy. Of the 136 Cardinal electors, 108 were “created” by him; which means that whatever Pope is elected in the upcoming Conclave – even if he were a new Saint Pius X – his authority will be compromised by having been elected by false cardinals, created by a false Pope. For this reason, some time ago, I asked my Brothers in the Episcopate to clarify these aspects before they proceed with the election of a new Pope.   Certainly, the situation is disastrous and humanly without a solution. However, as Bishop and Successor of the Apostles I cannot help but remind everyone that the Church, which is the Mystical Body of Christ, is destined to face the passio Ecclesiæ following the example of the Lord. It will be precisely from this passion – in which everything will seem lost as on that Good Friday 1,992 years ago – that the Church will be reborn, regenerated, and purified.   During these days in which we celebrate Easter, every Catholic finds in Christ’s triumph over death and sin the reasons for their own faithfulness to the Gospel. Our Lord told us, shortly before He faced His Passion: Do not be afraid: I have overcome the world.”

5. Finally, a question many have asked over the last 12 years, myself included, is what to make of the upcoming conclave if one takes into account that it is governed by Universi Dominci Gregis, the Apostolic Constitution of Pope John Paul II, with some modifications by Pope Benedict XVI, and one further considers that Bergoglio has purported to make the overwhelming majority of voting age “Cardinals”, as Vigano describes above. Yet further consider that not all, but most, of these were “made Cardinals” and then immediately walked over to see Pope Benedict XVI, with beaming photos and what not. In other words, were these men actually made Cardinals by the Pope Benedict XVI? One is sure of nothing here. But UDG requires that only Cardinals can participate in the conclave.

There is so much shrouded in things we cannot know that it seems like the foggy gnostic mists of actual sedevacantism loom. We pray to God to avoid that morass. Because, as others have pointed out, the Church of Christ is VISIBLE. And she endures to the end of time and in eternity. Pope Benedict’s purported resignation while remaining pope was visible. Whether the next group of men who enter the conclave are all Cardinals is not so visible. I have speculated that perhaps if the pre-Bergoglian Cardinals participate and back the selection it may be enough. According to the terms of the governing law it may not. I decline to make that call, at least not now.

It will be tough enough (speaking in purely human terms) to get a true pope, let alone a good one, let alone a holy one. One of the intentions in the St. Catherine of Siena novena prayer is for the good Lord to let us clearly see where His Church is so we may support and love her– and most importantly be counted among her members. But Christ is steadfast and He is omnipotent. We can and must trust Him in this as in all things. Watch and pray…

I think I will take some time in the interregnum to reread the legal texts above and pray to God that He has mercy on us.

And always avoid any suggestion or temptation to see the Church or this election as a political matter.

The Catholic Church risks a schism if it does not choose an “orthodox” leader, German Cardinal Gerhard Müller has warned ahead of next month’s conclave.

Müller, 77, has long been a leading light among traditional Catholics who often opposed the reformist approach of Pope Francis, and he is one of a handful of “conservative thinkers” in the Catholic Church based in Rome, alongside US Cardinal Raymond Burke, reports The Times.

Müller says he disagrees with the use of the labels “liberal” and “conservative” for the Catholic Church, pointing out the divide in the Church is deeper. The new pope, he said, “must be orthodox – neither a liberal nor a conservative”.

He said that “the question is not between conservatives and liberals but between orthodoxy and heresy”, adding: “I am praying that the Holy Spirit will illuminate the cardinals, because a heretic pope who changes every day depending on what the mass media is saying would be catastrophic.”

The next pope, Müller argues, should not “look for the applause of the secular world that sees the Church as a humanitarian organisation doing social work”.

Müller described Francis as a “good man” though they disagreed on much. Müller listed his differences with Francis, starting with the late pope’s 2023 decision to allow the blessing of same-sex couples. Pope Francis said at the time that “we cannot be judges who only deny, push back, exclude”, but the move sparked enormous controversy, with bishops in Africa and Asia refusing to permit the blessings.

The list of Müller’s grievances with Francis’s papacy also extends to the late pontiff’s focus on migrants and the environment, The Times reports.

Müller notes that “Pope Francis is well viewed by the mass media and there is a risk [the cardinals] are saying, ‘We should continue’”. Instead, he said, “they have the responsibility [at the conclave] to elect a man who is able to unify the Church in the revealed truth”.

RELATED: Cardinal Nichols on conclave vote: ‘intimidating’ but it’s our duty

He added: “I hope cardinals are not so influenced by what they are reading in the headlines.”

Nearly 80 per cent of the 135 cardinals eligible to vote were picked by Francis, pointing to a potential so-called liberal majority within the conclave, The Times reports. But the views of many will not be known until they mingle with fellow cardinals at the pre-conclave meetings known as general congregations, and which could well influence subsequent votes.

Asked if he would promote his brand of doctrinal Catholicism at those meetings, which begin in earnest after Francis’s funeral this Saturday, Müller said: “I have to do it; I owe it to my conscience.”

The alternative, he cautioned, was a Church that risks splitting in two if an “orthodox” pope is not elected.

“No Catholic is obliged to obey doctrine that is wrong,” he said, adding: “Catholicism is not about blindly obeying the Pope without respecting holy scriptures, tradition and the doctrine of the Church.”

Appointed by Francis’s traditionalist predecessor Benedict XVI as the Vatican’s doctrinal chief, Müller kept his job after the Argentinian pontiff’s election in 2013 but soon challenged his leader’s liberal agenda.

In 2017 he was dropped by Francis after criticising the Pope’s decision to allow communion for divorcees who remarry outside the church. His views are likely representative of other “conservative” cardinals determined to elect a more orthodox successor to Francis.

A former bishop of Regensburg in Germany, Müller has also been the head of dogmatic theology at Munich’s Ludwig Maximilian University.

In a 2023 book that The Times says “will be a convenient manual for conservatives at the conclave”, Müller criticised Francis’s deal with China to jointly appoint bishops, likening it to Vatican appeasement of the Nazis in the 1930s and warning: “You cannot strike deals with the devil.”

Gerhard Müller also cautioned cardinals arriving for the conclave vote to avoid the backroom manoeuvres depicted in the Oscar-winning film Conclave.

“It’s not a power game played by stupid people looking to manipulate, like in this film, which has nothing to do with reality,” the German cardinal said.

RELATED: Social media push for Cardinal Sarah as next pope gains momentum

Photo: German Cardinal Gerhard Müller attends the funeral procession of Cardinal Joachim Meisner in Cologne. (Credit Elke Wetzig.)

The post Cardinal Müller warns Church risks split if ‘orthodox’ pope not chosen first appeared on Catholic Herald.

The post Cardinal Müller warns Church risks split if ‘orthodox’ pope not chosen appeared first on Catholic Herald.

Filipino Cardinal Pablo Virgilio David has downplayed talk about “popular candidates” in the upcoming conclave that will occur following the death of Pope Francis on Easter Monday.

David, who left Manila for Rome on the morning of 24 April to attend Pope Francis’s funeral on Saturday and then to participate in the subsequent conclave, said a papal election is unlike the political processes seen in different parts of the globe.

“There are no candidates in a conclave,” David, the bishop of Kalookan, told reporters on Tuesday after a Mass celebrated for the repose of Pope Francis’s soul at Kalookan Cathedral.

David dispelled the notion that the conclave is like a political election – a relevant comparison given the Philippines is holding its midterm elections on May 12. “No one will give dole-outs. No one will put up tarpaulins. No one will mount a campaign,” the cardinal said.

“A conclave is a retreat. The cardinals will pray, and it is in the spirit of prayer that we will ask not whom we want to elect, but whom the Lord wants to succeed Pope Francis.

“That’s why we have a big moral and spiritual obligation to enter into the conclave, not in the spirit of politics but in the spirit of prayer for the continuity of the mission of the Church,” David said.

Cardinal Pablo Virgilio David attends a Mass with new Cardinals at St Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, 8 December 2024. (Photo by ANDREAS SOLARO/AFP via Getty Images.)

David, 66, is the 10th cardinal from the Philippines, and is participating in a conclave for the first time. He was part of the last batch of cardinals created by Pope Francis on 7 December 2024.

David, known for his opposition to former president Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs, is also the president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.

He has been cheered by supporters as a possible replacement for Francis. His college schoolmate when he attended a Jesuit university – Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle – is also a popular papabile from the Philippines.

Containing 86 million Catholics, the Philippines is the biggest Catholic-majority country in Asia and the third biggest in the world. This makes the papal election a highly-charged topic in the country both online and offline, prompting clergymen such as David to educate their flock about the nature of a conclave.

In his interview with journalists on 22 April, David said that since the conclave is a “retreat”, part of the cardinals’ duty is to discern through getting to know their fellow cardinals better.

One way by which they get acquainted with each other, according to David, is by writing each other personal letters.

He said another way is by doing research, noting that there is a website compiling the biographical data and other basic information about the different cardinals. “I am there. I was surprised, I didn’t even know who did my write-up,” he said.

When asked about the qualities of the next pope, David said he should be “somebody who will sustain the vision of Pope Francis of synodality”.

Referring to Francis’s synodal vision, David added: “That’s his biggest contribution – to propel the Church in mission. That the Church should not be too ‘churchy’ and inward-looking. That it should open its doors and look outside, at society. Because we have a mission: We are the salt of the earth, we are the light of the world.”

RELATED: Cardinal Müller warns Church risks split if ‘orthodox’ pope not chosen

When it comes to the Church and “our impact on society”, he cautioned: “So what if we are building big parishes, but we don’t make a difference in society?”

When asked about the possibility that the Catholic Church will gain an Asian pope, David said, “Well, in our time, anything can be made possible by the Holy Spirit.”

“It’s true: Before, the Global North was the centre. Now, the majority of the Catholics are in the Global South,” the cardinal said.

He noted that the bishops of the Global South have even banded together to form the Conferences of the Global South, composed of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences and their Latin American and African counterparts.

They often hold Zoom meetings, he said, as “a way to strengthen the bonding of the Global South”.

Despite this shift in the global landscape of the Catholic Church, the Filipino bishops have continued urging Filipino Catholics not to treat the forthcoming conclave like a horse race.

A spokesperson for the Filipino bishops’ conference appealed to Filipinos not to campaign online for one of their own: Tagle, pro-prefect of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Evangelisation and former archbishop of Manila, and who is widely viewed as a strong contender.

“We leave it to the cardinal electors to decide who will succeed Pope Francis,” Father Jerome Secillano, executive secretary of the CBCP Episcopal Commission on Public Affairs, said on Radio Veritas.

“It’s not prudent for the public to promote Cardinal Tagle as the next pope, as this could create the impression that the conclave might be swayed by external influences, if Cardinal Tagle [were to be] elected as the next pontiff.”

Secillano, who is also the spokesperson of the Archdiocese of Manila, added: “The independence of the electors must be respected, and the least we can do is pray for Cardinal Tagle and the other cardinal electors.”

RELATED: ‘Papabile’ of the Day: Cardinal Parolin

Photo: People react as white smoke rises from the chimney on the roof of the Sistine Chapel indicating that the College of Cardinals have elected a new pope, Vatican, Vatican City, 13 March 2013. Pope Francis had been chosen as the 266th Pontiff, and as Benedict XVI’s successor, selected by the College of Cardinals in conclave in the Sistine Chapel. (Photo by Franco Origlia/Getty Images.)

The post A conclave doesn’t deal in ‘candidates’, cardinal explains first appeared on Catholic Herald.

The post A conclave doesn’t deal in ‘candidates’, cardinal explains appeared first on Catholic Herald.