Dr. Anthony Fauci’s Brooklyn stickball days were anything but evident when he threw out the ceremonial first pitch of Major League’s Baseball (MLB) season’s opener between the New York Yankees and Washington Nationals in D.C, proving he doesn’t want anyone catching anything.
Perhaps Fauci thought he was there to throw out the First Amendment.
Maybe, Fauci is all bat and no balls, or as the New York Post put it, his pitch had finally flattened the curve straight into the ground. The screwball attempt was about as accurate as his advice for immobilizing the COVID pandemic.
If anything, Fauci should be cited for baseball malpractice.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ATLANTA, GA – Procession of Hearts (recently organized by lay Catholics in the Archdiocese of Atlanta) plans to hold a procession, on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15th, 2020, in downtown Atlanta to pray the Holy Rosary and consecrate the city and the state of Georgia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The group prays that the Lord will encourage other faithful Catholics to join the Procession of Hearts in other cities and towns.
A response to people who use the classic fallacious argument, "Well, if masks don't work, then why do surgeons wear them?"
I'm a surgeon that has performed over 10,000 surgical procedures wearing a surgical mask. However, that fact alone doesn't really qualify me as an expert on the matter. More importantly, I am a former editor of a medical journal. I know how to read the medical literature, distinguish good science from bad, and fact from fiction. Believe me, the medical literature is filled with bad fiction masquerading as medical science. It is very easy to be deceived by bad science.
Dr. Birx adds her expertise and sensitive touch to Commander Fauci’s suggestion that we include GOGGLES to our COVID arsenal.
So, quick! Grab your shopping list and write the following: masks, gloves, goggles, face shields, macaroni, glitter, craft glue - and underline goggles a bunch of times.
Birx makes a great case for the goggles, and she does so with finesse, telling us that we can even decorate our face shields because the American people are so innovative in times of crisis.
What a sweet idea! A chance to prove, innovative as we are, that we have quirky little personalities hidden behind all the soul-cancelling PPE!
Don’t believe me? First we have Fauci on goggles and mucus membranes:
Dr. Anthony Fauci to @DrJAshton : "If you have goggles or an eye shield, you should use it. It's not universally recommended, but if you really want to be complete, you should probably use it if you can." https://t.co/G8GrQyoJal pic.twitter.com/OpOf9tC6q4— ABC News (@ABC) July 29, 2020
Followed by Birx’s feminine interpretation:
It's craft hour with Dr. Birx over here in America, Land of the PPE and home of the Kindergartners.
BREITBART: Poland has announced it will withdraw from the Istanbul Convention, a treaty which requires that governments actively promote gender theory through the media and education system.
Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro said problems with the treaty eroded parents’ rights by necessitating far-left social policies be promoted to children.
According to Article 12 of the treaty, governments who sign the document must “take the necessary measures to promote changes in the social and cultural patterns of behaviour of women and men with a view to eradicating prejudices, customs, traditions and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority of women or on stereotyped roles for women and men”.
Asking whether ordinary citizens in countries like Britain, where the government has signed the Istanbul Convention, “realise that their leaders have signed them up to support a mini-Cultural Revolution”, University of Swansea law professor, Andrew Tettenborn, notes that there is “more than a whiff of totalitarianism” about the treaty’s requirements, and he has commented that the Istanbul Convention does nothing to protect females from domestic violence. He writes:
This provision for the compulsory instilling of a thoroughly ideological position ought to worry anyone concerned with parental rights to educate children according to their own beliefs, not to mention the ability of communities to set up schools so as educate children within reason according to their norms.
Poland’s conservative president, Andrzej Duda, was re-elected earlier this month after promising to “defend children from LGBT ideology” in schools and to protect the interests of the family and the institution of marriage if given a second term. After his re-election, he visited Jasna Góra Monastery in Częstochowa to participate in the evening prayer and to entrust Poland and himself to Our Lady's care:
Hungary passed a similar declaration against signing the Istanbul Convention, distrusting the treaty’s claim that gender is a “social construct” and its provisions to allow “gender-based asylum claims”.
REMNANT COMMENT: Maybe that's why the New York Times came out swinging this morning against, guess who? Poland and Hungary. The respective leaders of each country were labeled the EU's "major problem":
NYTimes: Europe has a major problem.
It has a rising autocratic movement that the continent’s leaders have no clear strategy for confronting. If anything, the pandemic has strengthened the most autocratic E.U. governments, in Hungary and Poland. Other countries have put a higher priority on fighting the virus and helping the economy than trying to stop the erosion of democracy.
In a telltale escalation in Big Tech censorship, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube all removed a video on COVID-19 that President Trump had promoted Monday evening.
The video garnered over 17 million views during the eight hours it was hosted on Facebook, until it was taken down from Facebook and banned from YouTube. The video was of a press conference in D.C., held by the group America’s Frontline Doctors and organized and sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots.
It was the top-performing Facebook post in the world Monday afternoon.
The press conference featured Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) and frontline doctors sharing their views and opinions on coronavirus and the medical response to the pandemic.
Yesterday’s press conference still appears in full on some platforms, such as BitChute.
Church of terminal tone deafness
If you've been thinking the Bergoglian Vatican has been a bit quiet lately, today's your day for some excitement. The Congregation for Clergy has released an Instruction: “The pastoral conversion of the parish community at the service of the evangelizing mission of the Church” ... and it only gets better from there.
Imagine the kind of mind that would think, in the middle of 2020, that this was a good way to start:
"The ecclesiological reflection of the Second Vatican Council, together with the considerable social and cultural changes of recent decades, has resulted in various Particular Churches having to reorganize the manner in which the pastoral care of Parish communities are assigned. This has made it possible to initiate new experiences..."
You don’t say! Yep! We’ve certainly had quite a lot of new experiences, especially recently!
I'll see if I can do an approximate, on-the-fly translation:
In the last 50 years, the Catholic Church has flowed merrily along with the secular world down the sewage pipe of Modernity. We are now in such a calamitous state that the institutions of the Catholic Church are barely capable of even pretending to continue to function. We are therefore dedicated to finding new ways to carry on toward our all-but-inevitable total collapse, without ever admitting that the Big Giant Trouble is in fact something we ourselves are responsible for.
"Far from being deterred by our impending doom, and following the divine precept: 'Never let a crisis go to waste,' we are pleased to announce the next round of 'new experiences' that we know you're going to love..."
Some pertinent quotes the mainstream media are certainly going to love:
The Parish no longer being the primary gathering and social centre, as in former days, it is thus necessary to find new forms of accompaniment and closeness."
"The current Parish model no longer adequately corresponds to the many expectations of the faithful."
"The Parish in a contemporary context, the aforesaid missionary conversion, which naturally leads to a reform of structures, concerns the Parish in particular, namely that community gathered around the Table of the Word and the Eucharist."
And the money quote that is going to get all the attention:
Where there is a lack of priests and deacons, the diocesan Bishop can delegate lay persons to assist at marriages."
What is it actually about?
In one sense – perhaps the sense intended – it’s an attempt to reign in some of the abuses the Catholic world has been seeing recently, with bishops ordering “amalgamations” of parishes – often significantly reducing availability of the Sacraments – and replacing pastors with lay “pastoral administrators” or mixed clerical and lay “pastoral teams”. But as always with the Vatican bureaucracy, it fails completely at addressing the actual problem: why is parish life dying out, and what can we do about that?
And of course, the impenetrable language it uses – that special brand of brain-clogging, soul-deadening NuChurch Bergoglian buzzword gobbledygook – will give anyone incautious enough to actually read the thing without special breathing apparatus a potentially deadly case of hypoxia.
Which is why I consulted a professional. A friend, who gave me permission to say he works for “a Vatican Secretariat,” told me that it’s not entirely a bad document, at least in its probable intentions. But he adds that its impenetrable language is not just an annoyance for journalists but a genuine part of the problem.
“At its core this is an attempt by the Congregation for Clergy to get bishops to follow existing rules and preserve the traditional structures of the parish, including the genuine communities they foster. They’re trying to protect pastors from arbitrary unilateral parish closures and especially amalgamations. It’s about parishes being the focus of what the Church does.”
Once you get past the thickets of verbiage, the purpose of the thing is to tell the ordinaries, “You can’t just suppress pastors by bundling parishes into amalgamations and putting these in the charge of (usually lay) parish administrators.” He says it is probably a response to a recent rash of German attempts to drastically reduce the number of independent parishes. In a couple of notable recent cases, ancient dioceses have proposed to amalgamate or suppress up to a thousand parishes down to a couple of dozen.
This way bishops are handling the priest shortage, which is a genuine problem, creates a toxic weed patch of potential abuses. First, it places the church in the hands of unconsecrated persons, hired in a secular way as employees, who can’t help but think of the Church not as the mystical body of Christ, or even as a coherent community of believers, but merely as a corporate employer.
My friend continued, “The document says you have to have some regard to canon law which envisions a more ancient parish model that includes a pastor for each parish, not merely a corporate-style administrator. You can’t simply exercise your power as bishop to eliminate the nature of parishes or the role of priests as the head of a parish.”
“This has been the model for bishops for some time, especially in Germany, France and the Low Countries [Belgium, the Netherlands]. But it’s happening more widely throughout the West because there is a genuine priest shortage that is already extreme or on its way to extreme.” Bishops have been consolidating parishes, or just suppressing and closing them, breaking up communities and simply relieving priests of their duties. In many places one or two priests are left in charge of numerous churches, run ragged to provide sacramental services and leaving administrative tasks to lay employees.
Sometimes the priest ends up reduced to a sort of sacramental delivery driver, a kind of employee in his own parish, subordinate to an administrative committee, meaning lay people are now supervising the clergy. Moreover, this new model of lay-committee-led parishes leaves laypeople at the mercy of bishops, who have few canonical restraints on how to treat lay employees and often little regard for secular labour laws.
But it’s a dead letter before it even gets read by a bishop
The document is a work of Italian bureaucrats with a fief to protect, namely the rights of clergy. To this kind of mind, the most important thing is to have “done something”. A document has been produced. Work has been accomplished. The question of whether that something is in any way effective is a matter of absolutely no importance. But like nearly anything from the Vatican in recent decades that might have been useful if handled better, this latest from the Congregation for Clergy, has shot itself in the leg before it gets out of the gate.
First, and perhaps from their perspective least important; the mainstream media are going to latch like remoras onto the references to laity, particularly women, being allowed formally to conduct priestless services, and even preside at marriages and baptisms. No secular journalist will, of course, stop to ask if this situation existed before this document was released, or if indeed it has been the case in canon law all along. The headlines just write themselves: “Catholic Church faces priestless future! Laywomen to conduct marriages!” The impossible opacity of the text itself, with the meat and bones in the middle rendered in parching of canonical legalese, will ensure no editorial staff will think twice.
But more importantly, its precepts are not going to make it to any bishop’s to-do list. Since the 1970s the most important rule about any instructional document from Rome is that enforcement is, at best, selective. To the bureaucratic minds that wrote it, the most important thing is that a document has been written. Job done. Enforcement – in other words, effectiveness – isn’t their problem. And every bishop in the world knows he can ignore it.
To understand why it was written one has to know that the Congregation for Clergy is always pushing back against bishops – who like to be far away from Rome so they can do whatever they like in their own dioceses. The total lack of enforcement of canon law in the last few decades have left priests caught in the middle between huge often hostile powers all around, with very little back up. Priests, especially pastors of parishes, if you swear you won’t tell anyone, will often admit that their lives are a delicate, and extremely stressful, balancing act between keeping the bishop happy (or at least at bay) and also keeping the parish busybodies – who like to complain to bishops – happy. Every priest knows the axiom, “Never, ever, ever go to the chancery.”
Buzzwordiness as defensive camouflage
The problem the Congregation has is that it must not only carry out its main task of protecting the rights of clergy, usually against their own bishops, but now must slide their work past the Bergoglian clique. This means everything must be marbled through with the signals of the Bergoglian agenda. And this has ramped up the normal Vaticanspeak to the level of totally impenetrable brambles of buzzwordiness and trending papal neologisms.
The strategy might not have exactly the desired effect outside the Vatican curial bubbleverse. As our friend Fr. Paul MacDonald, a fellow Remnant columnist and parish priest in Ontario, wrote to me: “I’m up to number 41. I have not read such dreary, depressing, revolting and simultaneously infuriating drivel in my life. The following words never occur: truth, heaven, hell, purgatory, eternity.” It’s notable, perhaps, that in a document of 16,413 words (including footnotes) the holy name of Jesus is mentioned 8 times, which is actually pretty good for the modern Vatican.
My friend in Rome reiterates that it is “an attempt to roll back the trend of blurring the line between the role of the clergy and the role of laity. On the whole, the document is something faithful Catholics should get behind.”
Can you all please stop helping? Thanks.
But its failing is the same as ever; the Vatican simply refusing to notice that the ship is sinking and that it’s their fault. “It flatly refuses to address the actual question,” he continues. “Why are parishes dying across the Catholic world? It acknowledges that it’s happening, but refuses to address it. Which on the face of it is bizarre.”
“It’s not exactly rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. It’s saying that while we deal with the inexplicable sinking of the ship we can’t have the captain doing the job of the engineers or passengers. It doesn’t address the main concern that the ship has hit an iceberg and we have to do something about that.”
My friend, who has worked in the Vatican for almost a decade, describes the Vatican bureaucratic mind as “existentially incapable of ever saying anything clearly, simply and forthrightly.”
“They simply cannot speak in normal, comprehensible language.” And their inability to think outside their curial bubbles leaves them baffled as to why their efforts are ineffectual, why bishops feel free to ignore them, clergy don’t trust them and laity don’t respect them.
But at the same time, he says, whether consciously or not, the impenetrability of the verbiage is in fact a defensive strategy. “If they were to speak plainly it would force them to acknowledge the existence of the fundamental problem, and their own complicity in it. It offers a wasteland of ambiguous platitudes before it gets to the unreadably dry bones of legislation, details of bureaucratic arrangements of parishes.
“It’s the language of an insipid bureaucracy helplessly caught in its own tangles, that is incapable of forthrightly addressing anything real. Another sign that the Church seems utterly incapable of actually talking to people, having any sort of conversation, that doesn’t immediately fall into Orwellian churchspeak that is at best incomprehensible. So the real positive aspects of a document like this get buried in the infuriating verbiage.”
 In Germany this has been going on a long time with the Catholic Church, thanks to the Church Tax, being the nation’s second largest employer.
The mandatory mask wearing orders put out by the states governors, are NOT backed by any legitimate law.
The mask does NOTHING to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and is being used as a social control apparatus.
Even Dr. Fauci said that the mask is ineffective to combat this virus, and the CDC has put out a memo stating the same.
NO ONE should be made to wear a mask, it is a SUGGESTION ONLY.
This is getting WAY out of hand, and causing a lot more harm than good. Something must be done!
Make your voice heard! Click the image below to sign:
-- PUBLICATION NOTICE --
Includes: Michael Matt's Editor's Desk column, Roberto de Mattei's Letters from Rome, John Rao's new series, Letters from Hell, Fr. Celatus's Last Word, and much more!
KANSAS CITY, MO: Demons - Police officers face them every day. Some are flesh and blood, some others are fallen angels who prey on the innocent, leave young children dead and corpses decomposing inside a home. Others commit vile deeds, leaving it to a ten-year-old to find the body parts strewn along the river bank. A police officer faces demons who urge men to shoot in order to escape prosecution for robbing an innocent man at a bus stop. A police officer faces demons who prod men to shoot him in the head leaving him in critical condition in the ICU. – And those are the “normal” demons that the police face.