LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

April 7, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Dr. Michael Yeadon, Pfizer’s former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory who spent 32 years in the industry leading new medicines research and retired from the pharmaceutical giant with “the most senior research position” in his field, spoke with LifeSiteNews. 

He addressed the “demonstrably false” propaganda from governments in response to COVID-19, including the “lie” of dangerous variants, the totalitarian potential for “vaccine passports,” and the strong possibility we are dealing with a “conspiracy” which could lead to something far beyond the carnage experienced in the wars and massacres of the 20^th century.

His main points included:

1. There is “no possibility” current variants of COVID-19 will escape immunity. It is “just a lie.”

2. Yet, governments around the world are repeating this lie, indicating that we are witnessing not just “convergent opportunism,” but a “conspiracy.” Meanwhile media outlets and Big Tech platforms are committed to the same propaganda and the censorship of the truth.

3. Pharmaceutical companies have already begun to develop unneeded “top-up” (“booster”) vaccines for the “variants.” The companies are planning to manufacture billions of vials, in addition to the current experimental COVID-19 “vaccine” campaign. 

4. Regulatory agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, have announced that since these “top-up” vaccines will be so similar to the prior injections which were approved for emergency use authorization, drug companies will not be required to “perform any clinical safety studies.”

5. Thus, this virtually means that design and implementation of repeated and coerced mRNA vaccines “go from the computer screen of a pharmaceutical company into the arms of hundreds of millions of people, [injecting] some superfluous genetic sequence for which there is absolutely no need or justification.”

6. Why are they doing this? Since no benign reason is apparent, the use of vaccine passports along with a “banking reset” could issue in a totalitarianism unlike the world has ever seen. Recalling the evil of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler, “mass depopulation” remains a logical outcome.

7. The fact that this at least could be true means everyone must “fight like crazy to make sure that system never forms.” 

Dr. Yeadon began identifying himself as merely a “boring guy” who went “to work for a big drug company … listening to the main national broadcast and reading the broad sheet newspapers.”

Continuing, he said: “But in the last year I have realized that my government and its advisers are lying in the faces of the British people about everything to do with this coronavirus. Absolutely everything. It’s a fallacy this idea of asymptomatic transmission and that you don’t have symptoms, but you are a source of a virus. That lockdowns work, that masks have a protective value obviously for you or someone else, and that variants are scary things and we even need to close international borders in case some of these nasty foreign variants get in. 

“Or, by the way, on top of the current list of gene-based vaccines that we have miraculously made, there will be some ‘top-up’ vaccines to cope with the immune escape variants. 

“Everything I have told you, every single one of those things is demonstrably false. But our entire national policy is based on these all being broadly right, but they are all wrong.”

‘Conspiracy’ and not just ‘convergent opportunism’

“But what I would like to do is talk about immune escape because I think that’s probably going to be the end game for this whole event, which I think is probably a conspiracy. Last year I thought it was what I called ‘convergent opportunism,’ that is a bunch of different stakeholder groups have managed to pounce on a world in chaos to push us in a particular direction. So it looked like it was kind of linked, but I was prepared to say it was just convergence.”

“I [now] think that’s naïve. There is no question in my mind that very significant powerbrokers around the world have either planned to take advantage of the next pandemic or created the pandemic. One of those two things is true because the reason it must be true is that dozens and dozens of governments are all saying the same lies and doing the same inefficacious things that demonstrably cost lives. 

“And they are talking the same sort of future script which is, ‘We don’t want you to move around because of these pesky varmints, these “variants”’— which I call ‘samiants’ by the way, because they are pretty much the same — but they’re all saying this and they are all saying ‘don’t worry, there will be “top-up” vaccines that will cope with the potential escapees.’ They’re all saying this when it is obviously nonsense.”

Possible end game: vaccine ‘passports’ tied to spending allowances, thorough control

“I think the end game is going to be, ‘everyone receives a vaccine’… Everyone on the planet is going to find themselves persuaded, cajoled, not quite mandated, hemmed-in to take a jab. 

“When they do that every single individual on the planet will have a name, or unique digital ID and a health status flag which will be ‘vaccinated,’ or not … and whoever possesses that, sort of single database, operable centrally, applicable everywhere to control, to provide as it were, a privilege, you can either cross this particular threshold or conduct this particular transaction or not depending on [what] the controllers of that one human population database decide. And I think that’s what this is all about because once you’ve got that, we become playthings and the world can be as the controllers of that database want it. 

“For example, you might find that after a banking reset that you can only spend through using an app that actually feeds off this [database], your ID, your name, [and] your health status flag.”

“And, yes, certainly crossing an international border is the most obvious use for these vaccine passports, as they are called, but I’ve heard talk of them already that they could be necessary for you to get into public spaces, enclosed public spaces. I expect that if they wanted to, you would not be able to leave your house in the future without the appropriate privilege on your app.

“But even if that’s not [the] true [intent of the vaccine campaign], it doesn’t matter, the fact that it could be true means everyone [reading] this should fight like crazy to make sure that [vaccine passport] system never forms.”

“[With such a system], here is an example of what they could make you do, and I think this is what they’re going to make [people] do.

“You could invent a story that is about a virus and its variations, its mutations over time. You could invent the story and make sure you embed it through the captive media, make sure that no one can counter it by censoring alternative sources, then people are now familiar with this idea that this virus mutates, which it does, and that it produces variants, which is true [as well], which could escape your immune system, and that’s a lie. 

“But, nevertheless, we’re going to tell you it’s true, and then when we tell you that it’s true and we say ‘but we’ve got the cure, here’s a top-up vaccine,’ you’ll get a message, based on this one global, this one ID system: ‘Bing!’ it will come up and say ‘Dr. Yeadon, time for your top-up vaccine. And, by the way,’ it will say ‘your existing immune privileges remain valid for four weeks. But if you don’t get your top-up vaccine in that time, you will unfortunately detrimentally be an “out person,” and you don’t want that, do you?’ So, that’s how it’ll work, and people will just walk up and they’ll get their top-up vaccine.”

Gov’t lies, Big Pharma moves forward, medicine regulators get out of the way, and possible ‘mass-depopulation’

“But I will take you through this, Patrick, because I am qualified to comment. I don’t know what Vanden Bossche is about. There was no possibility at all, based on all of the variants that are in the public domain, 4000 or so of them, none of them are going to escape immunity [i.e. become more dangerous].

“Nevertheless, politicians and health advisers (to loads of governments) are saying that they are. They’re lying. Well, why would you do that? 

“Here’s the other thing, in parallel, pharmaceutical companies have said, several of them, it will be quite easy for us to adjust our gene-based vaccines, and we can hasten them through development, and we can help you. 

“And here’s the real scary part, global medicines regulators like [the U.S. Food and Drug Administration] FDA, the Japanese medicines agency, the European Medicines Agency, have gotten together and announced … since top-up vaccines will be considered so similar to the ones that we have already approved for emergency use authorization, we are not going to require the drug companies to perform any clinical safety studies. 

“So, you’ve got on the one hand, governments and their advisers that are lying to you that variants are different enough from the current virus that, even if you’re immune from natural exposure or vaccination, you’re a risk and you need to come and get this top-up vaccine. So, I think neither of those are true. So why is the drug company making the top-up vaccines? And [with] the regulators having got out of the way — and if Yeadon is right, and I’m sure I am or I wouldn’t be telling you this — you go from the computer screen of a pharmaceutical company into the arms of hundreds of millions of people, some superfluous genetic sequence for which there is absolutely no need or justification. 

“And if you wanted to introduce a characteristic which could be harmful and could even be lethal, and you can even tune it to say ‘let’s put it in some gene that will cause liver injury over a nine-month period,’ or, cause your kidneys to fail but not until you encounter this kind of organism [that would be quite possible]. Biotechnology provides you with limitless ways, frankly, to injure or kill billions of people. 

“And since I can’t think of a benign explanation for any of the steps: variants, top-up vaccines, no regulatory studies… it’s not only that I cannot think of a benign explanation, the steps described, and the scenario described, and the necessary sort of resolution to this false problem is going to allow what I just described: unknown, and unnecessary gene sequences injected into the arms of potentially billions of people for no reason. 

“I’m very worried … that pathway will be used for mass depopulation, because I can’t think of any benign explanation.”

PETITION: Say ‘No’ to COVID ‘Vaccine Passports’!

 

 

144,205 have signed the petition.

Let’s get to 150,000!

 

Add your signature:

  Show Petition Text

 

 
Country…
USA
Canada
Aaland Islands
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa
Andorra
Angola
Anguilla
Antarctica
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Bouvet Island
Brazil
British Indian Ocean Territory
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Christmas Island
Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Cook Islands
Costa Rica
Cote D’Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Curacao
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Falkland Islands
Faroe Islands
Fiji
Finland
France
French Guiana
French Polynesia
French Southern Territories
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Greenland
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Guam
Guatemala
Guernsey
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Heard and McDonald Islands
Honduras
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Isle of Man
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jersey
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macau
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte
Mexico
Micronesia
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Montserrat
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
Netherlands Antilles
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Niue
Norfolk Island
North Korea
Northern Mariana Islands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Palestine
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Pitcairn
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Republic of Kosovo
Reunion
Romania
Russia
Rwanda
Saint Barthelemy
Saint Helena
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Martin
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Sint Maarten
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
South Korea
South Sudan
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Togo
Tokelau
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Turks and Caicos Islands
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vatican City
Venezuela
Vietnam
Virgin Islands (British)
Virgin Islands (U.S.)
Wallis and Futuna Islands
Western Sahara
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

  
State…
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Federated States Of Micronesia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Marshall Islands
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Palau
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
Washington D.C.
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Armed Forces Europe
Armed Forces Americas
Armed Forces Pacific

 

Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.

 

 Sign this Petition

‘Absurdly impossible’ variants will escape immunity, ‘just a lie’

“If I can show you that one major thing that governments around the world are telling the people is a lie, you should take my 32 years of experienced opinion that says, most of it, if not all of it, is a lie.”

“The most different variant is only 0.3% different from the original sequence as emailed out of Wuhan in … January 2020. 0.3% [is] the one [variant] that is the most different on the planet so far. And now another way of saying it is, ‘all of the variants are not less than 99.7% identical to each other.’ 

“Now, you might be thinking, ‘hmm, .3%, is that enough [to escape immunity and become more dangerous]?’ The answer is no. Get away, ya know, get out of here … 

“The human immune system is a thing of wonder. What it does is when it faces a new pathogen like this, you’ve got professional cells, they’re called professional antigen-presenting cells —they’re kind of rough tough things that tend not to succumb to viruses. And their job is to grab foreign things in the near environment and tear them limb from limb [inside the cell]. They really cut them up into hundreds of pieces. And then they present these pieces on the surfaces of their cell to other bits of your immune system, and amazingly, because of the variability that God and nature gave you, huge variability to recognize foreign things, and your body ends up using 15 to 20 different specific motifs that it spots about this virus. They’re called epitopes, basically they’re just like little photographs of the details about this virus. That’s what they do. And that is what is called your repertoire, your immune repertoire is like 20 different accurate photographs, close-ups, of different bits of this virus.

“Now, if a tiny piece of the virus changes, like the .3% I’ve just described, if you are reinfected by that variant, your professional cells tear into that virus and cut it into pieces, present them again, and lo and behold, most of the pieces that you have already seen and recognized, are still there in the variants.

“There is absolutely no chance that all of them will fail to be recognized and that is what is required for immune escape, to escape your immunity. It must present to you as a new pathogen. It must be sufficiently different that, when it is cut up by your professional checker cells, it won’t find mostly the same thing it has seen before. And that is just absurdly impossible when you have only varied .3%, so it is 99.7% (similar).

“You can go and check that by looking at papers by a person called Alison Tarke. There is also Shane Crotty, and all of the other co-authors.

“And before them, coming from my theoretical understanding of multi-locus immunity, which is what I just badly tried to describe, to what actually happens … If your [immune system] is presented with something that contains even half of those similar pieces, there is no way your body will say, ‘that’s a new pathogen.’ 

“And, so, the idea that 0.3% could even have a chance of getting around immunity is just a lie. It’s not [even] like an opinion difference. 

“I don’t think 3% would be enough. That’s 10 times more variation than has occurred in 16 months [with this virus]. I don’t even think 30% difference would be enough. So, I’m saying that 100 times more variation than has actually happened, would still leave me putting a big bet on the human immune system not being fooled that these are new pathogens. 

“I’ve chatted this over with several professors of immunology and they agreed with me, it’s like, ‘why are you asking me this?’

“So, I think that what I’ve just said is that governments and their advisors in multiple countries are lying about variants. That’s a massive thing! You should check it out. Your readers should check it out. If it’s true, don’t you think it’s terrifying?! It was when I realized it. 

“So, they’re lying about variants, and then, of course, since [the variants] are not really different, you do not need a ‘top-up’ vaccine. Now you should be getting the hairs on the back of your neck up, because they are making them right now!” 

“They are making billions of vials of it. And they will be available by the end of the year.

“And I think they’ll require people to first, be on the vaccine passport one-world database, and then it will roll up into the top-ups, and if it takes a bit longer it will take a bit longer. 

“But this is not going away. It won’t go away until enough people, if they ever do, say ‘you’re a bunch of frauds and we are taking our freedoms back, so you can just stop doing this.’ 

“Because one person shouting into the wilderness and all of the other academics looking the other way, will have us just going down this pipe maybe a week later than if I hadn’t said anything, but we’re still going down to hell. 

“So, that’s why I’m frightened. 

“The variants aren’t different. I call them ‘samiants’… they’re pretty much the same. They’re not different. Therefore, you don’t need a top-up vaccine, so don’t go near any of them.”

‘Why is my government lying to me?’ Because ‘they are going to kill you.’

“[And if you recognize that our governments are involved in a major verifiable lie], don’t just turn your computer off and go to supper. Stop. Look out the window, and think, ‘why is my government lying to me about something so fundamental?’ Because, I think the answer is, they are going to kill you using this method. They’re going to kill you and your family. 

“The eugenicists have got hold of the levers of power and this is a really artful way of getting you to line-up and receive some unspecified thing that will damage you. I have no idea what it will actually be, but it won’t be a vaccine because you don’t need one. And it won’t kill you on the end of the needle because you would spot that.

“It could be something that will produce normal pathology, it will be at various times between vaccination and the event, it will be plausibly deniable because there will be something else going on in the world at that time, in the context of which your demise, or that of your children will look normal. 

“That’s what I would do if I wanted to get rid of 90 or 95% of the world’s population. And I think that’s what they’re doing.”

“Now I don’t know [for certain] that they’re going to use that [system] to kill you, but I can’t think of a benign reason, and with that power they certainly could harm you, or control you, so you should object [and strenuously oppose it].”

People can’t deal with this level of evil, but Soviets, Hitler, Mao show its possibility

“It’s become absolutely clear to me, even when I talk to intelligent people, friends, acquaintances … and they can tell I’m telling them something important, but they get to the point [where I say] ‘your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death and that of your children,’ and they can’t begin to engage with it. And I think maybe 10% of them understand what I said, and 90% of those blank their understanding of it because it is too difficult. And my concern is, we are going to lose this, because people will not deal with the possibility that anyone is so evil…

“But I remind you of what happened in Russia in the 20^th Century, what happened in 1933 to 1945, what happened in, you know, Southeast Asia in some of the most awful times in the post-war era. And, what happened in China with Mao and so on.

“We’ve only got to look back two or three generations. All around us there are people who are as bad as the people doing this. They’re all around us. So, I say to folks, the only thing that really marks this one out, is its scale. 

“But actually, this is probably less bloody, it’s less personal, isn’t it? The people who are steering this … it’s going to be much easier for them. They don’t have to shoot anyone in the face. They don’t have to beat someone to death with a baseball bat, or freeze them, starve them, make them work until they die. All of those things did happen two or three generations back and our grandparents or great grandparents were either victims of this, or they were actually members of it, or at least they witnessed it from overseas. That’s how close we are.

“And all I’m saying is, some shifts like that are happening again, but now they are using molecular biology.

“And the people going along with it, I think they would probably say, ‘I was only following orders,’ which we have heard before. 

“But I know, because I have talked to lots of people, and some of them have said ‘I don’t want to believe that you are right, so I’m going to just put it away because if it is true, I can’t handle it.’ And I think … all you need to do is find a good reason to tell people, ‘Don’t take the vaccine unless you’re a medical risk of dying from the virus!’ That seems to me a pretty good line!”

Towards a solution – ‘We need God’

“I’m a scientist, and I can tell you, talking to non-scientists, using science as a tool, will not work. It will fail. 

“So, we need philosophers, people who understand logic, religion, something like that, [they have] got to wrestle with this, and start talking in a language people will understand. Because if we leave it with scientists, people like me, even though I’m well-intentioned, I’m a gabbling alien as far as most people in the street are concerned. They won’t believe the government will lie to them, they don’t believe the government would ever do anything that will harm them, but they are [doing such things].”

Finally, in an email correspondence, Dr. Yeadon concluded, “I have latest taken to signing off with ‘May God save us’, because I think we need God now more than at any time since WW2.”

LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here. 

RELATED

It’s ‘entirely possible’ vaccine campaigns ‘will be used for massive-scale depopulation’: Former Pfizer VP

Anti-lockdown scientists challenge theories of Geert Vanden Bossche, though vaccine ‘global catastrophe’ not ruled out

Coming soon — Vaccine passports will determine where you can go and what you can do

Former Pfizer VP: ‘No need for vaccines,’ ‘the pandemic is effectively over’

Frontline Doctors: Experimental vaccines are ‘not safer’ than COVID-19

April 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The Académie nationale de médecine, an independent but official learned society in France, published a statement on Thursday warning that nasopharyngeal swabs used for PCR tests to detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus “are not without risks.” The alert came days before nasal auto-testing kits will become available in French pharmacies.

According to the statement published online by the Academy, a growing amount of data show that “complications” can and do occur, some of them “serious.”

Most are “benign,” and include “discomfort, pain or bleeding.” But the statement notes that over the last weeks, scientific articles have been appearing in medical journals describing undesirable events “including breaches of the anterior skull base associated with a risk of meningitis.”

Several studies were quoted by the Academy, including one documenting “meningitis due to cerebrospinal fluid leak after nasal swab testing for COVID-19.”

The nasopharyngeal swab is done with a long, thin cotton swab introduced high up into the nasal cavity, often successively via both nostrils, and rotated quickly each time in order to collect a sample of cells and mucus to analyze for the Wuhan virus using the highly controversial PCR test, or to be used in view of an antigenic test.

The Academy noted that these tests have now become extremely common. The learned society is concerned because swabs are being increasingly used, and that more and more individuals are getting repeat tests, “sometimes in inadequate conditions.”

“It is important to recall that precautions need to be taken and that risks do exist,” it said.

The Academy advises that medical personnel should be making the swabs, and then exclusively those who received training to be able to observe the necessary “technical conditions.”

These include asking patients whether they had a medical history of accidents or surgery in the ORL field that may have modified the anatomy of the nasal and sinus cavities, and not placing their heads in hyperextension during sample taking: they should remain in a natural position, with the chin “parallel” to the floor. Swabs should be introduced “horizontally following the base of the nasal cavity and they should under no circumstance be deviated upwards, in the direction of the base of the skull.”

The Académie de médecine appears to be particularly worried about children, strongly suggesting that they should be tested using saliva samples “because of both their safety and their acceptability.”

Regarding the upcoming auto-tests that also rely on nasal swabs, the statement said that their users should be warned about their use. “Auto-sampling can lead to false negatives when the swab is too shy and too superficial, but it can also become dangerous when the swab goes too deep and is orientated in the wrong direction,” it said.

Auto-tests are not exactly like the nasal swabs used by health professionals in France since the beginning of the COVID crisis: the swab is shorter, wider, and less disagreeable and only requires entering three to four centimeters into the nasal cavity – some of these swabs, but not all, include a little “collar” showing how far to go. Instead of being processed in special lab instruments, the auto-test will give a positive or negative result within minutes. If negative, people are advised to continue “social distancing” and wearing masks; if positive, the result needs to be confirmed by an RT-PCR test in order to mark the “variant” and allow contact-tracing.

French health authorities are hoping that the tests will be used by private individuals who want to know their status before a visit to a vulnerable person, for instance, but they also expect to use them for large-scale testing in apartment buildings or high schools for people aged over 15.

PETITION: Say ‘No’ to COVID ‘Vaccine Passports’!

 

 

144,230 have signed the petition.

Let’s get to 150,000!

 

Add your signature:

  Show Petition Text

 

 
Country…
USA
Canada
Aaland Islands
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa
Andorra
Angola
Anguilla
Antarctica
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Bouvet Island
Brazil
British Indian Ocean Territory
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Christmas Island
Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Cook Islands
Costa Rica
Cote D’Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Curacao
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Falkland Islands
Faroe Islands
Fiji
Finland
France
French Guiana
French Polynesia
French Southern Territories
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Greenland
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Guam
Guatemala
Guernsey
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Heard and McDonald Islands
Honduras
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Isle of Man
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jersey
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macau
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte
Mexico
Micronesia
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Montserrat
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
Netherlands Antilles
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Niue
Norfolk Island
North Korea
Northern Mariana Islands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Palestine
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Pitcairn
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Republic of Kosovo
Reunion
Romania
Russia
Rwanda
Saint Barthelemy
Saint Helena
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Martin
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Sint Maarten
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
South Korea
South Sudan
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Togo
Tokelau
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Turks and Caicos Islands
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vatican City
Venezuela
Vietnam
Virgin Islands (British)
Virgin Islands (U.S.)
Wallis and Futuna Islands
Western Sahara
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

  
State…
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Federated States Of Micronesia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Marshall Islands
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Palau
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
Washington D.C.
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Armed Forces Europe
Armed Forces Americas
Armed Forces Pacific

 

Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.

 

 Sign this Petition

In Germany, similar tests are being marketed and will include a flash code allowing the identification and tracking of “positive cases.”

At the beginning of the crisis in March 2020, very little testing was done even on symptomatic patients, to the detriment of isolation procedures that would have stopped the spread of the virus much more efficiently. If early treatment of positive patients had been allowed and recommended, many would not have seen their condition worsen: according to Professor Christian Perronne, 24,500 deaths out of 30,000 during the spring epidemic last year could have been avoided.

Now testing in France is beyond imagination. Since March 1, 2020 and April 4 of this year, some 70 million tests were done: 57.7 million PCR tests, the rest antigenic, according to a public health statistics institution, DREES. And the numbers are going up and up: from March 29 to April 4, 3.8 million test results were validated in one week. They were obviously not limited to people with flu-like symptoms.

PCR tests remain the so-called gold standard of COVID-19 testing, even though the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned that they should mostly be considered as an “aid for diagnosis” and that their results should be carefully interpreted according to manufacturers’ guidance and accompanied by clinical observations, among others. The WHO also said that “the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases.”

Present curves representing the evolution of positives, hospitalizations, and deaths in France show a slow increase of the latter and a fast increase of the former as thousands of people test each day and “positives” keep climbing, while hospitalizations and deaths remain quite stable.

With the introduction of more and more kinds of tests and auto-tests, the “epidemic of cases” is not set to end.

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

ACHONRY, Ireland, April 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The youngest Catholic bishop in Ireland has become the latest to join a number of church leaders who have openly distanced themselves from the Vatican’s ban on blessing homosexual couples.

Bishop Paul Dempsey of Achonry called the ban a “hurtful response from the Church to people with same sex orientation” in a March 26 reflection that appeared on the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference website.

Dempsey, who was appointed Bishop of Achonry in January 2020 by Pope Francis, expressed regret at the language used by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in teaching about why the Church cannot bless such unions.

The CDF announced on March 15 that the Church cannot bless homosexual relationships since God “does not and cannot bless sin.” A question to the CDF about whether or not the Church has the “power to give the blessing to unions of persons of the same sex” was answered in the “negative” by the congregation’s prefect, Cardinal Luis Ladaria Ferrer. The congregation’s statement was assented to by Pope Francis. The Congregation stated that it is “not licit to impart a blessing on relationships, or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage (i.e., outside the indissoluble union of a man and a woman open in itself to the transmission of life), as is the case of the unions between persons of the same sex.”

Bishop Dempsey called the language used a “problem.”

“The deeper problem arises in the sphere of language, at best it is experienced as cold and distant, at worst hurtful and offensive,” he said.

PETITION: Call for Vatican to rescind restrictions on private and traditional rite Masses at St. Peter’s

 

 

17,380 have signed the petition.

Let’s get to 17,500!

 

Add your signature:

  Show Petition Text

 

 
Country…
USA
Canada
Aaland Islands
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
American Samoa
Andorra
Angola
Anguilla
Antarctica
Antigua and Barbuda
Argentina
Armenia
Aruba
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bermuda
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Bouvet Island
Brazil
British Indian Ocean Territory
Brunei Darussalam
Bulgaria
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Cayman Islands
Central African Republic
Chad
Chile
China
Christmas Island
Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Cook Islands
Costa Rica
Cote D’Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Curacao
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Falkland Islands
Faroe Islands
Fiji
Finland
France
French Guiana
French Polynesia
French Southern Territories
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Gibraltar
Greece
Greenland
Grenada
Guadeloupe
Guam
Guatemala
Guernsey
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Heard and McDonald Islands
Honduras
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Isle of Man
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Jersey
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lao People’s Democratic Republic
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macau
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Martinique
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mayotte
Mexico
Micronesia
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Montserrat
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
Netherlands Antilles
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Niue
Norfolk Island
North Korea
Northern Mariana Islands
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Palestine
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Pitcairn
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Republic of Kosovo
Reunion
Romania
Russia
Rwanda
Saint Barthelemy
Saint Helena
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Martin
Saint Pierre and Miquelon
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome and Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Sint Maarten
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
South Korea
South Sudan
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Timor-Leste
Togo
Tokelau
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Turks and Caicos Islands
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vatican City
Venezuela
Vietnam
Virgin Islands (British)
Virgin Islands (U.S.)
Wallis and Futuna Islands
Western Sahara
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

  
State…
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Federated States Of Micronesia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Marshall Islands
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Palau
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
Washington D.C.
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Armed Forces Europe
Armed Forces Americas
Armed Forces Pacific

 

Keep me updated via email on this
petition and related issues.

 

 Sign this Petition

“The statement that the Church ‘cannot bless sin’ is seen as targeting or treating same sex couples in a way that others are not targeted or treated in the Church. Many have found this deeply offensive. As a result some feel they are not welcome and have no place in the Catholic Church.  There is a great sadness in this as no one should feel that they are not welcome in the Church, which is the Body of Christ. Further to this, so many people in same sex relationships have enriched the life of the Church and continue to do so in parishes across the world,” he added.

Contrary to Dempsey’s assertions, the Church welcomes all sinners no matter who they are or what they have done. The Church, however, does not welcome sin and makes a careful distinction between sin and sinner. While rapists, pedophiles, and adulterers are welcome to receive God’s love and mercy in the Church through the sacraments, the Church uses strong language to condemn these sins and warns the people who do such things of the eternal punishment of hell that awaits them if they do not repent and believe in the Gospel. The Church speaks out of love when she uses strong language in warning men and women about the spiritual and even biological dangers of engaging in homosexual behavior.

Bishop Dempsey’s reflection comes in the wake of the country’s former president Mary McAleese demanding that Ireland’s Catholic bishops challenge the CDF’s directive for its language that she called “gratuitously cruel in the extreme.”

Dempsey joins German Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg (who is also head of the German Bishops’ Conference), Austrian Bishop Hermann Glettler, Australian Archbishop Mark Coleridge, Belgian Bishop Johan Bonny, Vienna Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, and many others in voicing dissent from the ban on blessings for homosexual couples.

Cardinal Raymond Burke commented last month that defiance to the ban shows that an “aggressive homosexual agenda” is dominating those who have been elevated as shepherds.

“The blowback is simply an expression of a worldliness, a mundanity, which has entered into the Church by which the aggressive homosexual agenda is now dominating even in certain ecclesial circles and even among certain bishops,” the Cardinal, who is the former head of the Vatican’s highest court and one of the world’s foremost canon lawyers, told EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo in an March 25 interview.

Burke went on to say that bishops who openly defy the decree should voluntarily “renounce” their office.

“The bishop, if he’s pained by what’s declared by the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, then he must examine himself with regard to his own coherence with the Catholic faith. And, if he is not holding to the Catholic faith, then he should renounce his office. He has to be relieved of his office as diocesan bishop, because this is simply unacceptable. It can’t be,” Burke said.

PARIS, France, April 9, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Two parishes where the extraordinary form of the Roman rite is regularly celebrated are under fire from French media and civil authorities after a person attending one of the events complained in the daily Le Parisien, last Monday, about lack of compliance with COVID measures such as “social distancing.” Some media complained that priests had touched the forehead of people being baptized with their hands; another media remarked that one priest “was not even wearing a mask while consecrating the Eucharist.”

Two priests even spent most of Thursday in custody, in a clear move to intimidate Catholics — but probably also as a diversion: A scandal had only just broken out regarding over-expensive — and lucrative — dinner parties that were organized in March and on April 1 in the Palais Vivienne despite the present lockdown in France, with prominent guests.

The organizer, Pierre-Jean Chalençon, had told the press he had dined in several clandestine restaurants last month, and seen several government ministers there. He later retracted the statement, saying he was just trying to be funny, but the backlash against the authorities was enormous: While the populace suffers, the Nomenklatura ignores the rules it has imposed. The case of the Catholic churches appears to have come as a welcome means of damage control, and it is being exploited to the dregs.

Videos and photos of the Easter Masses held in the two churches — one in Paris, one in Reims — showed the celebrant and choir boys and several adults who were baptized during the Easter vigil not wearing masks. The number of alter servers and clerics, the alleged lack of space between the faithful, the use of the “same” baptismal water for ten adults, as well as the distribution of Holy Communion on the tongue were all quoted and condemned as proof of the disregard of sanitary safety and provided an excuse for the secularist media to present Catholics who favor the traditional rite as extremists or half-wits who trust in God to protect them from COVID-19.

Saint-Eugène-Sainte-Cécile, in the center of Paris, was hardest hit by media hysterics. It all started when the non-Catholic brother of one of the adult men receiving baptism went to the press with the video of the Easter vigil (held on Saturday afternoon because of the 7:00 p.m. curfew) as broadcast and available on the parish website. A few minutes of the four hour-long ceremony were selected and edited for posting on the Parisien’s website with scathing comments about the priest using the same “flotte” — a slang word designating water — to baptize several faithful.

Immediately, the national media picked up the story with articles saying it was “incredible” how, despite one year of COVID-19, Catholic priests and their flock were being so “reckless” as to disregard the safety measures that all the other French are so scrupulously applying.

By Monday evening, the director of communications of the diocese of Paris, Karine Dalle, justified the attack, telling the national daily Le Figaro: “We are stunned by the obvious disregard towards the essential instructions of social distancing, of wearing a mask, and we disassociate ourselves from any behavior that does not respect a difficult health situation. Unfortunately, the video is unmistakable. The vast majority of people are not wearing masks and do not respect social distancing. The subject will obviously be addressed internally with those in charge.”

It is not clear whether Archbishop Michel Aupetit of Paris was aware of this public denigration of a Parisian parish and its pastor, Canon Marc Guelfucci. His own communiqué came two days later, on Wednesday: He publicly announced the opening of a canonical process against Guelfucci “because he is suspected of not having imposed in his church compliance of sanitary measures currently in force to fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, during a celebration on April 3.”

Aupetit added: “These measures had been clearly defined, and the Diocese of Paris regularly reminded all parishes. While waiting for the conclusion of this canonical procedure, he is asked to strictly enforce the respect of sanitary measures in this church and to communicate, during the weekend, a message from the Archbishop of Paris to the attention of the parishioners, in order to remind them once again of the rules that apply to all.”

There is of course no section of canon law imposing masks and social distancing during Mass. It can only be surmised that the procedure will involve the question of obedience to orders issued by the bishop: Disobedience, says canon law, can be sanctioned with a “just penalty.”

Regarding these orders, Canon Guelfucci told LifeSiteNews that “unfortunately, the French Bishops’ Conference has set up more restrictive norms than the government decree” regarding public worship.

For instance, the archbishop of Paris went further than the state norms in making Communion in the hand mandatory throughout the diocese. However, in the four diocesan parishes in Paris where the extraordinary form of the Roman rite is officially celebrated, Communion has continued to be given on the tongue since public worship was allowed from the end of May 202, after the first lockdown.

On the other hand, the whole business may well backfire against Aupetit: While he was very quick to condemn publicly a parish priest under his orders, videos and photos are now circulating on the internet showing that the choir singing at the Easter vigil he celebrated in Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois was not wearing masks, nor was the bishop himself during the whole celebration, and especially during the baptism ceremony that took place under basically the same conditions as in Saint-Eugène-Sainte-Cécile. Mainstream media are commenting on the similarities with relish.

Guelfucci was requested to meet with Archbishop Aupetit on Wednesday: The meeting took place shortly before the aforementioned communiqué was published. Nothing transpired of the discussion, but remarkably, Aupetit has now backpedaled on the question of compulsory Communion in the hand, according to his statement to be read out in the parish next Sunday, that has already been made available to some parishioners. Communion in the hand will remain the rule for Novus Ordo parishes in Paris (even though this contradicts the rules of the Church), but for “extraordinary form” Masses, an exception now exists: Communion on the tongue will from now on be officially permitted, provided the priest dips his fingers in a hydroalcoholic solution between communicants.

Marc Guelfucci, it should be said, is a doctor in canon law.

This Thursday morning, Canon Guelfucci — while in custody at a police station — was required to answer for what purportedly happened last Saturday in his church, together with the vicar, Fr. Gabriel Grodziski. Usually, police custody is used in serious cases where the police want to isolate a suspect and obtain information or confessions regarding a delict or a crime.

Speaking with LifeSite shortly after he was released from custody at 6:30 p.m., Canon Guelfucci made a point of stating that “the police showed exceptional courtesy” to himself and his vicar, and even appeared to be “embarrassed” by the situation and “indignant” at having to interrogate priests in a case that can reasonably be suspected of having political motives.

According to the weekly Le Point, the two men were remanded in custody for “deliberately having put the life of others at risk,” “not wearing a mask,” and organizing a “reunion of more than six people without barrier gestures,” as they call social distancing, hand-washing and other public rules for the COVID crisis. This and other information regarding the case was given out by the public prosecutor’s office throughout the day, with great disregard for the principle of secrecy of investigations.

The public prosecution is now going to have to prove that there are serious grounds for these accusations before an examining magistrate decides whether or not to allow the case to go before a court.

“Putting the life of others at risk” is probably not a good choice for the prosecution: In order to succeed, the accusation would need to prove that the violation of a particular security requirement had directly exposed another person to an immediate risk of death or of injury capable of causing permanent mutilation or infirmity. Besides clear causality between the act and the risk, the latter would need to be “highly probable.” Already in March 2020, the French justice ministry had made clear that such a delict could not be sanctioned in individuals joining a public reunion where safety distances were not be respected.

The fact of not wearing a mask will also be difficult to sanction. In the decree allowing public worship despite coronavirus measures, it is made clear that at necessary moments in the liturgy, the mask may be removed. In France, where Church and state are legally separate, it is surely not up to the state to determine which parts of the liturgy can be considered as justifying the removal of the mask. Can the state have its say regarding choir boys wearing or not wearing masks? Again, the public authorities are not competent to judge what happens as part of the liturgy.

As to the “six-person rule,” which in France only applies outside and not in the privacy of people’s homes, it clearly cannot be invoked regarding public worship, because public worship is legal for congregations provided that families can remain at a distance from each other during Mass, in large, well-ventilated churches.

The way of receiving Communion is not quoted at all in the government decree regarding public worship and is certainly no business of the state.

But now that the time for “squealing” against Catholic worship has come, one (purported) parishioner of Saint-Eugène-Sainte-Cécile told Le Parisien that “sanitary rules have not been respected for a year” in the parish, particularly regarding masks, spacing of pews, and Communion in the hand. The man even wrote to the diocese in January to complain, he said, and although he received an answer to the effect that his complaint had been registered, nothing changed, he said.

Interestingly, however, the parish has not deplored a single death or severe case of COVID among its members since the beginning of the epidemic.

In fact, it started using hydroalcoholic gel from February of 2020, and received a shipment of 3.000 masks by March last year at a time when the shortage of masks, even for health workers in direct contact with ill people, led the French government to proclaim that masks were “useless” in the general population. From the beginning of the pandemic, gel was available at the entrance of the church; an important factor when considering that according to French immunologist Didier Raoult, SARS-CoV-2 is mainly transported by hand contact, not by breath.

Canon Guelfucci made several statements to the press over the last days, noting in particular that during the Easter vigil, only 250 to 280 people were present while there are at least 600 seats in his large 19th century church. He added that most parishioners were wearing masks and that the pictures showing processions focus on exceptional moments during the liturgy. He added that in the Paris metro, crowds are much larger and pressed closed together. During the baptism ceremony, disinfectant wipes were used to avoid all risk, he added. When giving Communion, the celebrant disinfects his hands with ethanol. As to the choir boys, they are not face to face.

Guelfucci also stated that he baptized without a mask because the priest does not spit on the person he is baptizing.

The Saint-Eugène affair was launched in the press on Easter Monday. By Wednesday, a mayor in the Reims region, having hunted around for images of the Easter Mass on parish websites, warned the local press in his turn. He found a picture of the recently ordained Canon Jean Maïdanatz of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest during the Light Ceremony with the Easter candle, maskless, and accompanied by choir boys who also had no face coverings.

Once again, but more quickly this time, the public prosecutor jumped on the case and announced that there will be proceedings against Canon Jean Maïdanatz who celebrated two masses in supposedly dangerous circumstances on Easter Sunday.

Speaking to LifeSite, Canon Maïdanatz noted that contrary to accusations, the COVID rules were well applied in Reims: only 100 faithful attended each Mass in the St. Jeanne d’Arc church which can seat 350, the pews were well spaced, and care was taken with the Communion procession so that people would follow one direction only so as to avoid face-to-face contact. “I cannot police the congregation regarding masks,” he told a local newspaper.

There has been less coverage of the Reims case, and it would seem that the situation has already been in some measure appeased.

In a remarkable text published by the lay Catholic news blog “Le Salon beige,” its director Guillaume de Thieulloy called for an end to hostilities within the Church regarding the priests who are at present being vilified in the press with the clear objective of hurting Catholics.

He wrote (LifeSite’s translation):

For the past two days, the parish of Saint-Eugene-Sainte-Cécile has been under fire. Its parish priest has been accused by “courageous” anonymous individuals of having transformed the Easter vigil into a “COVID party.” As a result, legal proceedings have been announced against Fr. Guelfucci for endangering the lives of others. Why not complicity with murder or aggravated cannibalism, while they’re at it?

We must be reasonable. No, it is not bad news that a church is full for Easter! And no, I don’t believe that the main responsibility of a parish priest is to make sure that his parishioners have their masks on. If some of the faithful are fed up with idiotic, contradictory, and often freedom-killing instructions, it is not the fault of the priest. And I doubt that he went up to the pulpit to ask the parishioners to unmask themselves.

It is easy to understand the game of the anti-Catholic media. As with the fake news about the evangelical “cluster” in Alsace a few months ago, they are having a field day with the “irresponsibility” of Christians — without, of course, taking the trouble to verify that these gatherings have anything to do with the dissemination of the virus, nor, especially, with its potential deadly consequences.

It is also easy to understand the game played by the public authorities. In the middle of the discussion of a liberticide bill on “the respect of republican principles,” the government has every interest in “showing” that “radical” Catholics are as dangerous as the Islamists of the same ilk. And what better way to do this than with a “Latin Mass”?

But I confess that I don’t understand at all the interest of the ecclesiastical authorities or the Catholic media to burden the unfortunate priest.

That the archbishop of Paris should lecture the parish priest who earned him a day of media “ruckus,” I can of course understand. But a canonical procedure? Theologians who profess manifest heresies are left in peace; and yet a canonical trial would be instituted for a priest who deemed it more important to give the Blessed Sacrament the reverence it deserves than to make sure that his flock rubs its hands with hydro-alcoholic gel? This is simply absurd! Do we want to let believe, not only by the faithful, but by the whole world, that the Catholic Church is more concerned with prefectural injunctions than with God? By the way, when I speak of these heretical theologians who are left in peace, I speak with personal knowledge of the facts: A quarter of a century ago, I was a seminarian at the Catholic Institute of Paris and I had as a professor one of the rare theologians who had been forbidden to teach by John Paul II (it must be said that this man, who was charming by the way, had the rather eccentric idea of philosophically and morally “justifying” abortion)! Well, he was quietly teaching in this temple of French theological education, without it disturbing in the least either the academic or the ecclesiastical authorities. The Pope could say what he wanted, it was of little importance in Paris. So how can we not suspect a scandalous double standard when we compare it to this mini-media crisis?

However, the worst part, for me, is elsewhere. I know nothing about the relationship between [Canon] Guelfucci and his superiors and it is none of my business. On the other hand, there is something that concerns me closely, because it is precisely my responsibility as a faithful Catholic (and as a Catholic engaged in the media and political struggle): the political and media consequences of this affair.

The ABC of political action can be summed up in a few simple principles: never obey the dictates of the enemy media; never go further than they; never disassociate yourself from your friends. Of course, we can have different analyses — in the Church as elsewhere. One can debate them publicly and even rudely. Theological controversies in the Middle Ages (which was a bit more Catholic than our postmodern West) were more spirited than ours. But we must always keep in mind that, since 1789, the anti-Catholic left has attributed to itself the monopoly of moral legitimacy. They define us as “right-wing” (or reactionary, or fundamentalist, or fanatical, or obscurantist, or God knows what else). And it tolerates the “moderate” right only insofar as, like Salome, it offers the head of its less “moderate” neighbor on a platter. But let us never forget that we are always someone’s “moderate” and someone else’s “fanatic.” This is how the swearing priests had to disassociate themselves from the refractory priests (during the French Revolution), in order to show that they were good citizens, before being in turn proscribed as suppressors of superstition. Hodie mihi, cras tibi …

As the Church of France is engaged in a fight of capital importance for the defense of human dignity (against euthanasia, against the commodification of the body, for the educational freedom of families, to speak only of the laws currently under discussion in Parliament), it is obvious that our adversaries have every interest in dividing us. But nothing obliges us to obey them. Nothing obliges us to go further.

It is always a bad investment. And we can already see it in this “Saint-Eugène affair”: The media, having smelled the odor of blood, are beginning to evoke other churches which allegedly did not respect the letter of sanitary measures that no one understands anymore. There is no end to it: These new priests will be lynched by other priests who, themselves, will be victims of the same process a few days later. And, in this case, it seems obvious to me that Bishop Aupetit, a courageous opponent of euthanasia and of the bioethics law that respects neither biology nor ethics, will be among the next “collateral victims” since one could say of the Easter vigil he celebrated at Saint-Germain l’Auxerrois practically everything that was said of that of Saint-Eugène.

I have always been struck by an overwhelming superiority of American pro-life activists over us old Gauls who like to tear each other apart, even in front of the enemy: It is their capacity to never criticize the action of another pro-lifer, even when this action is more than questionable. I remember a conversation in the late 1990s with a conservative senator, during which a young Frenchman asked him about the killings of abortion doctors that were happening at the time. Naturally, we all thought that the senator would condemn these murders (which are indeed the worst way to defend the cause of life). Well, he was much more intelligent than that. He told us in substance: “It is not my way of acting, but the real problem is abortion …” Before going on to five minutes of denouncing abortion. I was very impressed. And I still believe that we have a perfect right to answer only what we want to the media. I think also of Georges Marchais (a former French Communist Party leader), who knew about politics, and who answered the journalist who told Marchais that he had not answered his questions: “But these are my answers.” It is not up to the media, it is not up to our opponents to dictate our agenda!

So, yes, common sense demands that we say: Ceasefire! No, Father Guelfucci is not an assassin. No, it is not a tragedy that his church was full for the Easter vigil. And yes, the Blessed Sacrament is more important than a piece of cloth on your snout!