Monsters of the Apocalypse

Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? [2] And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. [4] And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. [5] For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.

[6] And the woman saw that the tree was good to eat, and fair to the eyes, and delightful to behold: and she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave to her husband who did eat. [7] And the eyes of them both were opened: and when they perceived themselves to be naked, they sewed together fig leaves, and made themselves aprons. [8] And when they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise at the afternoon air, Adam and his wife hid themselves from the face of the Lord God, amidst the trees of paradise. [9] And the Lord God called Adam, and said to him: Where art thou? [10] And he said: I heard thy voice in paradise; and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.

And he said to him: And who hath told thee that thou wast naked, but that thou hast eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat? [12] And Adam said: The woman, whom thou gavest me to be my companion, gave me of the tree, and I did eat. [13] And the Lord God said to the woman: Why hast thou done this? And she answered: The serpent deceived me, and I did eat. [14] And the Lord God said to the serpent: Because thou hast done this thing, thou art cursed among all cattle, and beasts of the earth: upon thy breast shalt thou go, and earth shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. [15] I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. (Genesis 2: 1-15.)

Men have been trying to be like unto God in the knowledge of all things since Eve succumbed to the tempter’s allurements and then convinced Adam to follow her own disobedient example. Indeed, it has ever been the case that fallen men have tried to surpass the knowledge of God by denying His very existence and to demonstrate that they possess all omnipotence. In other words, men in today’s wicked age are still obeying the adversary, whether unwittingly or, in all too many cases, all too wittingly and willingly, to demonstrate that there is no God above them and that the only rule of life to do what is possible for them to do without regard for any limits that exist in the very nature of things.

As is the case with so much of what we are witnessing in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic world of Modernity, the unleashing of the forces of hell against all that is holy, good, pure, decent and natural—in other words against the entirety of the Order of Creation (Nature) and of Grace (Redemption)—is the but the logical consequence of Martin Luther’s diabolically-inspired revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man’s return to Him through His Catholic Church. The process by which evil has triumphed in the minds, hearts and lives of men has accelerated in recent decades, however, because there is a paucity of the superabundance of Sanctifying and Actual Graces as a result of the invalid and abominable liturgical rites of the counterfeit church of revolution that were designed to serve as instruments of effecting a “reconciliation” between Christ the King and Belial, something that was prophesied by Pope Leo XIII in Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892:

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

It was, therefore, a relatively short step from Charles Darwin’s junk science of evolutionism to the rise of Social Darwinism and its program of eugenics. An entire army of eugenicists arose at the end of the Nineteenth and the beginning of the Twentieth Centuries that produced books and journals devoted to the dissemination of racialist and elitist myths of how to create a master race of humans. The Nazis of Adolph Hitler’s Third Reich were veritable Johnny-come-latelies to eugenics as the likes of Margaret Sanger were promoting much of their agenda for at least two decades before the rise to the power of the mustachioed paper hanger from Austria.

Oh, you doubt my word?

Well, here is the proof:

Ernst Rudin was director of the foremost German eugenics research institute (Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Genealogy, in Munich, Germany). "On June 2, 1933, [German] Reich Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick announced the formation of an Expert Committee on Questions of Population and Racial Policy .... to plan the course of Nazi racial policy. The committee brought together the elite of Nazi racial theory: Alfred Ploetz, ..... Ernst Rudin, director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Genealogy in Munich;...." (4) On July 14, 1933 this committee's recommendations were made law, the sterilization law ("Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring"); the start date for exercising the law was 1 Jan 1934. What was Ernst Rudin's opinion of Adolf Hitler and eugenics ('racial hygiene')?:

Academic William H. Tucker (The Science and Politics of Racial Research, 1994, University of Illinois Press) tells us about Ernst Rudin (p. 121):

In an address to the German Society for Rassenhygiene [Race-hygiene] Ernst Rudin, a professor of psychiatry who was one of the organization's original members and now its head, recalled the early, fruitless days when the racial hygienists had labored in vain to alert the public to special value of the Nordic race as "culture creators" and the danger of "unnatural" attempts to preserve the health of heredity defectives. Now Rassenhygiene [Race-hygiene] was finally receiving the attention it deserved, and Rudin virtually slavered over the man whose efforts produced this change: "The significance of Rassenhygiene did not become evident to all aware Germans until the political activity of Adolf Hitler and only through his work has our 30 year long dream of translating Rassen- hygiene into action finally become a reality." Terming it a "duty of honor" (Ehrenpflicht) for the society to aid in implementing Hitler's program, Rudin proclaimed, "We can hardly express our efforts more plainly or appropriately than in the words of the Fuhrer: 'Whoever is not physically or mentally fit must not pass on his defects to his children. The state must take care that only the fit produce children. Conversely, it must be regarded as reprehensible to withhold healthy children from the state.' (E. Rudin, "Aufgaben and Ziele der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Rassenhygiene," Archiv Fur Rassen- und Gesellschafts- biologie 28 (1934): 228-29)

Who is author William H. Tucker? He is an associate professor of psychology at Rutgers University, Camden, New Jersey. Tucker is apparently somewhat left of center politically, since he complains about the 'Reagan slash and burn spending cuts.'

How many Germans were 'force sterilized'? Most estimates are in the range of 250,000-500,000. The Germans started twenty-seven years later that the U.S. but within a few years they greatly outpaced them.

Did Ernst Rudin advocate sterilization of Americans?

Three months before the German 'sterilization law' was passed, Rudin's "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need" article was published in the journal (BCR) Margaret Sanger started and continued to influence until its demise in 1940.

In addressing an American audience Rudin is much more circumspect with his choice of words:

The following essay is concerned only with sterilization as a voluntary practice, that is, when undertaken with the consent of the patient himself or his statutory guardians......

But as the essay wears on, the mask begins to slip:

My experience has led me to the conclusion that systematic and careful propaganda should be undertaken where sterilization is advisable. Such propaganda should, of course, be gradual and should be directed in the first instance at the medical directors in institutions and schools, medical officers of health, and finally at private practitioners.....

Margaret Sanger corresponded with Ernst Rudin and never once renounced his eugenic views. (Margaret Sanger and Sterilization.)

Just as Woodrow Wilson believed that he could engineer “peace” in the world by breaking up the Austro-Hungarian Empire and creating completely secular, Masonic states in Central and Eastern Europe, so did Margaret Sanger believe that engineering of population rates could contribute to “peace” in the world.

Here is Sanger’s “Plan for Peace,” which was published in the Birth Control Review in April of 1932:

First, put into action President Wilson's fourteen points, upon which terms Germany and Austria surrendered to the Allies in 1918.

Second, have Congress set up a special department for the study of population problems and appoint a Parliament of Population, the directors representing the various branches of science: this body to direct and control the population through birth rates and immigration, and to direct its distribution over the country according to national needs consistent with taste, fitness and interest of individuals. The main objects of the Population Congress would be:

a. to raise the level and increase the general intelligence of population.

b. to increase the population slowly by keeping the birth rate at its present level of fifteen per thousand, decreasing the death rate below its present mark of 11 per thousand.

c. to keep the doors of immigration closed to the entrance of certain aliens whose condition is known to be detrimental to the stamina of the race, such as feebleminded, idiots, morons, insane, syphilitic, epileptic, criminal, professional prostitutes, and others in this class barred by the immigration laws of 1924.

d. to apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.

e. to insure the country against future burdens of maintenance for numerous offspring as may be born of feebleminded parents, by pensioning all persons with transmissible disease who voluntarily consent to sterilization.

f. to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.

g. to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives.

The first step would thus be to control the intake and output of morons, mental defectives, epileptics.

The second step would be to take an inventory of the secondary group such as illiterates, paupers, unemployables, criminals, prostitutes, dope-fiends; classify them in special departments under government medical protection, and segregate them on farms and open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.

Having corralled this enormous part of our population and placed it on a basis of health instead of punishment, it is safe to say that fifteen or twenty millions of our population would then be organized into soldiers of defense---defending the unborn against their own disabilities.

The third step would be to give special attention to the mothers' health, to see that women who are suffering from tuberculosis, heart or kidney disease, toxic goitre, gonorrhea, or any disease where the condition of pregnancy disturbs their health are placed under public health nurses to instruct them in practical, scientific methods of contraception in order to safeguard their lives---thus reducing maternal mortality.

The above steps may seem to place emphasis on a health program instead of on tariffs, moratoriums and debts, but I believe that national health is the first essential factor in any program for universal peace.

With the future citizen safeguarded from hereditary taints, with five million mental and moral degenerates segregated, with ten million women and ten million children receiving adequate care, we could then turn our attention to the basic needs for international peace.

There would then be a definite effort to make population increase slowly and at a specified rate, in order to accommodate and adjust increasing numbers to the best social and economic system.

In the meantime we should organize and join an International League of Low Birth Rate Nations to secure and maintain World Peace. (Black Genocide.org | The Truth About Margaret Sanger.)

Here is what Pope Pius XI told us was the foundation of true peace:

It is possible to sum up all We have said in one word, "the Kingdom of Christ." For Jesus Christ reigns over the minds of individuals by His teachings, in their hearts by His love, in each one's life by the living according to His law and the imitating of His example. Jesus reigns over the family when it, modeled after the holy ideals of the sacrament of matrimony instituted by Christ, maintains unspotted its true character of sanctuary. In such a sanctuary of love, parental authority is fashioned after the authority of God, the Father, from Whom, as a matter of fact, it originates and after which even it is named. (Ephesians iii, 15) The obedience of the children imitates that of the Divine Child of Nazareth, and the whole family life is inspired by the sacred ideals of the Holy Family. Finally, Jesus Christ reigns over society when men recognize and reverence the sovereignty of Christ, when they accept the divine origin and control over all social forces, a recognition which is the basis of the right to command for those in authority and of the duty to obey for those who are subjects, a duty which cannot but ennoble all who live up to its demands. Christ reigns where the position in society which He Himself has assigned to His Church is recognized, for He bestowed on the Church the status and the constitution of a society which, by reason of the perfect ends which it is called upon to attain, must be held to be supreme in its own sphere; He also made her the depository and interpreter of His divine teachings, and, by consequence, the teacher and guide of every other society whatsoever, not of course in the sense that she should abstract in the least from their authority, each in its own sphere supreme, but that she should really perfect their authority, just as divine grace perfects human nature, and should give to them the assistance necessary for men to attain their true final end, eternal happiness, and by that very fact make them the more deserving and certain promoters of their happiness here below.

It is, therefore, a fact which cannot be questioned that the true peace of Christ can only exist in the Kingdom of Christ -- "the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ." It is no less unquestionable that, in doing all we can to bring about the re-establishment of Christ's kingdom, we will be working most effectively toward a lasting world peace. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

Margaret Sanger’s prescriptions for “peace” were founded on making warfare upon the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, thus helping to predispose men to be at war with each other at a moment’s notice in the domestic cell that is the family, in their neighborhoods and their cities and in their country. Yes, there is a direct line from Father Martin Luther to Margaret Sanger to the events in Ferguson, Missouri. Sanger was one of the most successful evangelists of evil that the world has ever known, more successful than the man under whose auspices Ernst Rudin worked, none other than the murderous Adolf Hitler himself (see Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part one and Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two).

Margaret Sanger and her cohorts were not the only ones who were on the cutting edge of “progressive” social thought in the 1920s and 1930s. White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPS) sought to curb the procreation of “undesirables,” most especially blacks and “imbeciles,” and to convince Catholics to rebel against a “rigid” teaching of Holy Mother Church that kept them from “enjoying” the “freedom” that supposedly was to be found in a debased use of that which is proper to the married state.

The eugenics crowd received judicial support from the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the infamous case of Buck v. Bell, May 2, 1927. The Court’s majority opinion was written by the notorious utilitarian and legal positivist, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Here are some chilling passages of what this “enlightened” jurist wrote as he justified a Commonwealth of Virginia law, that mandated sterilization of those deemed to be “imbecilic”:

The judgment finds the facts that have been recited and that Carrie Buck 'is the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring, likewise afflicted, that she may be sexually sterilized without detriment to her general health and that her welfare and that of society will be promoted by her sterilization,' and thereupon makes the order. In view of the general declarations of the Legislature and the specific findings of the Court obviously we cannot say as matter of law that the grounds do not exist, and if they exist they justify the result. We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 , 25 S. Ct. 358, 3 Ann. Cas. 765. Three generations of imbeciles are enough. [274 U.S. 200, 208]   But, it is said, however it might be if this reasoning were applied generally, it fails when it is confined to the small number who are in the institutions named and is not applied to the multitudes outside. It is the usual last resort of constitutional arguments to point out shortcomings of this sort. But the answer is that the law does all that is needed when it does all that it can, indicates a policy, applies it to all within the lines, and seeks to bring within the lines all similarly situated so far and so fast as its means allow. Of course so far as the operations enable those who otherwise must be kept confined to be returned to the world, and thus open the asylum to others, the equality aimed at will be more nearly reached. (See the text of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the case of  Buck v. Bell, May 2, 1997.)

The only dissenter in this case was Pierce Butler, a Catholic who, though a Democrat, had been appointed by a Republican president, Warren Gamaliel Harding. Holmes believed that Butler’s religion caused him to dissent, thereby preventing the Supreme Court from issuing its decision in Buck v. Bell unanimously. Holmes was a “progressive.” He wanted to remake society according to supposedly “scientific” principles and believed that those principles could be enforced upon all if a legislative and/or judicial majority decided upon so.

The decision in Buck v. Bell was welcomed by Margaret Sanger and her pals just as much as Holmes’s lecture at Harvard University nine years before, that is, in 1918, came at a time she was opening “birth control clinics” in predominantly black neighborhoods:

Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so. If I may quote myself again, property, friendship, and truth have a common root in time. One cannot be wrenched from the rocky crevices into which one has grown for many years without feeling that one is attacked in one’s life. What we most love and revere generally is determined by early associations. I love granite rocks and barberry bushes, no doubt because with them were my earliest joys that reach back through the past eternity of my life. But while one’s experience thus makes certain preferences dogmatic for oneself, recognition of how they came to be so leaves one able to see that others, poor souls, may be equally dogmatic about something else. And this again means skepticism. Not that one’s belief or love does not remain. Not that we would not fight and die for it if important—we all, whether we know it or not, are fighting to make the kind of a world that we should like—but that we have learned to recognize that others will fight and die to make a different world, with equal sincerity or belief. Deep-seated preferences cannot be argued about—you cannot argue a man into liking a glass of beer—and therefore, when differences are sufficiently far reaching, we try to kill the other man rather than let him have his way. But that is perfectly consistent with admitting that, so far as appears, his grounds are just as good as ours.

The jurists who believe in natural law seem to me to be in that naïve state of mind that accepts what has been familiar and accepted by all men everywhere. No doubt it is true that, so far as we can see ahead, some arrangements and the rudiments of familiar institutions seem to be necessary elements in any society that may spring from our own and that would seem to us to be civilized—some form of permanent association between the sexes—some residue of property individually owned—some mode of binding oneself to specified future conduct—at the bottom of all, some protection for the person. But without speculating whether a group is imaginable in which all but the last of these might disappear and the last be subject to qualifications that most of us would abhor, the question remains as to theOught of natural law. . . .

The most fundamental of the supposed preexisting rights—the right to life—is sacrificed without a scruple not only in war, but whenever the interest of society, that is, of the predominant power in the community, is thought to demand it. Whether that interest is the interest of mankind in the long run no one can tell, and as, in any event, to those who do not think with Kant and Hegel it is only an interest, the sanctity disappears. I remember a very tender-hearted judge being of opinion that closing a hatch to stop a fire and the destruction of a cargo was justified even if it was known that doing so would stifle a man below. It is idle to illustrate further, because to those who agree with me I am uttering commonplaces and to those who disagree I am ignoring the necessary foundations of thought. The a priori men generally call the dissentients superficial. But I do agree with them in believing that one’s attitude on these matters is closely connected with one’s general attitude toward the universe. Proximately, as has been suggested, it is determined largely by early associations and temperament, coupled with the desire to have an absolute guide. Men to a great extent believe what they want to—although I see in that no basis for a philosophy that tells us what we should want to want.

Now when we come to our attitude toward the universe I do not see any rational ground for demanding the superlative—for being dissatisfied unless we are assured that our truth is cosmic truth, if there is such a thing—that the ultimates of a little creature on this little earth are the last word of the unimaginable whole. If a man sees no reason for believing that significance, consciousness and ideals are more than marks of the finite, that does not justify what has been familiar in French skeptics; getting upon a pedestal and professing to look with haughty scorn upon a world in ruins. The real conclusion is that the part cannot swallow the whole—that our categories are not, or may not be, adequate to formulate what we cannot know. If we believe that we come out of the universe, not it out of us, we must admit that we do not know what we are talking about when we speak of brute matter. We do know that a certain complex of energies can wag its tail and another can make syllogisms. These are among the powers of the unknown, and if, as may be, it has still greater powers that we cannot understand, as Fabre in his studies of instinct would have us believe, studies that gave Bergson one of the strongest strands for his philosophy and enabled Maeterlinck to make us fancy for a moment that we heard a clang from behind phenomena—if this be true, why should we not be content? Why should we employ the energy that is furnished to us by the cosmos to defy it and shake our fist at the sky? It seems to me silly. (Natural Law by Oliver Wendell Holmes)

This elegy in behalf of the relativism that is legal positivism (the belief that morality is whatever “the law” says it is; in other words, that legal might makes moral right) had come into its own in the early-Twentieth Century, taking its place along with the other “scientific” ideas of “enlightened progressives,” including Margaret Sanger. Moreover, much of the language used by Holmes in 1918 reflects the mind of Jorge Mario Bergoglio with perfection as the Argentine Apostate rejects the certainty of Catholic doctrine and condemns as “rigid” those who believe it to be certain.

Interestingly, the Virginia sterilization statue at issue in Buck v. Bell had been based on the same set of eugenics directives that had been devised at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in Cold Spring Harbor, New York (which I have driven past hundreds upon hundreds of times in my life as it was located near my beloved Oyster Bay Cove, New York; this facility of pure evil was very visible the across the body of water known as Cold Spring Harbor from the Whaler’s Cove Yacht Club where my parents had a twenty-seven foot cruise boat docked between 1967 and 1972), that Adolf Hitler himself used as the model for his own eugenics laws that were denounced in 1941 by Bishop Clemens von Galen of Munster, Germany (see Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two).

As bad as things are now, they will only get worse and worse. They have gotten worse in the past forty-five years since the wellsprings of a superabundance of Sanctifying and Actual Graces began to dry up after the institutionalization of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service on Sunday, November 30, 1969 (see Nothing New Under Jorge's Sun).

The downward spiral, though, was over four centuries in the making, longer yet if one considers how certain elements of the Renaissance helped to undermine the integrity of Faith and Morals in various intellectual and artistic circles in the century before the rise of Martin Luther, but we are seeing the tragic consequences of this spiral into the abyss right before our very eyes.

Contraception, of course, resulted in widespread adultery, divorces, broken families, the feminization of poverty and, ultimately, the “legalization” of surgical abortion up to and including the day of birth. This denial of the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage has produced a mentality of selfishness between spouses, most of whom view children as something to be “planned” or “wanted” and not the first end of their married lives. The belief that one can “plan” to have children was followed by the belief that married couples have a “right” to have a child if a wife (or the husband) is infertile. Those who do not accept that it is part of God’s Holy Providence for men and women to join together in Holy Matrimony to welcome as many or as few children as He sees fit to send them will not accept His Holy Will if they are incapable of having children.

There is a long history of infertile couples over the centuries who have chosen to adopt children. Some of these couples continue to do so quite generously in our day. The logic of contraception is such, however, that the desires of the couple, whether married or not these days, are the sole determinant of how many children to have and what to do if even morally acceptable surgical remedies are incapable of rendering an infertile man or woman fertile.

It is this narcissistic and sentimentally-driven belief that led certain scientists who have no regard for the laws of God to create a “market” for the infertile by means of in vitro fertilization. This immoral process of creating a human being outside of the laws ordained by God was based on the expectation that untold thousands of fertilized human embryos, who are human beings, will die before being implanted within a woman’s uterus. Perhaps it should be noted that it came to pass that artificially fertilized human beings were implanted in the wombs of “surrogate” mothers. A very profitable money-making industry was created to cater to human sentiment in an era when people are indifferent to, ignorant or just plain hostile to the laws ordained by God.

The first such “petri dish” baby, Louise Brown, was born forty years ago. A 2015 news story about this supposed biological breakthrough that represented another phase in the realization of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World recounted the story, which includes a matter-of-fact statement that in vitro fertilization has made it possible for “same sex” couples and “single mothers” to have children:

In July 1978 Louise Brown was hailed as the world's first "test-tube baby", born through the fertility treatment IVF. But how does her story compare with modern procedures?

"On the day I was born, my mum had to be taken to the operating theatre for her Caesarean section in pitch darkness, with just a torchlight showing the way," Louise Brown explains.

"Only a few staff knew who she was, and my parents didn't want others realising her identity and tipping off the newspapers."

Louise's birth was cloaked in secrecy. Even her father John's first visit to see her in Oldham General Hospital was under the eye of police officers, who lined the corridor outside.

The reason was that his daughter, from Bristol, had become the world's first "test-tube baby", as the press hailed her.

More accurately, she was the first to be born through in-vitro fertilisation (IVF), a process in which an egg is removed from the woman's ovaries and fertilised with sperm in a laboratory, before being implanted into the uterus.

It is a treatment used to enable couples with a range of fertility problems to conceive a child, and now allows same-sex couples and single mothers to have children too.

Technological advancements mean - according to 2013 estimates - more than five million people worldwide have been born through this process.

But in 1978 it was highly experimental, and Dr Mike Macnamee, chief executive at the world's first IVF clinic - Bourn Hall in Cambridge - believes Louise "really was a miracle".

The two men who pioneered the treatment - gynaecologist Patrick Steptoe and Nobel Prize-winning physiologist Robert Edwards - "had gone through hundreds of embryo transfers before Louise was conceived", he adds.

The pair had joined forces a full 10 years earlier, with skills that perfectly complemented one another - Edwards having developed a way to fertilise human eggs within the laboratory and Steptoe having devised a method for obtaining the eggs from the ovaries.

When Louise's mother Lesley was put in contact with Steptoe by her doctor, she was warned there was a "one in a million" chance of success.

So when it worked, it was such a momentous scientific advancement that the birth had to be filmed - under agreement with the government - to give documented evidence that Louise was indeed her mother's.

Even before her mother was able to hold her newborn, Louise had undergone around 60 different tests to ensure she was "normal".

This is a far cry from modern procedures, which - owing much to the work of Bourn Hall in the 1980s - follow a refined and well-established clinical process.

"Once they [Steptoe and Edwards] worked out how to fertilise the egg, they very soon wanted to restrict the number of embryos they transferred into women - so they didn't have too many multiple births," Dr Macnamee explains.

"Development of the freezing technique in the mid-80s meant they could implant one or two embryos [into the would-be mother] and then freeze other embryos for future use, saving her the uncomfortable procedure of having the eggs removed again."

Progress can also be seen in the modern use of ultrasound imaging to harvest the eggs under a mild sedation, rather than the form of keyhole surgery known as laparoscopy that was previously employed.

Techniques developed in the late 1980s also made a big difference in treating male infertility by injecting single sperm directly into the egg.

These, and other, small incremental steps mean the success rate for each round of IVF has grown from 10% to 40% since the early 80s, when Dr Macnamee's first role included the hands-on task of mixing the eggs and sperm in a petri dish.

The chances of successfully conceiving through IVF decline with age, but the process is now more effective per cycle than natural reproduction. It does not, however, have approval from all quarters.

In November, Pope Francis said the process promoted children as "a right rather than a gift to welcome" and was "playing with life".

Yet in August 1978, Cardinal Albino Luciani - shortly to become Pope John Paul I - unexpectedly refused to criticise Louise's parents for using IVF, saying they had simply wanted to have a baby.

"It helped to counteract some of the negative things people were saying," Louise says.

"My mum got loads of letters from people. They were mostly positive, but there was some hate mail. (Louise  Brown Reflects at thirty-five.)

Ignoring this news report’s celebration of a violation of the laws of God that the adversary has used to further destroy the family and to convince a large percentage of people worldwide to accept any kind of “family” as perfectly legitimate as long as those involved are “happy,” the section in bold just above should disprove any lingering myths that Archbishop Albino Luciani, who was a true bishop, was any kind of “traditionalist.” He was not. He was a heretic, and he believed that there could be instances in which married couples could use contraception licitly, which is why he could accept in vitro fertilization so blithely.

All right, Jorge Mario Bergoglio got this one right. Remember, even broken clocks are right twice a day. Please see Jorge's Address to Itlian Catholic Medical Association for the full context of Bergoglio’s address to the Italian Catholic Medical Association on November 15, 2014, the Feast of Saint Albert the Great.

Also, although couched in conciliarspeak and its regard for “human dignity” and “human rights,” the so-called Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, then headed by Joseph Alois “Cardinal” Ratzinger, issued a document, Donum Vitae, February 22, 1987, that condemned in vitro fertilization in very clear terms (the appendix below contains an excerpt from the concluding section of this document, which was issued under the authority of  the otherwise heterodox Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger, who was then the congregation’s perfect. Novus Ordo Watch has a critique of Ratzinger’s latest foray into heresy, although his belief that there the Catholic Church has “no mission to the Jews” is not at all new as Walter “Cardinal” Kasper said the same thing in 2008. Indeed, a former colleague of mine, without naming me, denounced those who believed that Kasper spoke for his boss, “Pope Benedict XVI,” as guilty of rash judgment. No, it was true then. It is true now. See Many Acts of Evil Demand Many Acts of Reparation, Defending the Truth is Never Any Kind of Game and Here We Go Again: Fifty Years of Bowing Down to the Talmudists.

Alas, the pull of Protestant and Judeo-Masonic sentimentality is such that even most Catholics alive today have the sensus Catholicus of the late Albino Luciani/John Paul I, which is to say that they believe there is no conflict between doing what one wants for “good motives” and doing what God commands. After all, a “merciful God” wants people to be “happy.” Why shouldn’t they use contraception and/or in vitro fertilization.) The temptations to go along with everyone else in a pluralist culture are so strong that it gets easier and easier over time for even believing Catholics to grow silent in the face of evil and to sublimate even any attenuated sense of serving as a soldier in the Army of Christ the King to openly oppose the incremental advance of that which is offensive to God and injurious to souls—and thus to the common good of one’s own nation and the world-at-large.

This is why even most supposedly “pro-life” Catholics were deaf, dumb and blind as then President George Walker Bush, the son of the recently deceased President George Herbert Walker Bush, increased the Federal funding for “family planning” programs, permitted his Food and Drug Administration to authorize the over-the-counter sale of the “Plan B” baby-killing pill and decided to continue Federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research.

Indeed, Dubya Bush was proud of the fact that his administration increased the amount of money being spent by our tax dollars on domestic and international "family planning" programs, which, of course, dispatched innocent preborn babies to death by chemical means. Here is a letter sent in behalf of then President Bush to United States Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-New York) on May 25, 2006:

The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Ms. Maloney:
Thank you for your letter to President Bush to request his views on access to birth control. The President has asked that I respond on his behalf. This Administration supports the availability of safe and effective products and services to assist responsible adults in making decisions about preventing or delaying conception.

The Department of Health and Human Services faithfully executes laws establishing Federal programs to provide contraception and family planning services. The Title X Family Planning Program and Medicaid are each significant providers of family planning services.
Additionally, this Administration strongly supports teaching abstinence to young people as the only 100 percent effective means of preventing pregnancy, HIV, and sexually transmitted infections (STIs).
I will provide this response to the other signatories of your letter.
Sincerely yours, John O. Agwunobi, Assistant Secretary for Health (Bush Supports Contraception Letter)

Contraception, of course, of its very evil nature, over and above the fact that most contraceptives serve as abortifacients that kill babies chemically or act to expel fertilized human beings from implanting in the uterus, is denial of the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage and has led to the rise of promiscuity, an epidemic of venereal diseases, surgical abortion, broken homes, maladjusted children, the feminization of poverty and to the open proselytizing in behalf of sodomy, one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.

As noted just above, George Walker Bush announced at 9:00 p.m. on Thursday, August 9, 2001, that he was going to permitted the use of Federal taxpayer dollars to fund embryonic stem cell research on embryonic human beings whose "lines" were created before the time of his announcement. In so doing, of course, Bush authorized the death of those human beings and at the same time justify the immoral, evil practice of in vitro fertilization while doing nothing to stop the privately funded death and destruction of such embryonic human beings on those "lines" created after the date and time of his announcement:

My administration must decide whether to allow federal funds, your tax dollars, to be used for scientific research on stem cells derived from human embryos.  A large number of these embryos already exist.  They are the product of a process called in vitro fertilization, which helps so many couples conceive children.  When doctors match sperm and egg to create life outside the womb, they usually produce more embryos than are planted in the mother.  Once a couple successfully has children, or if they are unsuccessful, the additional embryos remain frozen in laboratories. (Remarks by the President on Stem Cell Research.) 

This is what I wrote at the time in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos:

Indeed, this whole controversy is the direct result of the rejection of the teaching authority of the Church on matters of faith and morals, as well as on matters of fundamental justice. For it is the rejection of the Deposit of Faith our Lord entrusted to Holy Mother Church that gave rise to the ethos of secularism and religious indifferentism, which became the breeding grounds for secularism and relativism and positivism.

A world steeped in all manner of secular political ideologies comes not only to reject the Deposit of Faith but to make war against all that is contained therein, especially as it relates to matters of the sanctity of marital relations and the stability of the family.

Contraception gave rise to abortion. Contraception also gave rise to the mentality which resulted in artificial conception. If a child's conception can be prevented as suits "partners," then it stands to reason that a child can be conceived "on demand" by using the latest technology science has to offer.

The Church has condemned artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization on a number of occasions as offenses to the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity of marital relations. Yet it is the very rejection of the Church's affirmation of what is contained in the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law which leads people, including George W. Bush, into thinking that artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization are morally licit to help couples deal with the problem of childlessness, ignoring the simple little truth that no one is entitled to a child.

Children are gifts from God to be accepted according to His plan for a particular couple. If a married couple cannot have a child on their own, they can adopt -- or they can use their time to be of greater service to the cause of the Church in the evangelization of the true Faith. No one, however, is entitled to a child.

Indeed, the whole tragedy of harvesting the stem cells of living human beings has arisen as a result of discoveries made by scientists experimenting on human beings conceived in fertility clinics to help couples conceive artificially.

That George W. Bush endorses this immoral enterprise (which is big business, by the way) and actually commends it as a way to "help" couples is deplorable.

It is as though he is saying the following: "We are not going to kill any more Jews for their body parts. We will only use the body parts of the Jews we have killed already. After all, we have people who will benefit from this research, do we not?"

Living human embryos do not have the "potential" for life, as Bush asserted on August 9, 2001. They are living human beings! To seek to profit from their destruction is ghoulish, and will only wind up encouraging the private sector to fund all stem-cell research, creating more "stem cell lines" from the destruction of living human beings. ("Preposterous," Christ or Chaos, September, 2001) 

Mrs. Judie Brown, the president and founder of the American Life League, wrote a retrospective on Caesar Georgii Bushus Ignoramus's stem cell decision some years later:

You have probably heard that right at the top of Speaker Nancy Pelosi's agenda is the promise of "hope to families with devastating diseases."

What she is promising, of course, is a Congressional action that will result in tons of federal tax dollars being spent on failed research using the dead bodies of embryonic children.

The White House, of course, is saying "the president has made it clear he believes in stem cell research so much -- the administration has done more to finance stem cell research, embryonic and otherwise, than any administration in history."

You see, Bush never really banned research using the bodies of embryonic children, he merely curtailed how much research could be done using tax dollars. So it would appear that everyone ... Democrat and Republican ... is on the same page.

The tragic reality underlying such statements is that over the course of the last 34 years, politicians and a whole lot of pro-lifers have let the principle of personhood slide away into oblivion for the sake of winning elections. And the result is staring us all in the face. (Embryo Wars.)

Once again, ladies and gentlemen, no one is “pro-life” unless he opposes all offenses against the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity of marriage and the inviolability of all innocent human life without any exception or qualification. In vitro fertilization is monstrous. We will only find out in eternity how many billions of innocent human beings were deprived of the Beatific Vision by being conceived artificially, experimented upon in their embryonic states and then killed off and consigned to Limbo.

The monstrous activities of a scientific world untethered by any respect for the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law have been premised upon the acceptance upon the disproved ideology of evolutionism. A veritable race of mad men posing as respectable scientists are rushing to be seen as pioneers in the development of artificial intelligence implanted into robots (one such robot assigned to the International Space Station asked a human astronaut not to be “mean” to him—see Cimon Robot Accuses International Space Crew of Being Mean to it.)

We are not yet at the point of mad scientists creating artificial human beings with home-brewed Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). However, there might be some mad scientist out there who is trying to do so. What we do know is that there is at least one mad scientist who claims to have created gene-edited babies:

Hong Kong (CNN) China has suspended the research activities of the scientists who claimed to have created the world's first gene-edited babies, state-run Xinhua news reported Thursday.

The moves comes after Chinese scientist He Jiankui announced Monday that two ostensibly healthy twin girls had been born this month from embryos altered to make them resistant to HIV.

Chinese authorities called He's claim "extremely abominable in nature" and a violation of Chinese law, according to Xinhua.

"The gene-edited twins matter reported by the media has brazenly violated Chinese laws and regulations and breached the science ethics bottom line, which is both shocking and unacceptable," said Xu Nanping, vice minister of the Ministry of Science and Technology, Xinhua reported.

He, an associate professor at the Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen, claims to have used a gene-editing tool known as CRISPR-cas9, which can insert or deactivate certain genes. CRISPR has been hailed as an innovation with tremendous potential, but many in the scientific community believe the technology is still experimental and not ready for human application.

It is unknown whether the procedure is safe or, if used in pregnancy, whether it can have unintended consequences for the babies later in life or for future generations.

Editing the genes of embryos intended for pregnancy is banned in many counties, including the United States. In the United Kingdom, editing of embryos may be permitted for research purposes with strict regulatory approval.

China has long been considered on the forefront of gene-editing technology, bankrolling expensive research projects and boasting less regulation in the field than Western nations.

But He's research has raised serious ethical questions around the transparency of gene editing and sparked calls for a globally binding code of conduct.

He's claims have neither been independently verified nor peer-reviewed. He said his research has been submitted to a scientific journal for review, without naming the publication, and apologized for the result leaking "unexpectedly."

n Wednesday, he publicly defended his work at a summit in Hong Kong, saying he was "proud" of his achievement. He also raised the possibility of a third child being born, after announcing that a separate woman was pregnant at an early stage with a modified embryo.

But after He's presentation, conference Chairman David Baltimore said the research was not medically necessary, as there are other treatments for HIV. Organizers of the conference called for an independent investigation to "verify this claim and to ascertain whether the claimed DNA modifications have occurred."

After He's findings were announced, the Chinese government ordered an "immediate investigation" into the incident. (Chinese Scientist Claims Gene-Edited Twins Have Been Born.)

HONG KONG — A Chinese scientist’s claim that he used the genome editing technology CRISPR-Cas9 to alter the DNA of human embryos, resulting in the birth a few weeks ago of twin girls, stunned organizers of the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing, leaving them scrambling to evaluate the claim two days before the scientist is scheduled to speak at the meeting.

“I don’t know the details” of the claim by He Jiankui, said David Baltimore of the California Institute of Technology, chairman of the organizing committee of the summit, which begins on Tuesday in Hong Kong. “We don’t know what will be said” when He speaks at a session on human embryo editing.

The summit’s organizing committee issued a statement Monday saying they had only just learned of He’s research in Shenzhen, China. “Whether the clinical protocols that resulted in the births in China conformed with the guidance” of leading scientific bodies for conducting clinical trials of heritable genome editing “remains to be determined,” the statement said. “We hope that the dialogue at our summit further advances the world’s understanding of the issues surrounding human genome editing. Our goal is to help ensure that human genome editing research be pursued responsibly, for the benefit of all society.”

Harvard biologist and genetics pioneer George Church said the claims were “probably accurate.

“I’ve been in contact with the Shenzhen team and have seen the data,” he said by email from Indianapolis. “The sequencing assays used are generally unambiguous especially when done in multiple cell types at different developmental stages and in two children.”

Church added: “Is the genie really out of the bottle? Yes.”

Dr. George Daley, dean of Harvard Medical School and a member of the organizing committee for the summit here, said He had been invited to speak because of a 2017 talk he gave at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory about genome editing in human, monkey, and mouse embryos. At that session, He described altering target DNA in human embryos created through in vitro fertilization, resulting in few unintended edits (“off-target effects“). The most serious problem was that only some of the embryos’ cells were successfully edited, resulting in what’s called mosaicism.

But He said then that he was able to increase the proportion of edited cells by injecting the very early embryos with CRISPR-Cas9 twice: once when they consisted of only a single cell, and again when they consisted of two cells.

This 2017 talk, He had not said he planned to use the edited IVF embryos to initiate a pregnancy. He ended his presentation by citing the case of Jesse Gelsinger, whose 1999 death in a trial of gene therapy — the much less precise forerunner of genome editing — set that field back by more than a decade. He urged scientists who are contemplating embryo editing to proceed slowly and “with caution,” since “a single case of failure will kill the entire field.”

The Chinese university where He is an associate professor issued a statement saying that it had been unaware of his research project and that He had been on leave without pay since February. The work has “seriously violated academic ethics and codes of conduct,” Southern University of Science and Technology in Shenzhen said in the statement. The university called on international experts to investigate. (Claims of Gene-Edited Babies Stuns Genome Editing Summit.)

The Chicom authorities doth protest a bit too much as it was in Red China that the first human-rabbit hybrid embryo was developed fifteen years ago:

Scientists in China have, for the first time, used cloning techniques to create hybrid embryos that contain a mix of DNA from both humans and rabbits, according to a report in a scientific journal that has reignited the smoldering ethics debate over cloning research.

More than 100 of the hybrids, made by fusing human skin cells with rabbit eggs, were allowed to develop in laboratory dishes for several days before the scientists destroyed them to retrieve so-called embryonic stem cells from their interiors. Although scientists in Massachusetts had previously mixed human cells and cow eggs in a similar attempt to make hybrid embryos as a source of stem cells, those experiments were not successful.

Researchers said yesterday they were hopeful that the rabbit work would lead to a new and plentiful source of embryonic stem cells for research and, eventually, for medical use. But theologians and others decried the work as unethical.

Some wondered aloud what, exactly, such a creature would be if it were transferred to a womb to develop to term.

The vast majority of the DNA in the embryos is human, with a small percentage of genetic material -- called mitochondrial DNA -- contributed by the rabbit egg. No one knows if such an embryo could develop into a viable fetus, though some experiments with other species suggest it would not.

Congress has been mulling legislation for years that would outlaw certain human cloning experiments, with some opposed to any creation of cloned embryos for research and others sympathetic to research uses as long as the embryos are not allowed to grow into cloned babies. No law has been passed, however, in part because of researchers' warnings that the proposed restrictions are so far-reaching that they would hobble development of new medical treatments.

The new work, led by Hui Zhen Sheng of Shanghai Second Medical University, appears in the latest issue of Cell Research and was highlighted in a news report in the journal Nature. Cell Research is a peer-reviewed -- if little-known in the United States -- bimonthly scientific journal affiliated with the Shanghai Institute of Cell Biology and the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Some researchers yesterday said they were frustrated by the lack of details in the paper.

The team said it retrieved foreskin tissue from two 5-year-old boys and two men, and facial tissue from a 60-year-old woman, as a source of skin cells. They fused those cells with New Zealand rabbit eggs from which the vast majority of rabbit DNA had been removed. More than 400 of those new, fused entities grew into early embryos, and more than 100 survived to the blastocyst stage -- the point at which coveted stem cells begin to form.

The approach could help scientists wishing to mass-produce human embryos as sources of human embryonic stem cells. Stem cells can morph into all kinds of tissues and may be able to reverse the effects of various degenerative diseases. But to make cloned embryos, scientists need both normal body cells -- such as skin cells -- and egg cells, which have the unique capacity to "reprogram" the genes in body cells and make them behave as though they were embryo cells. (Human-Rabbit Produced by Cloning in Red China.)

There is much that unites the Chicom with the supposed “civilized” class of Judeo-Masonic rulers in the West, including in the United States of America, of course, where our social engineers have long championed usury, materialism, licentiousness, contraception, divorce, abortion, sodomy and the vivisection of innocent human beings for their vital bodily organs under the aegis of the medical industry’s manufactured, profit-making myth of “brain death.”

While the murderous Chicom authorities have, at least for now, condemned He Jiankui’s gene-editing of twin babies, they are, of course, the world’s leaders in forced abortions and sterilizations, the one-child-per-family and the vivisection of living human beings for their vital body organs, many of which wind up on the international black market for purposes of “transplantation.” The late Dr. Harry Wu reported at a conference in 1997 that he personally witnessed the execution of political criminals by means of vivisection for their vital body organs while they were fully conscious. The Red Chinese oligarchs are tyrannical murderers who are not in the least constrained by “ethical” considerations, and thus it will only be a matter of time before the Red Chinese government comes to accept what He Jiankui has done and then to develop his “breakthrough” as a means of “editing” a more compliant and subservient populace for the future.

Indeed, there has been a long history of baby-killing in China even before its Communist captivity as this land of such intelligent and inventive people has been in the grip of the devil by means of pagan superstitions and practices dating back to the earliest history of that country’s different regions. Consider this account taken from the late Maryknoll missionary Father Joseph Patrick Lavin’s own words, prefaced by a brief introduction written by two of his nephews, that documented the Chinese pagan practice of throwing away girl babies:

Father Joe's first port in China was Loting. He was assigned to that mission as curate to Father Robert Kennelly. Caring for and baptizing abandoned babies and running the orphanage were an important part of Maryknoll's work there, and Father Joe jumped into this assignment with both feet running. He ever authored several pieces for The Field Afar about the founding of the Loting Mission by Father Daniel McShane. In one early article entitled, “Suffer the Little Ones to Come Unto Me,” Father Joe not only describes his assignment, but also discusses the many prejudices and obstacles that had to be overcome to save the bodies and souls of these unwanted babies. Here follows a good chunk of that article; it is enough to give the reader a very clear picture of what the Maryknoll spirit was all about:

SUFFER THE LITTLE ONES TO COME UNTO ME

The Loting Orphanage stands as a memorial to the late Father Daniel McShane. His name will always be connected with the work for abandoned babies. Even today, the Christians and pagans alike remember the great work done by this Apostle of Christ for these helpless castaways.

The care and attention for abandoned waifs was a dear work to the heart of Father McShane. His heart was Christlike and he imitated the Savior in his love for the little ones: “Suffer the little children to come unto Me for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” …

Thought the charity of American Catholics, Father McShane was able to build an orphanage at Loting, but under very trying circumstances. He sang “Te Deum” in 1923 when the Maryknoll Sisters came to Loting, and assisted him in the care for the little ones. Too much praise cannot be given to the Sisters for their splendid work and untiring zeal among these poor babies. The people though that the babies were brought to the establishent, and left to die from hunger and ill-treatment, or murdered, and finally the babies eyes were plucked out for medical use. These accusations were heart-rending to Father McShane, and it took many years to prove to these pagan people that these accusations were false and groundless. Their ignorance can be explained in the fact that we are foreigners and they cannot understand why we leave home to take care of outcast children; and secondly the charity of Christ as such in is unknown to pagans.

A few years later, Father McShane opened another orphanage for undesired babies at Lintaan. He bought an old Chinese shack on Iron Street and put a Chinese woman in charge. The people were very bitter and showed their hostility on many occasions by stoning the small shack – it is a good thing that Chinese dwellings have no glass windows. The old patented charges were hurled at the Church, but as time went on, the people were gradually educated and now things are calm and peaceful.

Father McShane died at Loting on June 4, 1927, a victim of smallpox. He contracted smallpox from one of the babies whom he baptized. No one else would handle this baby covered from head to foot with smallpox, so after the saving water of baptism was poured upon her head. Father McShane put the little thief of heaven in a small wooden cradle in the orphanage to die. On the following day, the newly baptized infant entered the fates of heaven to enjoy the beatific vision and there pray for her spiritual father and the Loting orphans.

Fourteen days later, Father McShane passed on to his reward. What must have been his joy when this abandoned waif and countless other orphans greeted their Spiritual Father at the gates of paradise? . . .

Just the other day, I baptized an orphan, who was covered with this dreadful disease of smallpox. Of course, the story of Father McShane's death rushed through my mind. We have many cases of smallpox and other contagious diseases.

The custom of throwing away babies does not exist in every part of China, but it is a fairly widespread evil and exists to some extent in most large cities. The custom of discarding babies in Loting and Lintaan is practiced on a scale that even amazes the Chinese.

Only the baby girls are the victims of wholesale slaughter. The Chinese never abandon or throw away a baby boy, because the boys are the pride of the Chinese family and the future of the clan depends upon them. A Chinese father said: when a boy is born, he is given a piece of gold to play with; when a girl comes into the world, she is given a piece of clay to play with.

What is the source of this evil practice of throwing away baby girls: The chief reason is superstition. Poverty also plays an important role in discarding infants, but the parents always find sufficient food to nourish and rear a baby boy. The baby boy must be brought up at the cost of any sacrifice or hardship.

Superstition plays havoc in china and it meets these poor people at every turn during the day. It is a very rare case when the mother does not want to raise the baby girl. A Chinese mother loves her children – boys or girls – just as the mothers in the rest of the world. Motherhood is the same the world over. The husband, or members of the clan, force the mother to get rid of the baby girl because of superstition.

The fifth and the ninth month of the Chines calendar play an important part in this evil practice. The fifth month is by far the most superstitious and it is a well-known fact that a baby girl, born during the fifth month, and reared by the family, the father of the girl will certainly die. Last year during the fifth month, the Loting Orphanage received one hundred and fifty waifs – this is a record.

Fortune tellers and “devil or witch women” play an important part in the lives of baby girls. The baby girls are brought to the fortune tellers or “devil women” and if the verdict reads that the baby will bring misfortune on the family, naturally the parents do away with the girl. Fortune tellers and these “devil women” cause the destruction of many helpless infants and are a curse to China.

The poor waifs are sometimes brought to our door by the mother or some member of the family, or some good friend. Our hired nurses, and other women friendly to the Church, bring in most of the babies. It is not an uncommon sight to see a man bring an abandoned baby. Women with the babies strapped to their backs walk for miles to give the little ones shelter and care at the Loting asylum. I know of one case when a woman with an infant strapped to her back walked over twenty-five miles to bring the little tot to out institution.

Loting has four blind orphans. Pauline, the oldest, is in charge of the three tiny waif – feeds, washed and takes good care of them. She takes great pride in her work and is an inspiration to all of us. The blind girls can cut grass, pull up and carry water, grind and pound rice, take care of the small orphans and do other odd jobs.

Since the establishment of the Loting and Lintaan Orphanages, about sixteen thousand waifs have been received and cared for. Out of this number only eighty-five have been reared {to adulthood}. Their ages run from six months to sixteen years ole. The babies are baptized, and then given out to the nurses, who care for them for one year, and then the waifs are returned to the orphanage and cared for by hired women and the older orphans. At first sight this seems to be a very low average, but when you recall to mind that infant mortality in China is very high, and secondly, that the majority of these waifs are brought to us when in the jaws of death, the percentage is not so startling. Most of them die because of former hardships and hunger. Many are diseased and smallpox is very prevalent, and lockjaw is very common.

On an average, the Loting Orphanage receives about twelve hundred babies and Lintaan about four hundred a year.

Famine is now striking heavily at our door. This year two crops of rice and sweet potatoes have been destroyed due to drought. Hungry mouths demand food, and when the cupboard is bare, we call and plead with our friends for help in our necessities. Remember St. Paul said; “it is better to give than to receive.” We feel confident that you will come to our assistance and give us the necessary money to feed and clothe these abandoned waifs. Last month, due to the famine, one hundred and sixty-nine babies poured through our doors. It is a had job t raise these abandoned babies, but the burden becomes heavier and also hopeless when financial help is lacking.

Loting has been called “the subway to heaven for abandoned babies.”

Most of these waif die shortly after the saving water of baptism has been poured. Your small offering will help us to uy more babes, and thereby increase the population in heaven.

The Maryknoll Sisters, with the assistance of the native women, are in charge of the two orphanages. Too much praise cannot be given to the Sisters for their splendid work with the orphans. They are a great help and give the orphans the necessary medicare care, schooling and a good Catholic training.

The care of the little ones is dear to the Heart of Jesus Christ, and also has a special appeal to each and every one of us. We can all do our share in praying for the success of the orphanage work and also by giving a little mite to feed and clothe these abandoned children. “Suffer the little children to come unto Me, for such is the kingdom of heaven.” (Dr. Paul Lavin and Robert Lavin, The Iron Man of China: An American Missionary’s Story, Loreto Publications, Fitzwilliam, New Hampshire, 2005, pp. 45-50.)

In other words, China was a pagan land with diabolical practices similar to those of the Aztecs in Mexico long before Mao Zedong and his forces claimed victory on May 1, 1949 and it remains a pagan land with even more sophisticated and technologically-advanced diabolical practices today. None of the educational, intellectual or artistic achievements of pagan China can redeem its evil ways, and none of the so-called technological, scientific and educational advances made by China in its Communist captivity since May 1, 1949, can do so today. Paganism is evil. Communism is evil. Period. (For a look at how the barbarism of cannibalism is alive on continent that has always been in the grip of the devil, see Cannibalism in South Africa and Africa One of the Biggest Secrets, South African Police Shoot South African eating a woman, htBlack African Cannibalism Imported to Europe Under Guise of Multiculturalism.)

More to the point of He Jiankui’s horrific work, though, is the fact that, as Harvard University biologist and geneticist Dr. George Church was quoted above, the “genie is out of the bottle,” and as has been the case with contraception, abortion and sodomy, there is no getting the genie back in the bottle, at least not by means merely human.

What was once the stuff of science fiction, a genre of fiction and drama in which I have never had the slightest interest, is becoming reality before our very eyes. After all, there have been at least a few instances since 2003 in which mad scientists have created a human-animal hybrids:

This may sound like the plot to a science fiction movie, but this one is firmly grounded in reality. Scientists have managed to implant a human mini brain into the skulls of mice. What’s more, they could check up on how the human cells were doing simply by peering through a little window they inserted in the bone.

The human brain cells were first grown in the lab to form what are called organoids, before being successfully implanted into the brains of mice for the first time ever. Reporting their results in the journal Nature Biotechnology, the researchers describe how the mouse brains even supplied the lentil-sized human cerebrum with a blood supply and nutrients, and that the two tissue types were even communicating.

The team behind the human-mouse brain hybrid first revealed what they had done last year, raising a whole bunch of questions about what this would actually mean. Would it alter the rodent’s intelligence, consciousness, or even identity, for example? In the paper the scientists have addressed some of these concerns, saying that following the implant of the brain tissue, there were no observed differences in the behavior or intelligence of the mice when compared to standard ones.

Researchers have been growing human brain organoids in the lab for a while now, coaxing human stem cells to develop into structures that resemble developing human brains, but the size of these has been restricted as the cells cannot get enough nutrients. Recently, however, one team has managed to get their mini-brains to grow their own blood vessels, which will hopefully allow them to get over this issue and grow the brains into larger organoids.

But this latest study has taken the smaller organoids and implanted them into over 200 mouse brains. Around 80 percent of these took, and within 14 days they had already developed a complex network of vessels, sent out axons to surrounding mouse brain tissue, and were even firing in sync with the natural mouse brains, showing quite clearly that the two tissues were communicating.

This research – despite sounding fairly extreme – could have some really significant applications. One of the main reasons for testing the viability of inserting small bits of brain into the heads of mice is that one day they could be used as brain repair kits.

The scientists envision using these little pieces of cortex to patch up human brains that have been damaged or injured, hopefully helping to restore function. Obviously, that is likely to be a long way off, but this work is an incredible starting point that lays down some of the basics and provides proof of concept if nothing else. (First Human-Mouse Brain Hybrid Created.)

IN A REMARKABLE—IF likely controversial—feat, scientists announced today that they have created the first successful human-animal hybrids. The project proves that human cells can be introduced into a non-human organism, survive, and even grow inside a host animal, in this case, pigs.

This biomedical advance has long been a dream and a quandary for scientists hoping to address a critical shortage of donor organs.

Every ten minutes, a person is added to the national waiting list for organ transplants. And every day, 22 people on that list die without the organ they need. What if, rather than relying on a generous donor, you could grow a custom organ inside an animal instead?

That’s now one step closer to reality, an international team of researchers led by the Salk Institute reports in the journal Cell. The team created what’s known scientifically as a chimera: an organism that contains cells from two different species. (Read more about the DNA revolution in National Geographic magazine.)

But for lead study author Jun Wu of the Salk Institute, we need only look to mythical chimeras—like the human-bird hybrids we know as angels—for a different perspective.

“In ancient civilizations, chimeras were associated with God,” he says, and our ancestors thought “the chimeric form can guard humans.” In a sense, that’s what the team hopes human-animal hybrids will one day do.

Building a Chimera

There are two ways to make a chimera. The first is to introduce the organs of one animal into another—a risky proposition, because the host’s immune system may cause the organ to be rejected.

The other method is to begin at the embryonic level, introducing one animal’s cells into the embryo of another and letting them grow together into a hybrid.

It sounds weird, but it’s an ingenious way to eventually solve a number of vexing biological problems with lab-grown organs.

When scientists discovered stem cells, the master cells that can produce any kind of body tissue, they seemed to contain infinite scientific promise. But convincing those cells to grow into the right kinds of tissues and organs is difficult.

Cells must survive in Petri dishes. Scientists have to use scaffolds to make sure the organs grow into the right shapes. And often, patients must undergo painful and invasive procedures to harvest the tissues needed to kick off the process.

At first, Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, a professor in the Salk Institute’s Gene Expression Laboratory, thought the concept of using a host embryo to grow organs seemed straightforward enough. However, it took Belmonte and more than 40 collaborators four years to figure out how to make a human-animal chimera.

To do so, the team piggybacked off prior chimera research conducted on mice and rats. . . .

The team then took stem cells from rats and injected them into pig blastocysts. This version failed—not surprisingly, since rats and pigs have dramatically different gestation times and evolutionary ancestors.

But pigs have a notable similarity to humans. Though they take less time to gestate, their organs look a lot like ours.

Not that these similarities made the task any easier. The team discovered that, in order to introduce human cells into the pigs without killing them, they had to get the timing just right.

“We tried three different types of human cells, essentially representing three different times” in the developmental process, explains Jun Wu, a Salk Institute scientist and the paper’s first author. Through trial and error, they learned that naïve pluripotent cells—stem cells with unlimited potential—didn’t survive as well as ones that had developed a bit more.

When those just-right human cells were injected into the pig embryos, the embryos survived. Then they were put into adult pigs, which carried the embryos for between three and four weeks before they were removed and analyzed.

In all, the team created 186 later-stage chimeric embryos that survived, says Wu, and “we estimate [each had] about one in 100,000 human cells.” (Human-Pig Hybrid Created.)

Perhaps this is how the creatures mentioned by Saint John the Evangelist will come into being to serve as God’s ultimate chastisement upon His sinful creatures, who have dared to defy His holy laws and to make themselves like unto Him in all things, especially by seeking to mimic His very work of creation. Obviously, the beasts mentioned by Saint John the Evangelist in the Book of the Apocalypse have been interpreted by our Church Fathers to mean the collection of heathens and heretics who will rise up to support the Beast, that is, Antichrist, it is also well within the realm of possibility that the world will be overrun with the beasts of the sort being created by the mad scientists, which might include the direct implantation of artificial intelligence into a fertilized human embryo to give that person the means to know things without having had to learn them first. This is indeed trying to replicate the Omniscience of God. Let me repeat this: Mad scientists want to create beings who will know what they program into artificial intelligence to know, and they such beings will be given eloquence and persuasiveness of speech.

Far-fetched?

No, I do not think so. Not at all.

This monstrous work has been made possible by the use of embryonic human beings who had been fertilized for purposes of implantation in a mother’s womb. Still think that George Walker Bush was pro-life? Remember that his recently deceased father, President George Herbert Walker Bush, was a firm supporter of contraception during his four years as a member of the United States House of Representatives from the State of Texas and that his father, the late United States Senator Prescott Bush (R-Connecticut), was a firm support of “family planning” and worked with Margaret Sanger herself:

Throughout the 1960s and early 1970s, the Republican Party embraced family planning and abortion. Prescott Bush, a Republican Senator from Connecticut and father and grandfather to the two Bush presidents, was Planned Parenthood’s treasurer in the late 1940s. Senator Barry Goldwater, the GOP’s 1964 presidential candidate, supported Planned Parenthood; his wife was a board member of its Phoenix affiliate. In 1968, while President Richard Nixon advocated federal funds for family planning, then-Congressman George H. W. Bush, of Texas, argued that “we need to make family planning a household word.” (The Bushes and Planned Parenthood://prospect.org/article/century-anti-abortion-attacks.)

President Richard Nixon signed family-planning legislation in 1970 that authorized federal funding for groups such as Planned Parenthood, which Republicans now want to cut. Former Sen. Barry Goldwater’s wife, Peggy, was a founding member of Planned Parenthood in Arizona. And George H.W. Bush, as a Republican Congressman from Houston, spoke so frequently on the House floor about the issue that he was tagged with an eyebrow-raising nickname. . . .

This support did not mean that Planned Parenthood was controversy-free. Bush’s father, Prescott Bush, lost his first bid for Senate in Connecticut in 1950 after receiving criticism from a syndicated columnist and church officials over his role in supporting Planned Parenthood. The elder Bush was treasurer of the family planning group’s first national fundraising campaign. (Republicans Once Supported Planned Parenthood For a review of President Richard Milhous Nixon’s own support for “family planning,” see Poster Boy of Modernity.)

There is a straight line from Margaret Sanger and her band of eugenicists a century ago to what is happening today. There is also a straight line from Martin Luther to Margaret Sanger (see  From Luther to Sanger to Ferguson.)

Ah, but there is also a straight line from Talmudism and Freemasonry to all modern errors, including those of Western pluralism and the Communism in Red China, something that the late William Thomas Walsh discussed in his epic book, Philip II:

The obvious affinity between Freemasonry and Talmud Judaism has been noticed often enough. It is no longer debatable that, if the false leaders of the Jews did not originate the secret societies to cover their own anti-Christian activities and to influence credulous members of the Christian communities, the had a great deal to do with the business. The degrees and rituals of Freemasonry are shot through with Jewish symbolism: the candidate is going towards the East, towards Jerusalem, he is going to rebuild the Temple (destroyed in fulfillment of the prophecy of Christ), he is going to find a Lost World (lost, it would seem, on the day when Christ, being lifted up, began to draw all things to Himself). Even in feminine Masonry, the fifth and last degree shows Judith cutting off the head of Holoferenes, perhaps a symbol here for political and religious authority, or as the rituals prefer to say, tyranny and superstition.

The Grand Orient and Scottish Rite lodges, sources of so many modern revolutions, are more militant, more open and apparently more virulent than some of the others whom they are leading into a single world-organization by gradual steps. The higher degrees of some of the Continental lodges manifest the full expression of that ancient hared of Christ which demanded His crucifixion, and which in later ages slew His priests and trampled on the Blessed Host. The rank and file of Masons know nothing of all this; but the initiates of Continental lodges could tell of a travesty of the Eucharist in one of the highest degrees, of a prayer to Lucifer, and of a Crucifix spat upon and trampled. Of the vile spirit here manifested the rank and file of Masons, especially of the York rite, and the rank and file of hardworking and credulous Jews are doubtless unaware.

“The annals of Freemasonry,” says Peter Wiernik, “usually disclose the earliest Jewish settlers.” In various localities in the eighteenth century.” In 1658, to go further (just sixty years after the death of Philip II), fifteen Jewish families arrived at Newport, Rhode Island, from Holland, “bringing with them the first degrees of Masonry, which they proceeded to confer on Abraham Moses in the house of Mordecai Campanall.” Descendants of certain of these Jews, originally from Spain and Portugal, went into the whaling industry, and founded some of the First New England Families. A little later, according to a Masonic authority, “American Masonry was introduced into China by the captains of the clipper ships, who came out from New England to trade with the Chinese. Was this only “operative” masonry? (William Thomas Walsh, Philip II, pp. 308-309.)

There is a direct connection between the monstrous activities of Modernity throughout the world, including in the United States of America and in Red China, and Judeo-Masonry as the “gnosis” worshipped in the lodges is the same devil worshipped in the Talmudic temples. Western pluralism and all forms of Communism, including its Bolshevik and Maoist variant, are expressions of the same anti-Christian phenomenon and have produced a world where men revel in playing God and dispensing with His Holy Laws as they seek to create all-knowing beings to advance the “evolution of the species” and, of course, the New World Order that the Sinophile named George Herbert Walker Bush advanced after the end of his immoral and unconstitutional Persian Gulf War (see Address Before a Joint Session of Congress on the End of the Gulf War.)

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ told Sister Mary of Saint Peter about how to make reparation for the evils done by blasphemers and other infidels, including those in our own world, of course, who dare to blaspheme the true God of Divine Revelation by seeking to ape His Omnipotence and His Omniscience while denying that He exists, and He exhorted her to promote devotion to His Holy Face as a means of making reparation for the crimes of infidels and blasphemers:

Revelation of December 7, 1843

Vigil of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception

Our Lord confides to Sr. Mary that whereas He would still endure patiently the contempt show Him by sinners, He was roused to anger by the present outrages committed against His Eternal Father. The Saviour then insists that since blasphemy is universal and public, Reparation for this crime must likewise by public, and it must be extended to all cities.

My soul is terrified at what our Lord has just made me hear during prayer this morning, charging me with the duty of transmitting His message to my superiours without any fear of being deceived. He said He was incensed with anger against our nation, and that He has sworn in His wrath to avenge Himself if Reparation to the honor of His Divine Father were not made for all the blasphemies of which the people are guilty, making me hear that He could no longer remain among men who, like vipers, were tearing at the entrails of His mercy. He said that as for the contempt shown to Himself, He would still endure it patiently, but that He was rouse to anger by the outrages committed against His Eternal Father. He then declared that His Mercy was on the verge of giving way to His Justice, and that His wrath would overflow with a fury such as had never yet been heard of before.

Greatly frightened, I pleaded, “My Lord, permit me to ask You if You would grant our nation pardon if this Atonement for which You ask were made to God?”

Our Lord answered me:

“Yes, I will grant it pardon once more, but mark my word, once! And since this crime of blasphemy extends over the whole nation, and since it is public, I demand that Reparation be extended to all the cities of the nation, and that it be public. Woe to those cities that will not make this Reparation!”

Now it so happened that at this time, through a mere coincidence I learned that there already existed in Rome an Association whose aim was to atone for blasphemy and that the Holy Father had granted to it a Brief under date of August 8, 1843. This was a great consolation to me, for I now felt doubly certain that the Work with which I had been entrusted, was indeed the Work of God. Moreover, I was filled with wonder at the remarkable concurrence of dates, for it was on August 26, 1843, only about two weeks after the formation of this Roman society that to me, a poor Carmelite in France, had been revealed the great Work of Reparation.

Revelation of February 2, 1844

Feast of the Purification

Our Lord offers a promise of pardon in view of the efforts made to spread the Reparation. He further designates Saint Michael, Saint Martin and Saint Louis, as the special patrons of the Work, and asks that the members wear a cross and band themselves together as Defenders of god's Holy Name.”

During the past several weeks I have not experience anything extraordinary regarding the Work of Reparation, except that our Lord continued to unite Himself to me in order to make reparation and to glorify His Eternal Father.

Today, however, being the Feast of the Purification, it was my turn to receive Communion in fulfillment of the vow made by our prioress, for the intention that the designs of the Sacred Heart of Jesus be accomplished, after receiving Communion, the good Saviour, had the kindness to speak to me.

Now although in the previous revelation, our Lord told me about His anger which was aroused on account of the crimes committed against His Father, which communication had left me in a frightful state of worry, and had cause me to weep, today He filled my soul with joy by making known to me the satisfaction His Divine Heart experiences at seeing the zeal and the desires of His children for this growing Association. He told me that just as His holy Mother has adopted the Arch-Confraternity of the Heart of Mary, to obtain the conversion of sinners, so will He adopt the Arch-Confraternity of Reparation. Both must go hand in hand, the one making reparation for crimes committed against God, and the other to obtain pardon, and the former would belong especially to Jesus while the other would belong especially to Mary.

Then our Lord told me that the Confraternity of Reparation which He desired to have established was to have a two-fold purpose, the first being Reparation for blasphemy, and the second being Reparation for the profanation of Sunday, since these were the two principal sins which in modern times were provoking the anger of God.

Therefore, the new Association was to differ from that in Rome in that besides striving for the extirpation of blasphemy, the Rules would oblige members to refrain from all Sunday work themselves, and to do what lay in their power to see that others stop all unnecessary servile works on the holy days of the Lord.

Our Saviour also desires that this Association be placed under the patronage of Saint Michael, Saint Martin, and of Saint Louis, asking that each member should say daily one Our Father, one Hail Mary, and one Glory Be, together with the Act of Praise, called the Golden Arrow, which the Saviour had previously dictated to me. But on Sunday and of feast days, all the Prayers of Reparation are to be recited, in order to make fitting reparation for the crimes committed against God's Majesty on these days of the Lord in order to obtain mercy for the guilty.

Out Lord showed me this Association as an army of brave soldiers, uniting themselves to Him as to their Commander-in-Chief, to defend the glory of His Father. It is His Will that this militia be called “The Defenders of the Holy Name of God,” so that this noble title should give evidence of the high calling of those enrolled.

Finally, our Lord told me that He desired each member of the Association to wear a special cross, and that on one side of this cross should be engraved the words, “Blessed be the Name of God,” and on the reverse side should be the words, “Begone, Satan!” To all those wearing tis holy cross our Lord promised a special resourcefulness to conquer the demon of blasphemy, adding that every time one hears a curse, he should repeat the two short inscriptions written on each side of the cross, and he will thus overcome the evil one and render glory to God.

At the end our Lord warned me, saying that the demon would do everything in his power to crush this Work which springs from the Sacred Heart. I then felt that I would willingly shed the last drop of my blood for such a holy association.

Our Lord also made me understand that He had not spoken to me regarding this Work for a long time because there was no need for Him to do so, and since He never does anything superfluous, He had kept silence. On this day, however, He felt it necessary to speak to me in order to show me the difference between the Confraternity of Reparation stemming from Italy, and the new Confraternity which He now demanded be formed in France, whose additional feature embodied reparation for the profanation of Sunday.  (The Golden Arrow: The Autobiography of and Revelation of Sister Mary of Saint Peter (1816-1848): On Devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus, edited by Dorothy Scallan and translated by Father Emeric B. Scallan, S.T.B., published originally by William Frederick Press, New York, New York, 1954, and republished by TAN Books and Publishers, Charlotte, North Carolina, 2012, pp. 131-135. For more information on this devotion, please see Saint Jude Thaddeus: Our Powerful Helper in These Times of Disarray.)

In all the difficulties of these times, though, we must remember that we have nothing to fear as the graces won for us by the shedding of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces, will be ever sufficient for us to carry whatever crosses in whatever circumstances of whatever time God has from all eternity appointed them to live and to work out their salvation in fear and in trembling.

The following prayers, found in The Raccolta, should fill us with peace in the midst of the difficult times in which we live:

Lord Jesus Christ, who didst say unto Thine Apostles: “Peace I leave with you, my peace I gve unto you,” regard not our sins but Thy merits, and grant unto Thy servants, that they whom the Almighty Father hath created and governeth, and whom Thou hast ordained unto everlasting life, may love one another with all their hearts for Thy sake, and may be made one in spirit and rejoice in Thy perpetual peace. Lord Jesus Christ, concerning whom the Prophet hath said: “And all kings of the earth shall adore Him, all nations shall serve Him,” extend thy reign upon the whole human race. Send upon all men the light of Thy faith, deliver them from all the snares and bonds of passion, and direct them to heavenly things; and graciously grant, that the states and nations may be united by means of Thine immaculate Bride, Holy Church, and through the intercession of the blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Peace, may serve Thee in all humility; and that all tongues and peoples may form one great choir, to praise Thee both day and night, to bless Thee, to exalt Thee, O King of the nations and the Ruler thereof, O Prince of prince immortal King of ages. Amen. (The Raccolta: A Manual of Indulgences, Prayers and Devotions Enriched with Indulgences, approved by Pope Pius XII, May 30, 1951, and published in English by Benziger Brothers, New York, 1957, Number 703, pp. 558-559.)

O God, who art the author and lover of peace, in knowledge of whom is eternal life, whose service is a kingly state; defend us Thy humble servants from all assaults of our enemies; that we, surely trusting in Thy defense, may not fear the power of any adversaries. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen. (The Raccolta: A Manual of Indulgences, Prayers and Devotions Enriched with Indulgences, approved by Pope Pius XII, May 30, 1951, and published in English by Benziger Brothers, New York, 1957, Number 703, pp. 559-560.)

O merciful Queen of the Rosary of Pompeii, thou, the Seat of Wisdom, hast established a throne of fresh mercy in the land that once was pagan, in order to draw all nations to salvation by means of the chaplet of thy mystic roses: remember thy divine Son hath left us this saying: “Other sheep I have that are not of this fold; them also must I bring, and they shall hear  voice; and there shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.” Remember likewise that on Calvary thou didst become our Co-Redemptrix, by virtue of the crucifixion of Thy heart cooperating with Thy Crucified Son in the salvation of the world; and from that day thou didst become the Restorer of the human race, the Refuge of sinners, and the Mother of all mankind. Behold, dear Mother, how man souls are lost every hour! Behold, how countless millions of those who dwell in India, in China, and in barbarous regions do not yet know our Lord Jesus Christ! See, too, how many others are indeed Christians and are nevertheless far from the bosom of Mother Church which is Catholic, Apostolic and Roman! O Mary, powerful mediator, advocate of the human race, full of love for us who are mortal, the life of our hearts, blessed Virgin of the Rosary of Pompeii, where thou dost nothing else save dispense heaven’s favors upon the afflicted, grant that a ray of thy heavenly light may shine forth to enlighten those many blinded understanding and to enkindle so cold hearts. Intercede with thy Son and obtain grace for all the pagans, Jews, heretics and schismatics in the whole world to receive supernatural light and to enter with joy into the bosom of the true Church. Hear the confident prayer of the Supreme Pontiff [of Holy Church in these times of papal vacancy], that all nations may be joined in the one faith, may know and love Jesus Christ, the blessed fruit of thy womb, who liveth and reigneth with the Father and the Holy Spirit world without end. And then all men shall love thee also, thou who art the salvation of the world, arbiter and dispenser of the treasures of God, and Queen of mercy in the valley of Pompeii. And glorifying thee, the Queen of Victories, who by means of thy Rosary, dost trample upon all heresies, they shall acknowledge that thou givest life to all the nations, since there must be a fulfillment of the prophecy in the Gospel: “All generations shall call me blessed.” ((The Raccolta: A Manual of Indulgences, Prayers and Devotions Enriched with Indulgences, approved by Pope Pius XII, May 30, 1951, and published in English by Benziger Brothers, New York, 1957, Number 628, pp. 501-503.)

There is a whole lot of good, solid Catholic theology in the prayer just above.

Our Lady is the Co-Redemptrix of the human race.

Our Lady is the Seat of Wisdom.

Our Lady is our Refuge of Sinners.

Our Lady is the Treasurer of all the graces won for us by her Divine Son on the wood of the Holy Cross.

The restoration of all things in Christ, a restoration that will include China, of course, will occur as a result of the fulfillment of her Fatima Message after the restoration of a true pope on the Throne of Saint Peter, which will occur miraculously at a time of God’s choosing. All we have to do is persist in our prayers as we maintain a joy-filled hope that we might, by virtue of the graces Our Lady sends to us, be able to plant a few seeds for the restoration of all things in Christ the King as a result of the Triumph of her own Immaculate Heart.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Peter Chrysologus, pray for us.

Saint Barbara, pray for us.

Appendix

From Conciliarism’s Donum Vitae, February 22, 1987

[Droleskey note: Although the passage from Donum Vitae below is, despite its conciliarspeak, good as far as it goes. Alas, the fact that we have reached such a nadir is the direct result of the very principles of 1789 with which, according to none other than the then prefect of the misnamed Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the counterfeit church of conciliarism has made its “official reconciliation.” The prefect’s name is Joseph Alois Ratzinger. Perhaps you have heard of him.]

The inviolable right to life of every innocent human individual and the rights of the family and of the institution of marriage constitute fundamental moral values, because they concern the natural condition and integral vocation of the human person; at the same time they are constitutive elements of civil society and its order. For this reason the new technological possibilities which have opened up in the field of biomedicine require the intervention of the political authorities and of the legislator, since an uncontrolled application of such techniques could lead to unforeseeable and damaging consequences for civil society. Recourse to the conscience of each individual and to the self-regulation of researchers cannot be sufficient for ensuring respect for personal rights and public order. If the legislator responsible for the common good were not watchful, he could be deprived of his prerogatives by researchers claiming to govern humanity in the name of the biological discoveries and the alleged "improvement" processes which they would draw from those discoveries. "Eugenism" and forms of discrimination between human beings could come to be legitimized: this would constitute an act of violence and a serious offense to the equality, dignity and fundamental rights of the human person. The intervention of the public authority must be inspired by the rational principles which regulate the relationships between civil law and moral law. The task of the civil law is to ensure the common good of people through the recognition of and the defence of fundamental rights and through the promotion of peace and of public morality.(60) In no sphere of life can the civil law take the place of conscience or dictate norms concerning things which are outside its competence. It must sometimes tolerate, for the sake of public order, things which it cannot forbid without a greater evil resulting. However, the inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the State: they pertain to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his of her origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard:

a) every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death; b) the rights of the family and of marriage as an institution and, in this area, the child's right to be conceived, brought into the world and brought up by his parents. To each of these two themes it is necessary here to give some further consideration.

In various States certain laws have authorized the direct suppression of innocents: the moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation must accord them, the State is denying the equality of all before the law. When the State does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a State based on law are undermined. The political authority consequently cannot give approval to the calling of human beings into existence through procedures which would expose them to those very grave risks noted previously. The possible recognition by positive law and the political authorities of techniques of artificial transmission of life and the experimentation connected with it would widen the breach already opened by the legalization of abortion. As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of his conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights. The law cannot tolerate - indeed it must expressly forbid - that human beings, even at the embryonic stage, should be treated as objects of experimentation, be mutilated or destroyed with the excuse that they are superfluous or incapable of developing normally.

The political authority is bound to guarantee to the institution of the family, upon which society is based, the juridical protection to which it has a right. From the very fact that it is at the service of people, the political authority must also be at the service of the family. Civil law cannot grant approval to techniques of artificial procreation which, for the benefit of third parties (doctors, biologists, economic or governmental powers), take away what is a right inherent in the relationship between spouses; and therefore civil law cannot legalize the donation of gametes between persons who are not legitimately united in marriage. Legislation must also prohibit, by virtue of the support which is due to the family, embryo banks, post mortem insemination and "surrogate motherhood". It is part of the duty of the public authority to ensure that the civil law is regulated according to the fundamental norms of the moral law in matters concerning human rights, human life and the institution of the family. Politicians must commit themselves, through their interventions upon public opinion, to securing in society the widest possible consensus on such essential points and to consolidating this consensus wherever it risks being weakened or is in danger of collapse.

In many countries, the legalization of abortion and juridical tolerance of unmarried couples makes it more difficult to secure respect for the fundamental rights recalled by this Instruction. It is to be hoped that States will not become responsible for aggravating these socially damaging situations of injustice. It is rather to be hoped that nations and States will realize all the cultural, ideological and political implications connected with the techniques of artificial procreation and will find the wisdom and courage necessary for issuing laws which are more just and more respectful of human life and the institution of the family. The civil legislation of many states confers an undue legitimation upon certain practices in the eyes of many today; it is seen to be incapable of guaranteeing that morality which is in conformity with the natural exigencies of the human person and with the "unwritten laws" etched by the Creator upon the human heart. All men of good will must commit themselves, particularly within their professional field and in the exercise of their civil rights, to ensuring the reform of morally unacceptable civil laws and the correction of illicit practices. In addition, "conscientious objection" vis-à-vis such laws must be supported and recognized. A movement of passive resistance to the legitimation of practices contrary to human life and dignity is beginning to make an ever sharper impression upon the moral conscience of many, especially among specialists in the biomedical sciences. (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html.)