As Jorge Worries about the Rainforest and "SDGs"

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is constantly giving interviews, and he will likely so tomorrow, Saturday, January 19, 2015, the Feast of Saint Januarius and the Commemoration of Ember Saturday in September and the Commemoration of the Vigil of Saint Matthew, as he travels from Rome, Italy, to Havana, Cuba, to begin his “pastoral visit” to Cuba, which is a land where Saint Anthony Mary Claret worked to convert hardened sinners and to tell adulterers to quit their lives of sin.

Although I have long ago given up trying to comment on everything that this blaspheming apostate says and does as he is one gigantic “TV Land” “rerun machine,” if you will, an interview from August 20, 2015, mentioned briefly before on this site, calls for just a bit of attention in order to contrast Bergoglio’s “worries” about deforestation caused by the planting of soy crops in  rainforests and “global warming” with his silence on the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn as exemplified so graphically by the videos produced by the Center for Medical Progress about Planned Barrenhood’s bloodlust for the innocent preborn.

Here is what hurts Jorge’s sin-stained soul:

Pope Francis criticized the destruction of forests in order to plant soy in an interview with an Argentine radio station on Saturday, reinforcing his message that the environment should take precedence over financial gain.

"It hurts me in my soul when I see deforestation to plant soy," said the pope in an interview with two priests at Radio Parroquial Virgen del Carmen in Campo Gallo, a tiny parish radio station in the poor northern province of Santiago del Estero in his native Argentina.

"It will take thousands of years to recover. Look after the woods and water."

Argentina is the world's largest supplier of soymeal and soyoil, and much of its vast pampas that were once given over to cattle ranches now grow the plant, used for animal feed and in foodstuffs, with China the leading importer.

In neighboring Brazil, also a major soy supplier, environmentalists claim that its cultivation has led to the destruction of rainforest.

The head of the 1.2 billion member Catholic Church has caused controversy before by weighing into debates on the environment and condemning speculation in food commodities.

He visited South America last month and gave passionate speeches in which he censured capitalism, championed the rights of the poor, and warned of irreversible damage to the planet.

In an encyclical dedicated to the environment in June, Francis, the first pope from a developing nation, advocated a change of lifestyle in rich countries and demanded swift action to save the planet from environmental ruin. (Apostate laments destruction of forests to plant soy.)

Bergoglio continued this theme in an address he delivered on Wednesday, September 16, 2015, the Feast of Saints Cornelius and Cyprian and the Commemoration of Ember Wednesday in September and the Commemoration of Saints Euphemia, Lucy, and Gemianus, to European Union “environment ministers”:

Thank you very much for having called this meeting which gives me the opportunity to share with you, if only briefly, some thoughts also in view of  important international events in the coming months: the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals at the end of this month and the Cop 21 Summit in Paris.

I would like to focus on three principles. First of all, the principle of solidarity, a word that is sometimes forgotten and others abused in a sterile manner. We know that those who are most vulnerable to environmental degradation are the poor; they are the ones who suffer its most serious consequences. Thus, solidarity means the implementation of effective tools that are able to fight environmental degradation and poverty at the same time. There are many positive experiences in this regard. For example the development and transfer of appropriate technologies that are able to make the best possible use of the human, natural and socio-economic resources that are most readily available at a local level, in order to ensure their long-term sustainability.

Second, the principle of justice. In the "Laudato si’" encyclical I spoke of "ecological debt", especially between North and South connected to trade imbalances with consequences in the context of ecology, as well as the disproportionate use of natural resources historically exploited  by some countries. We must honor this debt. These nations are called upon to contribute to solving this debt by setting a good example: limiting in a big way  consumption of non-renewable energy; providing resources to countries in need for the promotion of policies and programmes for sustainable development; adopting appropriate systems for the management of forests, transportation, waste; seriously addressing the grave problem of food waste; favouring a circular model of economy; encouraging new attitudes and lifestyles.

Thirdly, the principle of participation, which requires the involvement of all stakeholders, even of those who often remain at the margins of decision-making. We live, in fact, in a very interesting historical time: on the one hand science and technology give us unprecedented power; on the other, a proper use of this power requires that we adopt a more integral and inclusive vision. This demands that we open the door to dialogue, a dialogue that is inspired by a vision which is rooted in that of integral ecology, the very subject of the “Laudato si’" encyclical.  This is obviously a big cultural, spiritual and educational challenge. Solidarity, justice and participation for the respect of our dignity and for respect of creation.

Dear Ministers, the Cop21 summit is fast approaching and there is still a long way to go to achieve a result that is capable of bringing together the many positive stimuli that have been offered as a contribution to this important process. I strongly encourage you to intensify your work, along with that of your colleagues, so that in Paris the desired result is achieved. On my part and on the part of Holy See there will be no lack of support for an adequate response to the cry of the Earth and to the cry of the poor. Thank you.  (Antipope urges EU Environment Ministers to work hard in view of SDGs.)

Concern for the rainforests and for “sustainable development goals” is what hurts Jorge’s pantheistic soul that is the product of rank naturalistic sentimentality.

What doesn’t hurt Jorge’s soul, however, is to deny Catholic doctrine and to deride those who attempt to defend it without compromise, calling them, among other choice names, “fundamentalists.”

Bergoglio used his “homily” for the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service on Tuesday, September 15, 2015, the Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary in September, to proselytize in behalf of the false “mercy” that he will be showing to adulterers and practitioners of perversity next month by claiming that what he thinks is the Catholic Church fails her duties to be a “loving” mother who “welcomes all” and becomes “rigid” and full of “discipline”:

“The Church is our mother. She is our ‘Holy Mother Church’ that is generated through our baptism, makes us grow up in her community and has that motherly attitude, of meekness and goodness: Our Mother Mary and our Mother Church know how to caress their children and show tenderness. To think of the Church without that motherly feeling is to think of a rigid association, an association without human warmth, an orphan.”

“The Church is our mother and welcomes all of us as a mother: Mary our Mother, our Mother Church, and this motherhood are expressed through an attitude of welcome, understanding, goodness, forgiveness and tenderness.”  

“And where there is motherhood and life, there’s life, there’s joy, there’s peace and we grow in peace. When this motherhood is lacking all that remains is rigidity, discipline and people do not know how to smile. One of the most beautiful and human things is to smile at a child and make him or her smile.”

In conclusion, the Pope said “May our Lord make us feel his presence today as well, just as when He once more offered himself up to the Father on behalf of us: (saying) ‘Son, this is your mother!’” (Church is a mother, not a rigid association.)

This man never misses an opportunity to blaspheme Our Lady, who prays for the conversion of sinners and who asked Jacinta and Francisco Marto and their cousin Lucia dos Santos to pray specifically for the conversion of poor sinners to save them from hell, while once again trying to claim, albeit in his truly insidious, pestilential manner, that the Catholic Church has lack the maternal qualities of “love” and “welcoming” by becoming too “rigid” and full of “discipline. Bergoglio will not rest until he cast aside the last remaining vestiges of Catholic doctrine on Faith and Morals in favor of his false “mercy” and his love of “flexibility” on doctrine for “pastoral needs” that have their origin in hell itself.

Bergoglio’s preoccupation with bashing believing Catholics as he paves the way to give a “papal” green light to living in sin is matched only by his desire to show the “world” that what most people think, erroneously, of course, is the Catholic Church has “modernized” and is with the “spirit of the world” in order to “save the planet.” Such an ostentatious show of “love” for “creation” and for those steeped in unrepentant lives of sins against the Virtue of Chastity is an effort to dispense with Catholic teaching on Faith and Morals with endless appeals to sentiment about “love” and the ideology of environmentalism.

"Pope Francis's" concern about “irreversible damage to the planet” that he believes is being done by the development of such areas as the Amazon rainforest is, of course, pantheism and is based in pseudo-science. His prescriptions for attempting to remedy ecological problems are premised upon his sympathies for Judeo-Masonry’s New World Order that subordinates the sovereignty of individual nations to the demands of the atheistic socialists who desire to govern men and their nations by means of administrative and bureaucratic fiats that involve the use of massive regulations and confiscatory taxation to “save the planet” (see Dance, Dance, Eco Jorge part one and Dance, Dance, Eco Jorge, part two.)

The Argentine Apostate is not at all interested in saving souls or even speaking out to save the lives of the babies who are being butchered, both by chemical and surgical means, in their mothers’ wombs around the world, stooping so low as to link “respect for creation” to an “ecology of the human person” that includes the “right to life and religious freedom.” Bergoglio never mentions the direct, intentional killing of an innocent human being is a violation of the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law. Whatever few comments he makes on “the right to life” are qualified by the language of conciliarspeak as he conflates respect for the life of the preborn with the alleged “right” of citizens of one nation to migrate illegally into others with utter impunity and opposition to the death penalty.

There is a reason for this: Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that a strict adherence to the Ten Commandments is “Pharisaical” as it does not give “room” for the promptings of the “spirit,” and he does not believe in the Natural Law.

How can I say that this is so?

Well, he listens to those who do not believe in the Natural Law.

As noted in a recent article, Commissar Reinhard Marx, held a secret meeting at the Pontifical University of Saint Gregory, The Gregorianum, four months to plan for next month’s “synod of bishops,” whose results have already been decided unilaterally by Bergoglio and his claque of revolutionaries One of those who made presentations at that secret meeting was one “Father” Eberhard Shockenhoff, who specifically disparaged the “concept” of the Natural Law: Although it was clear to many of us within the first few weeks of Bergoglio's tenure as the universal public face of apostasy, there should no longer be any cause for rejecting the plain truth that "Pope Francis's" constant references to the "poor" and to those who are said to live on the "existential peripheries" have meant to pave the way for the "merciful" acceptance, without "judgment," you understand of those who are committed to living in states of Mortal Sin by violating the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law while moaning and complaining about the “harshness” of what Jorge Mario Bergoglio calls are “rigid rules.”

Among the specialists present was Father Eberhard Schockenhoff, a moral theologian. Faithful German Catholics are particularly disturbed about the rise to prominence of Father Schockenhoff, who is understood to be the “mastermind” behind much of the challenge to settled Church teachings among the German episcopate and, by implication, at the synod on the family itself.

A prominent critic of Humanae Vitae (The Regulation of Birth), as well as a strong supporter of homosexual clergy and those pushing for reform in the area of sexual ethics, Father Schockenhoff is known to be the leading adviser of the German bishops in the run-up to the synod.

In 2010, he gave an interview in which he praised the permanence and solidarity shown in some same-sex relationships as “ethically valuable.” He urged that any assessment of homosexual acts “must take a back seat” on the grounds that the faithful are becoming “increasingly distant from the Church’s sexual morality,” which appears “unrealistic and hostile to them.” The Pope and the bishops should “take this seriously and not dismiss it as laxity,” he said.

Father Schockenhoff has also gone on record saying that moral theology must be “liberated from the natural law” and that conscience should be based on the “life experience of the faithful.” 

He has also insisted that the indissolubility of marriage is “not seriously called into question” by admitting remarried divorcees to holy Communion, writing a book to push his thesis in 2011 entitled “Opportunities for Reconciliation?: The Church and the Divorced and Remarried.”  He has further proposed that the term the “official Church” should be done away with because of a growing gap between the institutional Church and the Church of the faithful. (Confidential Meeting Seeks to Sway Synod to Accept Perverse Unions.)

Although it was clear to many of us within the first few weeks of Bergoglio's tenure as the universal public face of apostasy, there should no longer be any cause for rejecting the plain truth that "Pope Francis's" constant references to the "poor" and to those who are said to live on the "existential peripheries" have meant to pave the way for the "merciful" acceptance, without "judgment," you understand of those who are committed to living in states of Mortal Sin by violating the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law while moaning and complaining about the “harshness” of what Jorge Mario Bergoglio calls are “rigid rules.”

“Father” Eberhard Shockenhoff’s disparagement of the “concept” of the Natural Law is pretty “mainstream” for the homosexual-friendly, if not homosexual themselves, Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionaries who will gather to put on the show of a “debate” on what purports to be a “pastoral matter” but is simply an open, unmasked abandonment of whatever remnants of Catholic moral theology remain within the false church that arose, albeit slowly at first, after the “election” of Angelo Roncalli as the first of the current line of pretenders on the Throne of Saint Peter.

Another disparager of the Natural Law is a conciliar “bishop,” Johnan Bonny, who is the conciliar “ordinary” of the Diocese of Antwerp, Belgium, who has been chosen personally by Bergoglio to one of the “synod fathers” in Rome next month:

ANTWERP, Belgium, September 11, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- In a sweeping critique of Catholic teaching, Belgian Bishop Johan Bonny, who will participate in the Ordinary Synod on the Family next month, has attacked not only the Church’s teaching against contraception but even the very notion of the natural law.

In a contribution for the recent German book, Zerreißprobe Ehe, published by Herder Verlag, the bishop of Antwerp makes a strong critique of the 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae and questions the Church's understanding of sexuality. He also criticizes the natural law as a moral foundation because it describes certain acts as good or bad independently of one's personal life history and biography.

Bonny claims in his essay, which is entitled "The Synod of Bishops on the Family - Expectations of a Diocesan Bishop," that the encyclical Humanae Vitae lacked the consensus of the bishops and therefore immediately caused "tensions, conflicts and breaches.” He regrets that the Church does not give more space for "the individual conscience" of the faithful with regard to the question of "methods of family planning and birth control," and says he hopes that the upcoming 2015 Synod of Bishops on the Family will correct this purported defect.

"All constitutions and decrees of the Second Vatican Council, also the difficult ones, were finally accepted with a consensus. Of this kind of collegiality, there was little left three years later, when Humanae Vitae was published,” Bonny writes. “That the pope would make a judgment concerning the problems of 'population, family, and births' was foreseen by the Council. But that he would ignore the collegial striving for a greatest possible consensus, was not foreseen by the Council."

"This ecclesial policy has left behind a broad trace of tensions, conflicts and breaches. This split should not remain such."

Bishop Bonny also discusses in his article the question of homosexuality and the Church’s traditional rejection of homosexual acts. According to Bonny, "scientific progress allows us to modify this point of view. First of all, one knows that homosexuality exists also in the world of animals." With his reference to the animal world, Bonny tries to show that the natural instinct for heterosexuality, as put into nature by God, might not exist, after all.

Bonny also argues that "in our personalistic culture, the interdiction of homosexual relationships is regarded as an unacceptable discrimination: there shall be men and women who do not have the right to live out their sexuality, only because they do not live in the same manner as the great majority of the people live!"

Finally, Bonny claims the "externally induced suppression of the sexual practice" is the cause of ailments such as alcoholism, aggressivity and drug abuse.  (Vatican Synod "Father" Attacks Humanae Vitae and Even the Natural Law.)

This man is a “bishop," a “bishop” who denies the complementarity of men and women that exists in the Order of Nature (Creation) and who denies the God’s command to Adam and Eve to “increase, and multiply,” which only a men and women can do, not men and men or women and women.

A “bishop,” a supposed Successor of the Apostles, bluntly says what so many priests/presbyters, consecrated religious, supposedly Catholic university and college professors, and alleged “theologians” have been teaching theoretically and living out themselves, namely, that one has a “right” to “live out” his “sexuality.” In other words, there are no sins against the Virtue of Chastity that one can commit because there is no such virtue. The human being is made, “Bishop Bonny” would have us believe, to “express love” in a physical manner without regard to the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony and without regard to this sacrament’s primary end: the procreation and education. Anyone who believes that Johann Bonny does not speak for Jorge Mario Bergoglio with complete approval is a fool. Anyone who believes that Johann Bonny does not speak for Jorge Mario Bergoglio with complete approval is a fool. Bergoglio’s agenda of “mercy” is nothing other than same kind of enabling of lust and divorce that was at the heart of Martin Luther’s prideful revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man’s return to Him through His Catholic Church (see More Hateful of Catholicism Than Martin Luther Himself).

We see also, of course, that the “personalism” championed by the late Father Herbert Doms and the late Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, which was condemned by Pope Pius XII himself, who drew up declaration that was issued by the Holy Ofice on April 1, 1944, that was the foundation of Giovanni Enrico Antonio Maria/Paul the Sick's Humanae Vitae, July 25, 1968, opened up a veritable Pandora's Box of immorality that has not yet seen the depths of the abyss.

That is, to assert that the procreation and education of children is not the primary end of marriage was to make it possilble to justify all manner of vile perversities, which in the near-future will include "polyamorous" (polygmaous) and incestuous relationships, and could also sink as low as "relationships" with the lower species. No, the depths of the abyss have not been plunged by Jorge and his band of spiritual robber barons, including Johan Bonny (an article that will be published before Jorge's synod in October will review some of the backgrounds of the lovers of immorality and deniers of Catholic Faith and Morals he has added as "synod fathers--see Novus Ordo Watch Wire.)

After all, what is to prevent Jorge and his band of spiritual robber barons from showing “mercy” to those who are involved in “polyamorous” (polygamous) or incestuous relationships or those who, shall we say, have a special “affinity” for “loving” animals. Don’t laugh. This is all being pushed by the forces of Judeo-Masonry in the world, and it is with “the world” that Jorge Mario Bergoglio, taking Roncalli’s revolution to its ultimate conclusion, wants his false church to conform without “rigidity” or “discipline.” The support for evil is getting so bold now that the uber-apostates of the Federal Republic of German have gone so far as to publish material on their website in support of “gay marriage” (see Germany’s bishops just published an apologia for gay ‘marriage’) .No, the depths to which the conciliar apostates intend to go to do away with Catholic Faith and Morals has not yet been reached. Not by a long shot. Every little bit of this is being done with Jorge's approval and blessing.

One cannot overemphasize the importance of Pope Pius XII's condemnation of the very personalist ideology that is at the root of what is called today "natural family planning" as it came just a little over seven years and one-half years after the Holy Office's condemnation of the work, which was identical to that of Dietrich von Hildebrand's, of Father Herbert Doms, who had inverted the end of marriage. The condemnation of Father Doms' work was alluded to in a passage from the October 29, 1951, address just cited above. Here it is once again for the sake of emphasis:

It was precisely to end the uncertainties and deviations which threatened to diffuse errors regarding the scale of values of the purposes of matrimony and of their reciprocal relations, that a few years ago (March 10, 1944), We Ourselves drew up a declaration on the order of those ends, pointing out what the very internal structure of the natural disposition reveals. We showed what has been handed down by Christian tradition, what the Supreme Pontiffs have repeatedly taught, and what was then in due measure promulgated by the Code of Canon Law. Not long afterwards, to correct opposing opinions, the Holy See, by a public decree, proclaimed that it could not admit the opinion of some recent authors who denied that the primary end of marriage is the procreation and education of the offspring, or teach that the secondary ends are not essentially subordinated to the primary end, but are on an equal footing and independent of it. (Pope Pius XII, Address to Midwives on the Nature of Their Profession, October 29, 1951.)

Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick, on the other hand,  prefaced Humanae Vitae's expanded conditions for the use of a woman's infertile periods as the basis of avoiding the conception of children upon with yet another reference to the myth of overpopulation:

1. The most serious duty of transmitting human life, for which married persons are the free and responsible collaborators of God the Creator, has always been a source of great joys to them, even if sometimes accompanied by not a few difficulties and by distress.

At all times the fulfillment of this duty has posed grave problems to the conscience of married persons, but, with the recent evolution of society, changes have taken place that give rise to new questions which the Church could not ignore, having to do with a matter which so closely touches upon the life and happiness of men.

2. The changes which have taken place are in fact noteworthy and of varied kinds. In the first place, there is the rapid demographic development. Fear is shown by many that world population is growing more rapidly than the available resources, with growing distress to many families and developing countries, so that the temptation for authorities to counter this danger with radical measures is great. Moreover, working and lodging conditions, as well as increased exigencies both in the economic field and in that of education, often make the proper education of a larger number of children difficult today. A change is also seen both in the manner of considering the person of woman and her place in society, and in the value to be attributed to conjugal love in marriage, and also in the appreciation to be made of the meaning of conjugal acts in relation to that love.

Finally and above all, man has made stupendous progress in the domination and rational organization of the forces of nature, such that he tends to extend this domination to his own total being: to the body, to psychical life, to social life and even to the laws which regulate the transmission of life.

3. This new state of things gives rise to new questions. Granted the conditions of life today, and granted the meaning which conjugal relations have with respect to the harmony between husband and wife and to their mutual fidelity, would not a revision of the ethical norms, in force up to now, seem to be advisable, especially when it is considered that they cannot be observed without sacrifices, sometimes heroic sacrifices?

And again: by extending to this field the application of the so-called "principle of totality," could it not be admitted that the intention of a less abundant but more rationalized fecundity might transform a materially sterilizing intervention into a licit and wise control of birth? Could it not be admitted, that is, that the finality of procreation pertains to the ensemble of conjugal life, rather than to its single acts? It is also asked whether, in view of the increased sense of responsibility of modern man, the moment has not come for him to entrust to his reason and his will, rather than to the biological rhythms of his organism, the task of regulating birth.

4. Such questions required from the teaching authority of the Church a new and deeper reflection upon the principles of the moral teaching on marriage: a teaching founded on the natural law, illuminated and enriched by divine revelation. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, Humanae Vitae, July 25, 1968.)

It is upon these false premises that the hideous friend of the lavender collective handed so many Catholic couples over to the devil so that they could immersed in considerations of physicality that have never had any place in Catholic teaching. Although Montini/Paul VI re-stated the immutable teaching of the Church concerning the begetting of children, this was part of the "bait and switch" game as he used his own text to place what he called the "unitive" end before that of procreation:

And finally this love is fecund for it is not exhausted by the communion between husband and wife, but is destined to continue, raising up new lives. "Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents."⁸

10. Hence conjugal love requires in husband and wife an awareness of their mission of "responsible parenthood," which today is rightly much insisted upon, and which also must be exactly understood. Consequently it is to be considered under different aspects which are legitimate and connected with one another.

In relation to the biological processes, responsible parenthood means the knowledge and respect of their functions; human intellect discovers in the power of giving life biological laws which are part of the human person.

In relation to the tendencies of instinct or passion, responsible parenthood means that necessary dominion which reason and will must exercise over them.

In relation to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised, either by the deliberate and generous decision to raise a numerous family, or by the decision, made for grave motives and with due respect for the moral law, to avoid for the time being, or even for an indeterminate period, a new birth.

Responsible parenthood also and above all implies a more profound relationship to the objective moral order established by God, of which a right conscience is the faithful interpreter. The responsible exercise of parenthood implies, therefore, that husband and wife recognize fully their own duties towards God, towards themselves, towards the family and towards society, in a correct hierarchy of values.

In the task of transmitting life, therefore, they are not free to proceed completely at will, as if they could determine in a wholly autonomous way the honest path to follow; but they must conform their activity to the creative intention of God, expressed in the very nature of marriage and of its acts, and manifested by the constant teaching of the Church.

11. These acts, by which husband and wife are united in chaste intimacy, and by means of which human life is transmitted, are, as the Council recalled, "noble and worthy,"and they do not cease to be lawful if, for causes independent of the will of husband and wife, they are foreseen to be infecund, since they always remain ordained towards expressing and consolidating their union. In fact, as experience bears witness, not every conjugal act is followed by a new life. God has wisely disposed natural laws and rhythms of fecundity which, of themselves, cause a separation in the succession of births. Nonetheless the Church, calling men back to the observance of the norms of the natural law, as interpreted by their constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marriage act (quilibet matrimonii usus) must remain open to the transmission of life.

12. That teaching, often set forth by the magisterium, is founded upon the inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning. Indeed, by its intimate structure, the conjugal act, while most closely uniting husband and wife, capacitates them for the generation of new lives, according to laws inscribed in the very being of man and of woman. By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its ordination towards man's most high calling to parenthood. We believe that the men of our day are particularly capable of seeing the deeply reasonable and human character of this fundamental principle. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, Humanae Vitae, July 25, 1968.)

Who had been calling for "responsible parenthood" for five decades prior to her death on September 6, 1966?

The nymphomaniac, racist and eugenicist named Margaret Sanger, the founder of the Birth Control League that became known as Planned Parenthood, that's who. Her followers continue to champion this shopworn slogan that found its way into the text of an alleged "papal" encyclical letter. Montini/Paul VI's acceptance of "responsible parenthood" slogan of Margaret Sanger and her diabolical minions, coupled with the inversion of the ends of marriage propagated by Father Herbert Doms and Dietrich von Hildebrand, constitutes a revolution against the ends of marriage that have "baptized," if you will, a supposedly "natural" form of contraception that is to be used as a matter of routine, not in truly extraordinary cases, where is it only lawful, that is, permissible, and never mandated.

No, what is happening at present under the regime of Antipope Francis is not really that novel. It only seems to be novel because the Argentine Apostate and his fellow figures of Antichrist have stripped away all of the sophism that had been used to mask the reality of the evil of the conciliar concept of moral theology concerning the Sixth and Ninth Commandments.

This is very much to the point of the Jorge’s synod next month as his attacks on the very natural foundations of the family perforce must include silence about the evils being done by Planned Barrenhood, whose gruesome ways continue to be documented by the Center for Medical Progress:

September 15, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) - Planned Parenthood officials are proud of being able to harvest "fresh" babies' organs, including eyes and genitals, and admit such practices "generate a fair amount of income" in the latest video released by the Center for Medical Progress, released this morning.

The video, the fourth in CMP's "Human Capital" series, captured abortion industry leaders saying that money for aborted babies' body parts is a "valid exchange" - but the organization will not be "bullied by ridiculous laws."

Leaders also admit the national office deliberately keeps all discussion of such activity at arms-length, and exposing the gruesome undertaking could be "a huge PR issue."

In the latest video, Dr. Carolyn Westhoff - who is the senior medical advisor for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) - tells undercover investigators they are able to extract a wide variety of organs from aborted babies.

"We’ve just been working with people who want particular tissues, like, you know, they want cardiac, or they want eyes, or they want neural...Oh my God, gonads," Dr. Westhoff says.

"Everything we provide is fresh," she boasts. 

That echoes the organization's fourth video, which showed techs combing through aborted babies' body parts and proclaiming, "It's another boy."

In the new video, Dr. Westhoff then offers to introduce the faux organ buyers to “national office abortion people” to facilitate their specific purchases. But all such interactions must be discreet.

“Obviously, we would have the potential for a huge PR [public relations] issue in doing this," Dr. Westhoff says.

Other abortion industry officials are caught agreeing with the potential fallout.

"It’s an issue that you might imagine we’re not really that comfortable talking about on e-mail,"Deborah VanDerhei, the director of Planned Parenthood's Consortium of Abortion Providers (CAP), affirms.

Dr. Deborah Nucatola, who was featured eating salad during a business lunch in the first investigative video, has a similar assessment.

"There are no guidelines" from Planned Parenthood's national office on organ procurement and payment, Nucatola tells them. "There will never be guidelines."

Nonetheless, VanDerhei tells CMP investigators, "We have independent colleagues who generate a fair amount of income doing this.”

That comment seems to undermine Planned Parenthood's continual assertions that they make no money from its "fetal tissue donation" program, which it presents as a "humanitarian undertaking."

In the video, Vanessa Russo, compliance program administrator for Planned Parenthood Keystone in Pennsylvania, defends the practice wholeheartedly -- even if it runs afoul of federal laws. “A company like this that wants to give our organization money for the tissue–I think that that’s a valid exchange, and that that’s OK,” she says.

U.S. statutory law makes it a federal felony to receive "valuable consideration" - that is, economic profit of any sort - in exchange for human organs, something abortionists deny they receive.

"We feel like we can't consent to be bullied by ridiculous laws," Russo says.

"Planned Parenthood runs their abortion and baby parts business in open disregard for the law and should be prosecuted immediately,” says David Daleiden, Project Lead for CMP.

But PPFA leaders worry about the optics of trading in organs. Dr. Vanessa Cullins, vice president for external medical affairs for PPFA, worries on camera, “This could destroy your organization and us, if we don’t time those conversations correctly."

However, VanDerhei states she has been trying to manage potential fallout with the abortion industry as a whole. She tells them she has "been talking to the executive director of the National Abortion Federation. We’re trying to figure this out as an industry, about how we’re going to manage remuneration, because the headlines would be a disaster.”

Daldeiden says this should rip the mask off the organization's brutality.

“From e-mail blackouts to contorted oxymorons like ‘donation for remuneration,’ the lengths to which Planned Parenthood leadership will go to cover-up their illegal sale of aborted baby parts are nothing less than the desperation of a guilty conscience," Daleiden says.

The newest video comes during Congressional investigations – sparked by its previous video releases – as well as a brewing Capitol Hill fight to defund the nation's leading abortion provider.

“Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards openly admits they receive ‘$60 per tissue specimen,’ and their contracts with StemExpress offer payments per fetus ‘determined in the clinic to be usable,’" Daleiden says.

"Their taxpayer funding should be reassigned to Federally Qualified Health Centers, which provide more and comprehensive health services at locations outnumbering Planned Parenthood 20 to 1,” Daleiden suggested today. (Planned Parenthood caught: We make ‘fair amount’ selling ‘fresh’ baby eyes, gonads.)

Does any of this hurt Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s soul? If so, why has he remained silent so far?

Although it is somewhat possible that the conciliar “pope” will make an allusion to the Planned Barrenhood videos when he addresses a special joint session of the Congress of the United States of America on Thursday, September 24, 2015, the Feast of Our Lady of Ransom, next week in the context of respect for “human ecology,” which would include also the “rights” of those from one country who seek to enter and settle into another country illegally and the “rights of creation,” there is little sign that this will be the case.

You doubt my word?

Consider the “sneak preview” of the papal imposter’s pilgrimage to Cuba and to the United States of America that begins tomorrow, Saturday, September 19, 2015, the Feast of Saint Januarius and the Commemoration of Ember Saturday in September and the Commemoration of the Vigil of Saint Matthew the Apostle:

(Vatican Radio) Cardinal Pietro Parolin says migration will be one of the most important themes raised by Pope Francis during his visit to Cuba and the U.S. from the 19th to the 28th of September. Speaking in a wide-ranging interview with the Vatican Television Centre, Cardinal Parolin also confirmed that the Pope would definitely relaunch his message during his speeches to the U.S. Congress and the United Nations about the need to care for creation that was at the heart of his recent encyclical Laudato Si. The cardinal spoke too about how he hoped the canonization of Blessed Junipero Serra, a Spanish Franciscan missionary, would encourage integration within the U.S. Church of an increasingly relevant and important Hispanic component in the nation.

Asked first about the journey to Cuba and the rapprochement between Havana and Washington, Cardinal Parolin reiterated the Holy See’s view that the (U.S.) economic embargo against Cuba should be lifted.  At the same time, he said the bishops hoped that this step could be accompanied “by a greater opening (in Cuba) when it comes to freedom and human rights.” 

Touching next on the Pope’s visit to the Shrine of Our lady of Charity of Cobre in Cuba, Cardinal Parolin said it was a “normal” thing to do, because of “the strong Marian devotion of the Latin American and Cuban people” and by going there the Pope would encounter the heart of the Caribbean island and its people. 

Asked next whether migration would be one of the main themes of the papal visit to the U.S., Cardinal Parolin said he was sure this would be the case because this is an issue very keenly felt by the Pope to which he often refers.  The Cardinal said it was his earnest hope that this encounter between the Pope who is carrying this problem within his heart and a nation that has experienced many waves of migrants landing on its shores “can offer some guidelines” for resolving this ongoing migration crisis.

During his visit to the U.S. Pope Francis is due to canonize blessed Junipero Serra, a Spanish Franciscan missionary, whom he has described as the founding father of the United States.  When asked whether this event is a call for the U.S. to rediscover its Spanish and Catholic history, Cardinal Parolin agreed.  He said the main message offered by this canonization is to encourage integration within the U.S. Church of an “increasingly important and relevant Hispanic component” in the nation.

Turning next to two keenly awaited speeches by Pope Francis, one to the U.S. Congress and another to the United Nations, Cardinal Parolin was asked whether the Pope is likely to relaunch the message contained within his Laudato Si encyclical.  He replied saying “yes, definitely” but added that he believed the Pope’s remarks would extend beyond the issue of climate change and encompass a “more integral ecology” that takes into consideration the transcendental nature of the human person possessing fundamental rights, “especially the right to life and religious freedom.” 

Asked about the criticism that have been raised by some in the U.S. who consider the papal encyclical an excessively strong attack on the capitalist system, Cardinal Parolin responded by saying he believed the Pope would invite everybody to reflect on those issues, adding that it was realistic to realize that “things are not going in the right direction” and therefore there’s also a need to find ways of solving this. “We need a change,” he said.

The final question put to Cardinal Parolin concerned the Pope’s meeting with families from around the world in the U.S. city of Philadelphia and whether that would be the final chance to listen to families on the road leading to next month’s Synod of Bishops on the Family taking place in the Vatican. The Cardinal said he agreed with that and said what will emerge from this meeting is the beauty of the family and the help that the Gospel can offer to families.  He said this would be the positive side, without forgetting the great challenges on this issue.  Concluding, the cardinal said the meeting in Philadelphia would give the whole Church “a new enthusiasm” and a desire to proclaim the gospel of the family, whilst at the same time, “helping families who find themselves in whatever type of difficulties in living the Gospel in its fullness which is a source of joy, peace and happiness for all.” (Parolin on Antipapal visit to Cuba and the U.S..)

Yes, Jorge will make a gratuitous reference or two to the “right to life” next week. As he has thus far remained silent about the Planned Barrenhood videos while being quite vociferous about the “environment” and the “rights” of illegal immigrants, it would be out of character for him to mention what some of his advisers no doubt to be a “political issue” that should not be mentioned, although he could so if only to disarm his “conservative” critics about the prebaked results of next month’s synod and his calls for draconian public policy measures to be taken to “save the planet.” I still believe that Bucking for Obama's Job, which was my mock draft of what Bergoglio will say next week, may turn out to be a fairly accurate summary of what the conciliar "Petrine Minister" will say.

Well, the hour is approaching 3:00 a.m. on the Feast of Saint Joseph of Cupertino, whose joy was such in offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that he levitated while holding the Sacred Species over his head It is time for some edification from the life of a holy priest whose special gifts were believed by many of his brother Franciscans to be from the devil, not from God:

This Joseph was born, of godly parents, at Cupertino, a small village of the diocecese of Nardo, between Brindisi and Otranto, (six miles from the coast of the Gulf of Tarento, upon the 17th day of June,) in the year of Redemption 1603. The love of God came to him early, and he passed his childhood and youth in great guilelessness and harmlessness. After recovering by the help of the Virgin Mother of God from a long and painful sickness which he bore very quietly, he gave himself altogether to godliness and self-improvement. God called him inwardly to higher things, and to give himself more utterly to His service, he determined in himself to join the "Seraphic" Order. After divers failures and changes, he obtained his wish among the Friars of the convent of "La Grotella." He went first as a lay-brother, on account of his ignorance of letters, but God was pleased to allow him afterwards to be taken among the choir brethren. After taking his solemn vows he was ordained Priest, and then set before him to aim at a more perfect life. To this end (as far as in him lay) he thrust from him all earthly affections and all carnal things, even to such as seem almost needful for life. He tormented his body with haircloth, scourging, spiked chains, and every kind of hardship and affliction. He fed his spirit sweetly upon the constant exercise of holy prayer, and gazing upon the highest matters. And so it came to pass that the love of God, which had been enkindled in his heart from his earliest years, burnt forth day by day more strangely and openly.

The chief outcome of this love of God was the strong and marvellous trances whereinto he oftentimes fell. It was, nevertheless, strange to observe that after he had entirely lost his senses he could be called out of the trance by the mere order of his superiors. To be utterly obedient was one of his chief aims, and he was used to say that those who ruled him could lead him about like a blind man, and that it was better to die than not to obey. He so imitated the poverty of the Seraphic Patriarch, that when he was at the point of death, when the Friars use to dispose of anything they have, he was able to tell his Superior that he had absolutely nothing. Thus bearing about in his body the dying of the Lord Jesus, the life also of Jesus was made manifest in his body. When he saw that certain persons had committed a foul sin of uncleanness, there came from him a strong savour, a proof of that snowy and glorious purity which, in spite of the most hideous temptations whereby the unclean spirit wrestled long to darken it, he kept undefiled, partly by an iron bridling of his senses, partly by the stern punishments he inflicted upon his own body, and partly by the extraordinary protection of the pure Virgin Mary, whom he was used to call his own Mother, whom he honoured and worshipped as his most tender Mother in his very heart of hearts, and whom he was eager that all men should honour, because, as he said, if we have her protection, every good thing comes with it.

This eagerness on the part of the blessed Joseph was but one outcome from his love for his neighbours. So great was his zeal for souls, that he vehemently sought in all ways for the salvation of all. When he saw his neighbour in any trouble, whether it were poverty or sickness or any other affliction, his tenderness went out toward him, and he helped him as well as he could. They who reviled, and slandered, and insulted himself were not cut off from his love. He was used to welcome such with great long-suffering, meekness, and cheerfulness of countenance and he preserved the same constantly amid many hardships and changes when he was sent hither and thither by command of the Superiors of his Order, and of the Holy Inquisition. People and princes alike marvelled at the exceeding holiness of his life, and the spiritual gifts poured upon him from above, but he was so lowly, that he sincerely held himself to be chief among sinners, and earnestly besought God to take away from him the more showy of His gifts. Of men he entreated that after his death they would cast his body somewhere where his memory might soonest perish. But God, Who exalteth them of low degree, glorified His servant during life with the gifts of heavenly wisdom, of prophecy, of discerning the hidden thoughts of the heart, of healing, and of other spiritual gifts in marvellous abundance, gave him a precious death, and made the place of his rest glorious. He fell asleep in Jesus upon the very day and at the very place foretold by himself, that is, at Osimo, (between Ancona and Loretto, upon the 18 th day of September,) in the 61st year of his own age, and in that of salvation 1663. He was famous for miracles even after his death, and Benedict XIV. enrolled his name among those of the Blessed, and Clement XIII. among those of the Saints. Clement XIV., being himself a member of the same Order, extended the use of the Office and Mass in memory of him to the whole Church. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Joseph of Cupertino.)

Invoking the protection of Saint Joseph Cupertino (whose life was dramatized--emphasis on dramatized--in The Reluctant Saint, which is a very good motion picture starring the late Maximilian Schell and Ricardo Montalban), whose love of purity made him so very close to Our Lady, we ask Our Lady to give us the holy simplicity that that Saint Joseph  Cupertino exemplified as we seek to die to self in order to serve Christ the King as His consecrated slaves through the Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.

The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, not to Jorge and his band of spiritual thieves.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, 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 Joseph of Cupertino, pray for us.