Francis: “the most wayward pontificate in the history of the papacy” – Lawyer…editor
DEERFIELD, IL, April 16, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Approximately 100 Catholics from the United States, Latin America, and Europe attended the 2018 Catholic Family News conference in northern Illinois last weekend.
Advertised as “The Weapons of Our Warfare,” the three-day long gathering at a Hyatt Regency hotel just outside Chicago featured talks by some of the most knowledgeable laymen and clergy engaged in the battle for and preservation of the Catholic faith, including renowned Church historian Roberto de Mattei.
The conference, which focused on Pope Francis and the family, was the first hosted by Catholic Family News, a Traditional Catholic newspaper, since 2016. John Vennari, the paper’s longtime editor who managed the organization since its founding in 1994, passed away after a long battle with cancer in April of 2017.
The crisis in the family
In his opening address, editor Matt Gaspers paid homage to his predecessor, assuring his audience that the fight for Tradition will continue. Gaspers then delivered a well-sourced, detailed speech, quoting Sr. Lucia and Our Lady in an effort to contextualize attacks presently being waged against the family.
“Although it is painful to witness this terrible crisis in the Church and the family, the fact that it is occurring should come as no surprise. Our Lady told us it would happen.” The “crisis in the Church and the family share the same root cause, namely, a crisis of fatherhood.”
Gaspers made special mention of Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, the president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, who in March said it is “dangerous” to speak of the family as “the domestic church.”
Archbishop Paglia’s credibility is “next to nothing,” Gaspers said. He has “thoroughly dismantled the Pontifical Academy for Life and has commissioned homoerotic paintings.” The family is a patriarchal hierarchy of baptized persons whose head fills the role of teaching, governing, and sanctifying. As such, it is a reflection and microcosm of the universal Church, he said.
Gaspers also detailed how marriage and the family are “powerful weapons” that must be used in the restoration of Holy Mother Church.
True and false mercy
Traditional Franciscan priest Fr. Isaac Mary Relyea spoke about Confession, a timely topic given the implementation of Amoris Laetitia across the world and Pope Francis’ constant invocation of mercy.
Extensively quoting St. Alphonsus Liguori (1696-1787), the patron saint of confessors, Fr. Relyea argued that there is a false sense of mercy being promoted in Rome. This sense of mercy is “twisted” and “disgusting,” he said.
Priests are “obliged to inform consciences” and to withhold absolution if the person confessing isn’t amending their life. You are “crazy” if you think you are being merciful by telling someone cohabitating in an adulterous union that they are pleasing to God, the priest said in a Brooklyn accent.
Fr. Relyea incorporated the Four Last Things — Death, Judgement, Heaven, Hell — into his remarks as well, recalling that although God shows mercy to those who fear Him, for those who abuse His mercy, He exercises justice.
The New York-born priest described the Pope’s 2016 exhortation Amoris Laetitia as “wicked.”
In between speeches, conference attendees went to morning Mass, enjoyed evening refreshments, and frequented the vendor area, where Loreto Publications and the St. Vincent Ferrer Foundation of Texas — among other apostolates — sold books, missals, veils, and audio CD’s.
The Francis papacy as well as the “Catholic Church: Where are you heading?” symposium held in Rome on April 7th (the same day of the conference) were common topics of conversation among guests.
Attendee Elizabeth Yore told LifeSiteNews she went to the conference because “It is incumbent upon the laity to mount a resistance, and to continue to mount a resistance to what is going on in the Vatican, especially now given that so few Bishops and Cardinals are willing to do so.”
Internet-based Catholic radio station Magnificat Media broadcast live from the hotel as well.
Prayer cards and literature on Freemasonry and Our Lady of Good Success were given to everyone who came.
Despite heresy, the Pope is still the Pope
Three speeches at the “Weapons of Our Warfare” conference focused on the papacy.
Church historian Roberto de Mattei said “true devotion” to the Chair of St. Peter requires Catholics to speak out against “the heresies” being promoted by Pope Francis, who, despite propagating heresy, remains the pope.
Canadian Dominican priest Fr. Albert Kallio O.P. echoed de Mattei’s words. “Even if the pope is a heretic…that does not at all mean that by that very fact, ipso facto as we say in English, he would cease being pope.”
Rejecting the claim that Pope Francis has lost his office, Fr. Kallio said, “Even those who hold that a pope who is manifestly a heretic loses automatically his office [believe] that the manifestation required before the pope would lose his office takes place by a declaration declared by the authority of the Church, namely the bishops.”
It seems God is allowing “a sort of eclipse” of the Church for the moment, he concluded.
Christopher Ferrara, a lawyer and prolific Catholic writer, delivered a strongly worded speech emphatically urging Catholics not only to put forth the Church’s perennial teachings but to expose the problematic teachings coming from Pope Francis.
Speaking with LifeSiteNews, Ferrara said “the most effective opposition to what has to be seen now as the most wayward pontificate in the history of the papacy will have to come from the upper hierarchy.”
Such an opposition would come in the form of a public statement made by a significant number of Cardinals that would declare Pope Francis is “in error, that he’s attempting to impose error upon the Church, that his effort to pass off these errors as ‘authentic magisterium’ is a fraud…and that the faithful cannot follow this pope in his errors,” Ferrara said.
Young Catholics need Tradition
Another talk particularly relevant to events taking place in the Church was that which was given by 21-year-old Alexandra Reis, Catholic Family News’ youth correspondent.
“What can the youth do to fight the devil?” Reis rhetorically asked. Not staying updated with every piece of world news and constantly attending protests, she argued. Rather, they can fight the devil by fulfilling their daily duties of state.
If you want “real penance” and if you want to truly change the world, she said, try doing dirty dishes, try “getting out of bed right when your alarm goes off in the morning. Offer that up to Our Lady. Mary wants us to offer sacrifices to her heart.”
Reis told LifeSiteNews that today’s youth aren’t being taught about the virtues of purity and modesty. Millenials view religion “as a cross” and rebel against “simple acts.” In truth, “it is through the little things that we convert the world.”
Other weapons of our warfare
Louis Tofari, owner of Romanitas Press, a publishing company that helps Catholics learn about the Roman Mass, delivered a talk on the liturgy.
Tofari told LifeSiteNews that the Roman Mass “needs to be used to convert souls to Christianity and to restore the Social Reign of Christ the King.”
Another fascinating topic covered at the conference was the life of Fr. Augustus Tolton, a former slave born in the mid 1800s who was ordained a priest in Rome because no seminary in the United States would accept him due to being African American.
Catholic Family News’ web editor Brendan Young pleaded with Catholics to consecrate themselves to the Blessed Mother during a thoughtful address about St. Maximilian Kolbe and the Militia Immaculata.
Dr. Andrew Childs from St. Mary’s Academy and College in St. Mary’s, Kansas gave an insightful lecture on music while Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X discussed the Traditional Latin Mass. Source
(Ed: visit the Catholic Family News website if you are interested in purchasing any of the talks in CD-format.)
If – in your opinion – Pope Francis is not the worst ever pope in the history of the Church, tell us who you would nominate for that title.
It’s disappointing that only 100 people went to this Conference, but I hope they publish these presentations, on YouTube or elsewhere.
And if anyone thinks that there was a Pope worse than Francis, I say let them lose their voting privileges! Actually, the whole Conciliar lot of them, from John XXIII on, should be tied together with a rope attached to an anchor and cast deep into the memory hole of the Church…that is, after our Holy Mother the Church, having been restored, has pronounced anathema upon their words and deeds, and revoked their “sainthood.”
LOL! You are so right!
If there is a worse pope than Francis, I can’t wait to hear his name. He’s definitely the worst IMHO
Sounds like a great conference, and so it is a pity they didn’t get a bigger audience but that’s always the way. Halls get packed by modernists, traditionalists are less zealous.
You make a very good point, one that I’ve observed myself on many occasions when I’ve gone along to a modernist event (usually at St Aloysius Jesuit church in Garnethill) and it’s been close to standing room only. Then I’ve watched in amazement as the audience listened in wonderment at the baloney being peddled as some kind of batty “theology”. But, as you say, you can’t fault them for their zeal. They do have it, where the supposedly orthodox/traditionalists don’t. Facts are awkward things…
We were always happy to get 100 people at our conferences. It’s actually an achievement of miraculous proportions, these days! The apathy is palpable – nobody cares. I’ve seen me, in the company of modern, diocesan Catholics, mention a burning cause for concern in the sphere of morality – for example, transgenderism – and receiving blank stares in response. The Faith has gone and, as ever, the Morals duly followed – along with most of the alleged faithful, although they like to pretend nothing’s changed…
As for the rest of your measured remarks – who could possibly disagree? 😀
I just can’t believe that 23% of voters don’t think Francis is the worst pope ever. What kind of Catholics are they?
I’m totally shocked at this information:
“Another fascinating topic covered at the conference was the life of Fr. Augustus Tolton, a former slave born in the mid 1800s who was ordained a priest in Rome because no seminary in the United States would accept him due to being African American.”
We were taught very clearly that charity meant loving every person in the world, no matter their race because they were made, as we all are, in the image and likeness of God. It’s mind-boggling to think that the men running seminaries in the USA did not know that, it’s so basic. What terrible people they must have been. I sincerely hope that discrimination no longer happens in American Catholic institutions. I’d say that it is mortally sinful, to be against someone due to their skin colour.
I’m also appalled at those US seminaries turning away vocations due to skin colour. What?!*! That’s unbelievably scandalous. I was taught the same as you, nobody was to be rejected or looked down on or in anyway badly treated for any reason because the supreme law is charity – without that, all the faith in the world is useless (not that those racists would have true faith)
As for the worst ever pope in history – that’s a no-brainer if ever there was one! Francis, of course!
I wholly agree – see my reply to Lily on the matter of racism aka totaly lack of Christian charity (or, at its most basic, humanity).
Looks like Pope Francis just read your “no-brainer” comment… 😀
It is surprising that there are any visitors to this site who think Francis is NOT the worst ever pope. Maybe they’re just being careful what they wish for, so to speak…
It goes without saying that I endorse, two thosuand percent, what you say about charity and racial prejudice and discrimination. Unthinkable! I was stunned to read that part of the Conference report. Utterly shocking and anyone with even a hint of racial prejudice in their body, is no Catholic. That is a given.
I often say, “Come back Paul VI, all is forgiven!” Pope Francis is not anti-pope pope – he’s a TERRIBLE pope!
I agree with RC Victor, all the conciliar pope’s have been a disaster, perhaps with the exception of Pope Benedict XVI. He did some good.
Well, if you mull over the shocking fact that it was Paul VI who took it upon himself to create a new Mass (think about that for a second) you might begin to see that he, along with the rest of Francis’ predecessors, was paving the way for Papa Francis to work his diabolical magic.
So, no, I wouldn;t say “come back” to any of those who have overseen this horrendous crisis in the Church.
I say “Hurry Up Pius XIII” Puleeeeeese! Still, we have to admit, everybody has a different idea about what makes a good employee, or, in this case, a good pope… We await, in fear and trepidation, the next conclave…
It was a joke to highlight how bad Papa Frank is!
Oops! I get it!
It’s just that we do get one particular blogger on here from time to time who defends Papa Paul VI as if his very life depended on it, and that based on the flawed encyclical Humanae Vitae. HV is, for sure, an improvement on the current permissive attitude to sexual sin of our much lamented despite still breathing, Papa Francis, but still leaves something to be desired.
Anyway, love jokes…. keep ’em coming!
I agree with Ferrara that the action against this “wayward pontificate” has to come from the upper hierarchy, but when will that be? I’m sick of hearing Cardinal Burke’s name when he has not acted as he said he would.
The silence from the hierarchy about this shocker of a pope, is deafening.
I wonder if the deafening silence from the hierarchy is partially due to the realization that for them to call a council to try Francis on charges of heresy is also an implied trial on the entire failed Vatican II experiment. That is, they might have to admit that the last 50 years was a tragic mistake and a heinous crime against the Church.
I say open Pandora’s Box, dear hierarchy, and let the chips fall where they may….PS: most of them will fall on your feckless shoulders.
Don’t you think that the deafening silence from the hierarchy is because the majority agree with Francis? They elected him, after all, and they would have known what kind of bishop he was.
I’m going to be optimistic and say that I don’t think the majority agree with him. I think the majority is horrified at what he is doing, but, with a handful of exceptions, are afraid to act, for various reasons. The traitors certainly seem to be everywhere, but then again, they are the vocal ones, clapping loudly so that they don’t lose their jobs.
(There is an old anecdote about members of the USSR Politburo, or the Parliament, or whatever they called it, clapping after a speech by the murderous Stalin. They clapped for a ridiculously long time, because everyone was afraid to be the first one to stop clapping, lest they be sent to the Gulag, or executed).
The silent ones are just like the Apostles – who, during the Passion of their Master, fled from fear after just one brief attempt by Peter to defend Him.
I do hope you’re correct, because, right now, I am leaning more to the opposite view, as Fidelis, that the majority are suffering from the same spiritual blindness as their leader on earth. And that makes two women against one male of the species… So, to make it a level playing field…
Seriously, your parallel with the Apostles during Our Lord’s Passion, has merit, so I’m keeping a slightly open mind on this…
PS – you’d never believe I’m up to my eyes in work of one kind or another, the time I waste looking for jokes to post here just to
Editor & Fidelis,
Thanks for the tip, Ed, that Fidelis is a woman., and that this is a clear case of 2 women ganging up on a man…..sort of tempts one to join the transgender movement just to be on the right side….
Anyway, here’s a little more far-fetched speculation. I don’t know how closely the Passion of the Church will parallel Our Lord’s Passion, but if you think about it, 1 of the 12 betrayed Him. So perhaps1 out of every 12 bishops are betraying Him. The rest, to continue this parallel, are hiding “for fear of the Jews.”
Can’t wait for your next cartoon…..
I’m assuming that Fidelis is a woman, judging by her great posts… O and her email address is a bit of a clue as well, although, now that you mention transgender, I may have to rethink that….
This cartoon was worth the wait, methinks… albeit nothing to do with the apostles hiding – a little poetic licence so to speak… 😀
Bloggers, you may find this forthcoming webcast of interest – ‘PF’s plan to change the Church’
That looks interesting. I remember the shock on reading that Pope Francis had plans to change the Church. Some nerve.
What bothers me about this webcast is that they act like this is fresh news. Seriously? This Pope has shown himself to be a Marxist subversive almost since the day he was elected.
That said, I registered so I can eat my words….:-)
This is very interesting – Pope Francis and the English Bishops giving different messages about the Alfie Evans case.
I’m not impressed with lifenews using pejorative words like “yanking life support” and “shocking statement”. It is a sad fact that despite the best efforts of the medical staff some children do die in hospitals everyday for one reason or another. Some children, like some adults, are just too sick to be cured. Fact. I don’t know if any bloggers saw the recent programme from the Southampton Childrens’ ICU in which doctors, nurses, parents and members of the ethics committee gave an insight into the difficulty of deciding when to continue with extraordinary measurein very ill and brain damaged children. The dedication of the staff and the compassion for the parents was remarkable. No one could even think of them yanking life support from children.
I cannot understand why, if a hospital (in England) decides it cannot do any more for a child like Alfie Evans but another hospital (overseas) says it CAN help, why that hospital goes against the parents’ wishes and refuses to release that child. It makes no sense and the implication that the doctors care more about the child than the parents, is insensitive, not to say insulting, in the extreme.
I am totally nonplussed about this mentality. If the parents choose to try another hospital, and are happy to release the English hospital from all responsibility, what’s the problem?
I did see the documentary (or parts of it) that you mention, but those were different situations. There were no situations covered where an alternative offer of treatment was available and refused by the hospital. I repeat my standard position which is that it is for the parents, not anyone else, medically qualified or not, certainly where there is a conflict of medical opinion as in Alfie’s case, to decide that a child cannot be given the opportunity to be treated elsewhere. Keeping such children virtual prisoners against the will of their parents, is an outrage.
As for the language employed – well, there was no need to use the term “yanking life support” – I agree – because the truth has its own power and the fact of the matter is, these doctors are deciding to take life from the child when there is a possible treatment to save his life elsewhere.
As the documentary to which you refer demonstrated, there are certainly cases where life support can be switched off with integrity – nobody needs to go to extraordinary measures to save a life, in any event, that is a given – but what I just cannot understand is that, as I have already said (but as Groucho Marx famously said, don’t stop me, I want to hear it again!) where other doctors (overseas) claim to have the means to treat that child, the doctors here don’t simply accept the right of the parents (and child!) to take advantage of that possibility. What’s to lose?
I’m going to be away from my computer for quite a while, so if you come back at me, don’t think I’m giving in gracefully – I’ll be back!
This is a bit like the case of little Charlie Gard all over again and we did not agree on that so there is not much point in engaging with this one either. Nevertheless….
If I understand your position correctly, you believe that the parents must always be the ones to decide what happens to their child. Them and only them no matter what medical experts have said regarding the futility of continuing with extraordinary measures to keep the child alive.
I would argue that in such rare situations it is almost impossible for the parents to consider things objectively which is why the courts have to be involved.
Should parents who wish to remove a child to take him to an African witch doctor be allowed to do so? If not why not?
Should Jehovahs witnesses be able to refuse life saving heart surgery because they do not agree with blood transfusions? Again, if not why not?
Should parents insist that a very sick child with practically no brain activity be further subjected to tracheostomy and kept alive at the cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds in a struggling health service while other children have operations cancelled because there is not an ICU bed available? Almost impossible for a parent to decide.
In this case as far as I am aware the Italian hospital are not offering any chance of a cure only a continuation of palliative care. I do not know why Alder Hey are not just going along with that since it would seem that there is no good reason for them to disagree with that solution. I can only assume that they believe themselves to be acting on the child’s best interests and wish to prevent further suffering by moving him. Maybe we do not have all the facts.i doubt we do.
I know you will not agree with me but this is not a case as St Miguel argues, of Big Brother flexing his muscles. Sadly when very small babies become sick who would formerly have died quickly from one cause or another, doctors these days find it difficult to accept death so go down the path of heroic treatments which some months down the line are seen to be both futile and as in this case difficult to stop. It is not always clear at the beginning of course. And after months of intensive care perhaps it is more difficult for parents who have then built up their relationship with the child and have held on to hope to finally let the child go. Extremely difficult but few go to the extent of involving the courts to the extent that these parents have done. I wonder what Charlie Gards parents now feel about the battle over ther child! I hope they have somehow come to terms and been able to grieve for him in peace.
Notice you mention the cost Elizabeth.Assume you may be of the medical profession? Would cost be an issue if the child was of famous parents I wonder.
Elizabeth is a trained nurse and she worked in the famous Ormond Street children’s hospital.
Cost really doesn’t come into the cases we’ve been discussing – Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans because, to the best of my knowledge, the health service has not been asked to pay for these children. If the parents go abroad for treatment, they have to pay themselves, so really that isn’t an issue here.
I specifically said that I understand there is no requirement for doctors to go to extraordinary lengths to save a life. That’s basic ethics. The Church does not require that. I thought I’d made that clear in my post responding to your concerns but since one of my many mottos is “if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again” I’m going to try again 😀
In the case of a Jehovah’s Witness declining blood transfusion, that would certainly be a legitimate case for court intervention because the parents’ refusal of treatment is based on a belief which is skewed by a false reading of Scripture. The other cases, I think are self-evidently Elizabeth being naughty. I mean, witch doctors? It’s clear that there are cases where parental decisions will have to be called into question, but the two points I’m arguing are as follows:
1) if there is an alternative treatment offered by another hospital, the doctors in the first hospital should not have the right to over-ride the parents’ wishes. In fact, you seem to be agreeing with that when you write: In this case as far as I am aware the Italian hospital are not offering any chance of a cure only a continuation of palliative care. I do not know why Alder Hey are not just going along with that since it would seem that there is no good reason for them to disagree with that solution.
I didn’t argue for life support to be kept on indefinitely. These machines represent extraordinary lengths and thus may be switched off by the medical staff when deemed necessary, and I’m sure that would be carried out with sensitivity in consultation with parents. What I’m arguing for, in this and similar cases, is that where another hospital, whether at home or abroad, offers to treat the child, then that decision must be made by the parents. With respect, there is no equivalence between parents and others, including doctors, when it comes to the education or health treatment of children. You appear to be arguing that “doctor knows best” and well, that brings me to my second point…
2) The case of little Ashya King, where his parents were actually jailed and treated like criminals for taking him abroad without the hospital's "permission" – !*!?! – is an example where the doctors manifestly did NOT know better. There was a recent report about his case on the TV news and he is thriving. Here's one newspaper report from two/three years ago, but notice, he is still alive and well and thriving. If those doctors had gotten their way, Ashya would no longer be with us.
Yes, there may be occasions where it is right for the medical staff to switch off life support, there being no chance of survival, no alternative treatment.
If there IS an offer of alternative treatment, even if the doctors disapprove, then it should be for the parents to decide whether or not to try the offered treatment or, if convinced that it is unlikely to work, or that the child could not stand the rigours of the journey etc. then the parents may go with the doctors' decision to switch off the life support machine.
There is NO moral equivalence between doctors and parents or teachers and parents in the care of children. Outsiders are permitted to act in loco parentis, in the place of parents, in certain, very limited, circumstances. They do not replace parental authority and they must not try to do so.
That’s all I’m saying… And yes I know I talk too much 😀
The Aysha KIng was the case that came to mind when I was replying.
That case demonstrates how parents are under the thumb of their betters. I also believe that in the UK the money/budget caper is prime in the minds of Health Service managers (administrators) driven by performance and stats.
Also there appears to be a rule for some and not others.
Prince Philip at 96 versus a 96 year old in Possillpark, no expense spared for some..no budget trimming there.
I stumbled across this video just now, having searched for something entirely unrelated. Now, we HAVE to ask ourselves why this MEP’s interaction with the family and hospital, the video clips of Alfie showing him responsive, have not been shown on the mainstream TV outlets. This is absolutely shocking. Watch this five minutes clip – which, by the way, answers the question as to how the family managed to get to meet Pope Francis…
That’s an amazing video – amazing that it hasn’t been broadcast on the news. What a lovely little boy, God bless him. I hope and pray his life is spared, if only to let him travel overseas to see if one of the hospitals that have offered to take him, can make him better.
What a lovely little boy. How can he be so animated, responsive, and have serious brain damage? I cannot understand how an “undiagnosed” condition can be terminal, but I’m not medically qualified so will have to take their word for it all.
Now that Alfie is off life support and breathing independently and maybe going to be allowed home, we should pray hard for a real miracle to drive home the fact that doctors are not infallible.
I reckon it’s about money for a start and prestige (another hospital in another country can do something we can’t and it’s happened before, when a child was taken abroad and had successful treatment).
Cost/benefit analysis always at the forefront. UK has no money,except for Olympics, Commonwealth games, State visits etc.
The OTHER reason is that it is not actually YOUR child when it suits the powers that be…the State will overrule and pull the in loco parentis caper when it suits them and they wish to ‘discourage’ other parents daring to challenge the ‘professionals’…..(their betters), you should accept your station in life bilge).
Case in question is the Named Person stunt in Scotland….your child is only fed and clothed and school trips paid for by the parents, but the parents MUST be overseen by another ‘non-partisan’ and ‘enlightened’ adult to monitor and correct their parenting skills.
Big Brother does not liked to be challenged and will not tolerate anyone exercising their beliefs.
How can you expect them to have any money left to attend to sick children when it mainly gets spent on the slaughter of perfectly healthy unborn children and the remaining shekels getting used up by vasectomies and their reversals.
We can spend BILLIONS looking for life on Mars but it chokes when it is to be spent on people. Especially the elderly and disabled.
Euthanasia will become a Right, then a Duty and then a Senior Social Worker will be sitting with a calculator working out the cost/benefit analysis on Old Alex’s tanking of resources.
Another point from me, is that time and time again we get this mantra in the media….viz the General Medical Council says…..the Nursing Union….the College of Midwives etc.
The next ‘let’s put them in their places group’ is the BMA….The British Medical Association and we get these line:- BMA guidelines say XYZ and Joe Public falls in to line.
The BMA IS A ‘UNION’ for Doctors…..UNIONS do NOT legislate, enable laws etc…that is for Parliament….
The GMC is NOT the law.
GUIDELINES ARE NOT LAW.
Talking back to your betters is just not tolerated….oh hang on…toleration, equality and diversity ?
Elizabeth has tried to reply to your comments, but WordPress has been playing games and it would not post. She’s emailed the comment to me, so what follows is from Elizabeth…
So St Miguel, are you saying that there should be no guidelines or overseeing of doctors then if you object to the GMC and the BMA? Any rogue medic could then get away with malpractice and have no fear of being struck off. Most professions have some sort of professional body who try to maintain standards eg CIMA for accountants, Law Society for solicitors etc. As a nurse myself it was important to be registered by the General Nursing Council, indeed essential, and to be a member of the Royal College too. I do not understand your objection to these bodies unless you are in favour of a general free for all!
However I do agree that far too much money is spent on things like space research etc instead of addressing the needs of the elderly and the sick. But the NHS as it stands does not have a bottomless pit of money however we might wish it had. And we need prudent overseeing of resources. Get rid of most of the overpaid administrators for a start. Stop funding for infertility treatment for would be single mothers. But I am sure that Prince Philip paid for his own hip replacement in the private hospital and did not cost the NHS a penny so no need to have a go there St Miguel.
Editor: can’t help putting in my tuppence worth to say that Elizabeth has made excellent points, here, St Miguel. I’d give the “money” and Prince Philip a rest, I really would … strongly recommended!
Doctors and Nurses should remember that parents have a God-given right in the care of their children. In the case of Alfie, we are not talking “loony parents” wanting to take their child to a witch doctor or otherwise. Another hospital is willing to take over the care of the child so he should be released immediately as per his parent’s wishes and the new hospital’s willingness to treat. People forgot that God is the greatest physician and has the final answer.
I have just signed a petition to support this
As rightly stated some Doctors and Nurses have no problem destroying an unborn child or otherwise, I know as a former Nurse I have worked with many and had many conflicts over this issue.
The NHS talk about the cost of supporting these babies, but how long has this gone on for and also this would have released a much needed ITU bed if they had acted with integrity.
The CDF (Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith) Says “NO” to German Plan for Intercommunion with Protestants. But Pope Francis wants the “NO” kept secret. Why?
Am I reading it correctly, Pope Francis is pushing for this idea?
Yep, looks like he is pushing it and what a mendacious shower they all are!
Whilst I agree Pope Francis is suboptimal, to say the least. I think there have been worse Popes. Examples: Stephen VI, John XII.
Saint by comparison. Stephen only lasted a year anyway, and didn’t want to be pope, Francis is going on and on and on and DID want to be pope; John was merely (add inverted commas) a worldling, a misbehaving so & so. No comparison to Francis who is changing dogma and announcing to the world that he has set out to change the Church. As I say… saints by comparison…
“Suboptimal” did you say? That puts you in the running for some kind of “understatement of understatements” award. There is just no pope to compare to this horrendous incumbent. Trust me. Even if you don’t normally trust me, trust me on this. Please. Give Google a rest – you won’t find any pontiff to begin to equal Francis’s position as the most damaging pontiff ever. Trust me… Did I say that before?
Thank you Editor for restoring me…if only!
My pleasure, Elizabeth! The blog just isn’t the same without you and your cheerful avatar!
Seems to be working Elizabeth.
My points previously are that certain groups of people seem to assume that they are OUR self appointed ‘leaders in thought’. The BMA being but one, but the fact that they are a union and their raison d’etre is for the working benefits of their members does not stop them from sticking their tuppence worth in to the various laws of the UK and assuming that they know better than anyone else.
Guidelines are not law and laws are for Parliament to enable.
However the long suffering public seem to be overwhelmed when august bodies start using this terminology and are liable to accept rather than question.
Here I am once again. I somehow think that you were referring to me as being the one poster who defends to the death the late Pope Paul VI. I have voted in your poll and I do think that our present Pope is the worst ever and as for Paul VI I think that basically he was a weak pope but on HV he did come out most courageously. Here in Australia one topic that is dragging on and on is the comment by one of the very best Rugby players here (Israel Folau) who is a Polynesian and a devout Christian. He was asked what happens to a “Gay” who dies and then has to face God. Folau’s reply was that unless he had repented then he would be sent straight to Hell. Now note, Folau was asked a question about what God would do. The howls here have resulted in Alan Joyce (Irish born director of Qantas and a raging homosexual) has cancelled Qantas’s sponsorship of Australian Rugby and issued directives to all Qantas staff that they are to support diversity and to cease using such terms as “husband” “wife” “Mr” and “Mrs” etc!
Religious persecution is increasing here in Australia. Cardinal Pell has been dragged through the Court in Victoria on false charges of Sexual impropriety. His Council has demonstrated that these charges should all be thrown out but the Magistrate has yet to give her verdict and this will come out on 1stMay. She is certainly biased against Cardinal Pell.
I honestly can’t remember the name of the blogger who defends Paul VI to the death but I know we have a blogger who comes on from time to time to do so. If you’re willing to take the blame 😀 that’s fine by me!
The account of the conversation about where unrepentant sinners (even homosexuals!) go after Judgment is unsurprising, sadly. Any hint that homosexuals are not going to be seated on the right hand of God in eternity, is bound to meet with the kind of reaction which you describe. Such frantic reaction is, in itself, a sign of diabolical activity. How sad to see Australia taking this deadly route to the canonisation of unnatural sexual behaviour. Tragic.
As for Cardinal Pell – I’m becoming more and more convinced that he has been set up. We should pray hard for him at this time.
And here is yet another example of Papa Francis’ in the role of the worst ever pope in the history of the Church…
CNSNews.com) — In the wake of news that Pope Francis told a clergy-abuse victim that God made him gay and “loves you like that,” several LGBT activists have praised the pontiff, declaring his remarks “tremendous” and revolutionary.
As reported Monday, in his recent meeting with Juan Carlos Cruz, who was sexually abused as a boy by a homosexual Chilean priest, Pope Francis apologized for what happened to the young man and told him, “That you are gay, does not matter. God made you like that and he loves you like that and I do not care. The Pope loves you as you are, you have to be happy with who you are.” (emphasis added – Ed).
None of that old, ‘you need to repent, turn away from sin…’ Nope! God loves you just as you are, in your sin. and the Pope doesn’t care that a soul may end up in Hell – WOW! The times they are a-changing right enough – big time!
Comments are closed.