Opposing the Luciferic Great Reset

 As Lifesite News notes:

"Pastor Artur Pawlowski has made it clear that he will not comply with the gag order imposed by a Canadian judge that was part of the final ruling against him and his brother for their outspoken stance against lockdowns and vaccine mandates.

Regarding the desire of the Alberta court that Pawlowski not contradict the government narrative when speaking publicly about COVID-19 vaccines and lockdowns, the pastor stated, 'This is compelled speech the judge ordered like in China and North Korea … I won’t comply and I’m fully prepared to go to prison.'

Alberta Justice Adam Germain’s 12-page ruling contained instructions for what the court expects Pawlowski to say about COVID-related topics. According to the judge, if he speaks against any of the recommendations laid out by Alberta Health Services, he is supposed to state the following:

'I am also aware that the views I am expressing to you on this occasion may not be views held by the majority of medical experts in Alberta. While I may disagree with them, I am obliged to inform you that the majority of medical experts favour social distancing, mask wearing, and avoiding large crowds to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Most medical experts also support participation in a vaccination program unless for a valid religious or medical reason you cannot be vaccinated. Vaccinations have been shown statistically to save lives and to reduce the severity of COVID-19 symptoms.'

Pawlowski’s lawyer, Sarah Miller, intends to appeal the 'compelled speech and unconstitutional' sentencing in a separate court challenge. An appeal of Germain’s guilty verdict for the Pawlowksis’ contempt of court charges has already been filed.

Canadian lawyer and Rebel Media chief Ezra Levant wrote: 'In a bizarre, 40-minute rant, Justice Adam Germain ordered that for the next 18 months, whenever Pastor Artur talks about lockdowns, the pandemic or vaccines — in tweets, in speeches, in media interviews — he must immediately repudiate himself, and give the ‘official’ government view condemning himself.'

Levant added that 'he must argue against himself. He must condemn himself. Or go back to jail.' And 'it’s compelled speech, like a Maoist “struggle session” in Communist China. You have to say what the government tells you to say.'"

______________________________

Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death. Father Livio Fanzaga, writing about the Antichrist, says that, "Catholicism alone will resist him. How then do we destroy this superstition which alone obstructs the world's self-revelation? How do we destroy this superstition which divides mankind and which prevents man from being truly brotherly and free? The true Antichrist is revealed in the replies to these questions. Here is perceived his profound being as the man of iniquity. He will not tolerate the idea of men who adore any god other than himself. His intolerance obliges him to make an exception to his pacifism and his philosophy of non-violence. He is the greatest pacifist in the history of the human race, but because peace and justice really reign on earth he will make an exception to kill and destroy the great superstition of Catholicism, once and for all time..." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 124).

On September 15, 1992, Our Lady told Father Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests that, "..It is the hour of my great sorrow for the Church, my dearly beloved Daughter.  How grievously the Church is suffering in these times, as she carries her great cross and climbs the bloodstained Calvary of her passion and her bloody immolation!  Never before, as today, has the Church been made so utterly like my Son Jesus.  She is like Him in solitude and abandonment; she is like Him in denial and betrayal; she is like Him in contempt and condemnation; she is like Him in her crucifixion and in her agony.  This is the hour of my great sorrow for the Church, because the hour of her redemptive passion has come.  It is the gour of my great sorrow for humanity, so ill and so reduced to slavery by the spirits of evil.  The diabolical powers are ruling the earth and producing everywhere the wicked fruits of their dark reign.  And thus this humanity has again become pagan, after almost two thousand years of its redemption and of the first announcement of the Gospel of salvation.  Faithlessness and impiety again cover it; sins wound it; evil poisons it; pride rules it; impurity seduces it; egoism and hatred enchain it; Satan reduces it more and more to slavery and reigns over you with his diabolical power...This is the hour of my great sorrow for all of you, my poor children, because the time of your great suffering has come.  Take refuge in me.  Hasten to the sure refuge of my Immaculate Heart, because we must live together through the hour of the greatest trial, which has now come for you, for the Church and for all humanity."

Increasingly,  we are witnessing the truth being censored by governments,  social media and big tech.  The Luciferic State will not permit anyone to question its Satanic regime or its pseudo-science in the service of the demon and population control zealots.

Hey Mr. Wilson: Your tribal theory of religion is a lot of bunk!

The Cardinal Newman Society Blog is reporting that:

"DePaul University, the largest Catholic university in America, has invited one of the foremost population control advocates who once called Christianity “the most dangerous of devotions” to speak at the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences and College of Science and Health commencement ceremony.


E.O. Wilson, a Harvard professor and two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize who once called humans “an environmental abnormality,” is scheduled to speak at DePaul University’s commencement on June 10th.

He is one of a number of prominent people who will be speaking on campus that day. This is yet another scandalous invitation from a Catholic institution. Wilson once cited as one of the “reasons for optimism” for environmentalists was that “despite entrenched traditions and religious beliefs, the desire to use contraceptives in family planning is spreading.”

In his book The Diversity of Life, Wilson wrote:

'The time has come to speak more openly of a population policy…By this I mean not just capping the growth when the population hits the wall, as in India and China, but a policy based on a rational solution of this problem.'

Wilson has said many times that he doesn’t believe in God but insists he’s not an atheist. He did, however, argue in the online Salon Magazine that “religious belief itself is an adaptation” of evolution. And on top of that, Wilson singles out Christianity as “the most dangerous of devotions.”

He wrote in his book Consilience, The Unity of Knowledge:

'The most dangerous of devotions, in my opinion, is the one endemic to Christianity: I was not born to be of this world. With a second life waiting, suffering can be endured — especially in other people. The natural environment can be used up. Enemies of the faith can be savaged and suicidal martyrdom praised.'

Why a Catholic institution would give a platform to a population control advocate who blasts Christianity as “dangerous” is unfathomable." (See full post here).

Edward Wilson, who is connected with the Earth Charter [see my previous posts on this demonic iniative], subscribes to the Social Theory to explain the origin of religion.  He has been quoted as having said that, 'Religious belief itself is an adaptation that has evolved because we're hard-wired to form tribalistic religions.  Religion is intensely tribalistic.  A devout Christian or Muslim doesn't say that one religion is as good as another.  It gives them faith in the particular group to which they belong and that set of beliefs and moral views." (See here).

But how could a devout Christian say that one religion is as good as another?  That would be the same as saying, "I think error and truth are equally good."  Why in heaven's name would anyone profess a religion that they were not absolutely sure was the true religion?  Would such a profession of faith be honest?  Of course not.  Thus, Mr. Wilson's objection is idiotic.  As is his explanation for the origin of religion.  Responding to the Tribalistic or Social Theory of the origin of religion, Mgsr. Paul J. Glenn, Ph.D., S.T.D., explains that according to this theory, "Primitive men, living in groups, came under the dominance of group-conscience.  They developed a sense of unity in their group or tribe that made them 'herd animals,' and they grew more and more slow to venture upon any procedure not sanctioned by the group.  To such men group-existence was a thing different from, and superior to, individual existence.  It was but natural that they should 'project' their group-unity or group-spirit and view it mentally as a kind of high power.  From this it was only a step to the deification of group-unity, group-spirit, group-power.  As society developed, however, the strong sense of group-unity slackened; men emerged into a clearer consciousness and appreciation of their individuality.  Still, the old idea of a superior power, a god or gods, endured.  The scope of this religious notion was much narrowed and adapted to man's new consciousness of his individual self, and there arose the concept of individual gods.  Among primitives there were many outstanding men, leaders, distinctly individual.  Our own American Indians give us a type of primitive civilization, and their brief recorded history is full of the names of great chiefs who were not only warriors, but orators, counsellors of ripe wisdom, some of them inventors of forms of writing for their tribal dialects.  The social theory [which Edward Wilson promotes] contradicts historical fact, richly increased in our own times by ethnological research, which gives us clear evidence that primitive peoples were not dull masses of witless herd animals.  The basic fallacy of this theory is that it makes the individual man among primitives a nonentity, a unit that counts for nothing.  There is no shadow of evidence for the assertion of this fallacious notion; its reason for existence lies in the fact that it suits the theory!" (Apologetics: A Philosophic Defense and Explanation of the Catholic Religion, pp. 127-128, Tan Books and Publishers).

Edward Wilson is a Darwinist, a materialist.  But as Dr. Peter Kreeft has said, "...if materialism is true, if the soul is only the brain, if there is no spirit, no human soul and no God, then the brain has been programmed by mere chance.  All the programming our brains have received, through heredity (genetics) and environment (society), is ultimately only unintelligent, undesigned, random chance, brute facts, physical causes, not logical reasons.  Therefore materialism cannot be true.  It refutes itself.  It destroys its own credentials.  If the brain is nothing but blind atoms, we have no reason to trust it when it tells us about anything, including itself and atoms."

Edward Wilson is a mental midget with regard to philosophical matters.  I'm sure he'll fit right in at DePaul University.  The school largely abandoned serious thought a long time ago.

Melinda Gates: I'm rich so listen to me!

"The most important men in town would come to fawn on me!

They would ask me to advise them,
Like a Solomon the Wise.
"If you please, Reb Tevye..."
"Pardon me, Reb Tevye..."
Posing problems that would cross a rabbi's eyes!
And it won't make one bit of difference if i answer right or wrong.
When you're rich, they think you really know!"

C-FAM is reporting that Melinda Gates, co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and a Catholic, is telling governments to dismiss the controversial link between contraception and population control and explicitly rejects Catholic social teaching along the way...Speaking at a TedxChange conference in Berlin, Germany, Gates argued that contraception has been mistakenly associated with population control, abortion, forced sterilization, and mortal sin and insisted they are 'side issues.'"  See here.

The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes), No. 51, says that, "..God, the Lord of life, has conferred on men the surpassing ministry of safeguarding life in a manner which is worthy of man.  Therefore, from the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care, while abortion and infanticide are unspeakable crimes."  Abortion is not a "side issue."  It is an unspeakable crime.

The same document teaches that, "...sons of the Church may not undertake methods of birth control which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law." (No. 51).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, citing Humanae Vitae, the Encyclical Letter of Pope Paul VI, teaches that, "...'every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible' is intrinsically evil.." (2370).

But Melinda Gates believes that she knows better than the Pastors of the Church.  Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth) teaches that the Church's more-than-human authority "is apparent from the living Tradition" and then confirms this by citing a key passage from Dei Verbum, Vatican II's Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, which reminds us that, "the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether in its written form or in that of Tradition, has been entrusted only to those charged with the Church's living Magisterium, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ" (Veritatis Splendor, No. 27, with internal citation from Dei Verbum, No. 10).

Faith demands a renunciation of the sinful self.  Pride must give way in every Catholic's life to humility, which is but a readiness to accept everything good as God's gift and to than Him for it (see Aquinas, S.t., 2-2, q. 161, aa.2-3).  When we allow ourselves to succumb to pride, humility is viewed as a threat to the self.  As a result, sinners who lack faith and believers whose faith has been weakened through habit to sinning will be the more tempted to reject faith in order to avoid self-renunciation - the renunciation of their sinful selves (John 3: 16-21).

Melinda Gates is chained by abundance.  Her material wealth has contributed to a pathological pride.  And this pride has led her to embrace self-assertion.  Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, "Removed from its evangelical context, the Christian insight into each individual's worth is perverted to rationalize sin.  Thus, post-Christian humankind is susceptible to a distinctive moral pathology: egoistic individualism, which exalts the well-being and satisfaction of individuals above every community, even the family.  When colored by this pathology, pride is not expressed exclusively by the quest for positions of social superiority; also, and even more arrogantly, it is seen in every individual's effort to be his or her own sovereign.  Thus, the contemporary attachment to liberty to do as one pleases: 'No one can tell me what to do.'  This attitude leads to rejection of authority generally as well as an unwillingness to accept any social responsibility toward people for whom one has no personal feelings.  Other people are to be ignored except to the extent that they are relevant to one's own purposes or can be made so.  Then they are to be dominated and manipulated, so that at least they will allow one to gain one's ends and at best will serve one's purposes."


The real tragedy is that many will no doubt be confused or led astray by Melinda Gates because, as Topol expressed in song, "When you're rich, they think you really know!"

The Global Elite's Idea Of "Utopia"

In his book entitled "Europe Today and Tomorrow," then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, warned that, "Today we find ourselves in the midst of a second Enlightenment, which has not only left behind the motto Deus Sive Natura but has also unmasked as irrational the Marxist ideology of hope.  In its place it has proposed a rational goal for the future, which is entitled the New World Order and is now supposed to become in its turn the essential ethical norm.  It still shares with Marxism the evolutionary idea of a universe brought forth by an irrational event and formed by its intrinsic rules, which however - unlike the provisions of the ancient idea of nature - cannot contain within themselves any ethical direction.

The attempt to derive from the rules of the evolutionary game the rules for the game of human life as well, and hence a new set of ethics, is in reality rather widespread but not very convincing.  There are more and more voices of philosophers such as Singer, Rorty, and Sloterdijk telling us that man now has the right and the duty to construct a new world order on a rational basis.  The new world order, the necessity of which cannot be doubted, they say, ought to be a world order of rationality.

Thus far they are all in agreement.  But what is rational?  The criterion of rationality is drawn exclusively from experiences of technological production on scientific foundations.  Such rationality exists in the sense of functionality, efficiency, increase in the quality of life.  The exploitation of nature that is connected with it increasingly becomes a problem because of environmental hazards, which are becoming dramatic.

Meanwhile, the manipulation of man by man is proceeding apace with even greater impudence.  The visions of Huxley [Aldous] are definitely becoming a reality; the human being must be no longer begotten irrationally but rather produced rationally.  But man as a product is at the disposal of man.  The imperfect specimens are discarded, so as to develop the perfect man by way of planning and production.  Suffering must disappear, life must be nothing but pleasant...in this way new forms of oppression are born, and a new ruling class arises.  Ultimately the destiny of other men is decided by those who have scientific power at their disposal and those who manage the finances...The human being cannot become a product.  He cannot be a product; he can only be begotten.  And for this reason protection for the special dignity of the communion between man and woman, on which the future of mankind is based, must be numbered among the ethical constants of every human society."

Having abandoned the God of love, the Supreme Creator, 21st-century man is now ready to worship himself and to usurp the divine powers of creation and destruction. In the words of Dr. Edmund Leach of King's College at Cambridge: 'The scientist can now play God in his role as wonder-worker, but can he - and should he - also play God as moral arbiter?...There can be no source for these moral judgments except the scientist himself. In traditional religion, morality was held to derive from God, but God was only credited with the authority to establish and enforce moral laws because He was also credited with supernatural powers of creation and destruction. Those powers have now been usurped by man, and he must take on the moral responsibility that goes with them' (Edmund Leach, "We Scientists Have the Right to Play God," The Saturday Evening Post, November 16, 1968, p. 16).


But make no mistake about it, when man becomes God society becomes, in the words of the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, 'a termite colony.' We are still in the twilight. But unless we take a stand now, we will have the Moloch state. As at Auschwitz, men will determine who has quality of life and who should be "mercifully terminated."