Suffer the Little Children: Pope Francis downplays abortion for the sake of his eco-globalist agenda

For centuries, the Catholic Church represented unmitigated opposition to abortion. But as recent events seem to indicate, Pope Francis is preparing to sacrifice that historic position — and those it protects — on the altar of his globalist agenda.

On May 7, Cardinal Luis Ladaria issued a letter from the Vatican discouraging American bishops from preventing elected officials who support abortion to receive Communion. Only the pope himself ranks higher as a theological authority than Ladaria, prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Ladaria released the letter after several bishops publicly said Joe Biden, the virtual president who supports abortion, should not receive Communion. San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone even wrote a forceful pastoral letter on the subject, without mentioning Biden. But other bishops, such as Cardinal Wilton Gregory of Washington, D.C., said they would welcome Biden at Communion.

A church-going Catholic, Biden was denied Communion by a priest in Charleston, S.C. while campaigning in that state in 2019. Since replacing President Donald Trump, Biden has used legislation and executive action to give abortion providers nearly $500 billion from taxpayers.

At that pace, Biden will have provided more federal funding for abortion than any President in American history.

The Catholic catechism describes abortion a “moral evil,” quotes a pastoral letter in calling it and infanticide “abominable crimes,” and demands excommunication for anyone involved in “formal cooperation.” Catholic canon law also states that Catholics “persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion,” and that Catholics who “are conscious of grave sin” must not receive Communion “without previous sacramental confession.”

If giving $500 billion to abortion providers fails to constitute “formal cooperation” with a “moral evil,” then what does?

But Ladaria’s letter not only appears to contradict canon law. It de-emphasizes abortion as a moral criterion.

Ladaria wrote that any policy the American bishops develop “would best be framed within the broad context of worthiness for the reception of Holy Communion on the part of all the faithful … reflecting their obligation to conform their lives to the entire Gospel of Jesus Christ as they prepare to receive the sacrament.”

“It would be misleading,” Ladaria added, “if such a (policy) were to give the impression that abortion and euthanasia alone constitute the only grave matters of Catholic moral and social teaching that demand the fullest level of accountability on the part of Catholics.”

Ladaria even described Catholics who support abortion as “pro-choice.” Observers believe his letter was the first official Vatican document to use the term.

Ladaria’s letter demonstrates how Francis need not make a formal announcement to nullify teaching on abortion. The pope merely can let it wither through neglect. Even if the catechism and canon law state moral theology and penalties, those are worthless if nobody enforces them.

Francis’ relaxed attitude also revealed itself one day before Ladaria issued his letter, when the Vatican began a three-day conference on health care. Some of the main speakers held positions that opposed Catholic moral teaching.

For example, Chelsea Clinton, vice-chair of the Clinton Foundation, supports Roe v. Wadepassionately. Yet that support provided no impediment for her to participate in a panel on “Building a More Equitable Health Care System for All.”

Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes for Health, spoke on “Bridging Science and Faith” despite his support for research using fetal tissue. Moderna’s presence provided an even more significant clue to the church’s direction.

Moderna not only supplied major funding for the conference. CEO Stephane Bancel addressed the potential for experimental mRNA vaccine therapy, the basis for the firm’s Covid-19 vaccine, beyond the pandemic. But Moderna used aborted fetal cells to produce the spike protein for its vaccine.

Five months earlier, Francis gave permission for Catholics to use Covid-19 vaccines made from aborted fetal cells. A letter Ladaria issued Dec. 20 allowed their use “when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available.”

“The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent,” the letter continued. “Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent.”

In other words, protection from Covid-19 matters more than using ethically reproachable vaccines.

Opposing abortion proves inconvenient beyond Francis’ pandemic policies. It threatens his desire to make environmental sustainability and economic redistribution the hallmarks of his papacy. Two encyclicals, Laudato Si on the environment and Fratelli Tutti on economic equityexpress Francis’ fundamental worldview. 

Consider the words of Cardinal Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, the chancellor of the Pontifical Councils of Science and Social Science.

“Right now, those who are implementing the Church’s social doctrine the best are the Chinese. They search for the common good and subordinate everything to the general welfare,” Sorondo said in 2018 during diplomatic negotiations between China and the Vatican.

Sorondo even praised China’s implementation of Laudato Si for “defending the dignity of the person” and “assuming a moral leadership that others have left,” meaning the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on carbon-dioxide emissions.

Never mind that China ranks among the world’s worst air polluters, performs between 10 million and 23 million abortions a year — many of them forced by the government — and persecutes Christians who worship outside of state-approved churches.

Perhaps the most alarming indication of Francis’ long-term intentions is Jeffrey Sachs’ status as a papal advisor on sustainability. Sachs, an economist from Columbia University, wrote the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. He also supports abortion as a means to limit world population.

In his book “Common Wealth: Economics for a Crowded Planet,” Sachs called abortion “a lower-risk and lower-cost option” to prevent the birth of “unwanted children.” Legalizing abortion, Sachs wrote, “reduces a country’s total fertility rate significantly, by as much as half a child on average.”

Why would any pope, let alone Francis, have someone with Sachs’ views as an advisor? Because Francis represents the logical consequence of the Vatican’s embrace of materialist humanism, as FrontPage Magazine detailed last year in “The Roman Globalist Church” and “The Vatican vs. Trump.” That embrace includes endorsing global governance.

In 2009, Benedict XVI crystallized nearly five decades of Vatican thought in his encyclical, Caritas et Veritate. Francis’ predecessor advocated that the United Nations govern international and domestic economics.

“There is a strongly felt need … for a reform of the United Nations … and, likewise, of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can have real teeth,” Benedict wrote. “To manage the global economy … to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority.”

Such an authority, Benedict wrote, must “have the authority to ensure compliance with its decisions from all parties” as it seeks to “establish the common good.”

So what is that common good? A “directed” global economy that will “open up the unprecedented possibility of large-scale redistribution of wealth on a world-wide scale,” Benedict wrote, including “a worldwide redistribution of energy resources, so that countries lacking those resources can have access to them.”

Benedict’s objectives match the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

Francis is accelerating the pace to reach those objectives. On May 14, one week after Ladaria’s letter to the American bishops, the Vatican held another conference, “Dreaming of a Better Restart,” that featured two sessions. Sachs participated in the first, “Financial and Tax Solidarity.” John Kerry, Biden’s climate envoy, gave the keynote address for the second, “Integral Ecological Sustainability.”

Then on May 25, Francis announced creation of the Laudato Si Platform, a seven-year campaign dedicated to environmental rescue. The campaign includes fighting climate change and implementing the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

Francis described the campaign as part of a larger effort to emphasize what he called “green economics,” “green education” and “green spirituality.” Kerry — another Catholic who supportslegalized abortion — praised Francis as “one of the great voices of reason and compelling moral authority on the subject of the climate crisis.”

A voice that roars to support obtuse environmentalist ideology becomes muted when confronted with unborn human beings.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/06/suffer-little-children-joseph-hippolito/

Austria: Ex-ski champion Nicola Werdenigg compares migrant tents in Greece to Mauthausen concentration camp

“This idiot seriously compares the migrant camp #Moria, abandoned due to fire, with #Mauthausen, where 100,000 people were murdered by forced labour, hunger, disease and gassing during the Second World War,” a Twitter user criticises the ex-ski racer for her posting about the migrant camp. He is not alone in his protest, many users think that such statements trivialise the Holocaust – and that this posting by Nicola Werdenigg (63) was in bad taste.

For example, the Ex-Liste-Jetzt activist literally wrote during her privately financed “fact-finding mission” in Greece: “The visit to the burnt-down camp #moria triggers similar feelings of unease as Mauthausen. People are locked up in concentration camps in the EU. We will not stop making the serious human rights crimes public.”

The use of the terms “Mauthausen” and “concentration camp” in connection with asylum accommodation in Greece is indeed not unproblematic: As every compulsory school graduate in Austria knows, the victims of National Socialism imprisoned in concentration camps had no possibility to leave – migrants can very well return to their countries of origin at any time.

Equally problematic is Werdenigg’s insinuation that “the EU” would lock people up in concentration camps: The political leadership in Brussels does make some mistakes in asylum care, but to accuse the EU leadership of deliberately destroying human lives and deliberately torturing migrants – as was common in concentration camps at the time – is a massive provocation or a dramatic ignorance of the conditions in the camps of National Socialism.

Due to the immediate reactions, it must have quickly become clear to Nicola Werdenigg that she had gone a step too far with her choice of words: The ex-ski racer tried to backpedal, denied her intention to trivialise the Holocaust – and continued to formulate harshly: “I did not make a Holocaust comparison. I am reporting on the ruins of a current hell that has been reopened a few kilometres away. People are being destroyed here. Simply because we are not supposed to speak the truth for a thousand reasons.” And Werdenigg rebuked the critics, “Since, as you say, you cannot imagine what is being done to people here, perhaps you had better not judge what I call a concentration camp. Thank you.”

200,000 people were imprisoned in the Mauthausen concentration camp, 120,000 of them were murdered by the Nazi regime.

The Moria asylum camp was located in the interior of the East Aegean island of Lesbos. In March of the previous year, 20,000 people temporarily lived in the camp, which was designed for 2800 people; it was Europe’s largest refugee camp and a so-called EU hotspot. For years, the camp had been in catastrophic conditions due to overcrowding. On the night of September 9, 2020, several young migrants from Afghanistan set fire to the camp, which almost completely destroyed the camp and the refugees’ belongings, leaving 12,600 people homeless. Some of the people were taken to the Greek mainland, and a temporary tent camp was set up for 7800 people on the coast near the already existing Kara Tepe camp.

https://exxpress.at/proteste-im-web-ex-skistar-vergleicht-migranten-zelte-mit-kz-mauthausen/

Migration costs France approximately €25 billion a year, many migrants remain unemployed even after years: academic

Employment data shows that it is a myth that immigration to France has economic benefits, French author and academic Jean-Paul Gourévitch said in an interview with Radio Sud.

“I have studied this topic extensively and today everyone in France, from the left to the right agrees that immigration costs more than it brings in,” Gourévitch said. “There is a major difference between left and right (oriented) economists regarding the costs: the leftist economists say the deficit is six to ten billion [euros per year], while those on the right say it is 40 to 44 billion. My own scientific research shows that the deficit is 20 to 25 billion [euros].”

Gourévitch also spoke about the debate in Europe and France whether worsening demographic figures should be improved via immigration or domestic demographic incentives.

“There is an argument that immigration could to some extent offset the birth rates, because there is a major difference between the birth rates of the domestic population and the migrant one,” he said. “The domestic population has a birth rate of 1.49 (children per couple), while the immigrant population has 2.5 to as many as four children. This (birth rate), however, is gradually declining, as the children of immigrants have fewer children than their parents who, in turn, had fewer children than their parents.”

“Bringing in migrants to be able to increase our capacity to pay those retired is in fact a coup,” he said. “The migrants — those who work, of course — will contribute towards pensions, but for the rest it is a real burden for the state.”

Gourévitch also said his own studies showed that after fives years of migrants arriving, only one third of migrants had jobs. These statistics mirror other countries which show, for example, in Sweden that most migrants will never become self-sufficient. Other countries like Germany have already spent tens of billions on migrants and plans to spend another €64.5 billion over the next four years. 

“All the surveys show that 5 years later, only 33% of migrants have found work,” said Gourévitch.

Gourévitch (79), is the author of over 60 studies and books. While at the beginning of his career he focused on education, he later turned his attention to immigration. His latest book, “France in Africa 1520-2020” was published last year.  

https://rmx.news/article/article/migration-costs-france-approximately-25-billion-a-year-many-migrants-remain-unemployed-even-after-years-academic

Ceuta: Almost all Moroccan parents refuse to take back their children

This week, Ceuta began to focus clearly on the problem which, in the shape of more than a thousand unaccompanied Moroccan migrant minors, has created a crisis.

The flood of children was triggered by the neighbouring country Morocco on May 17. It is enough to walk almost anywhere in the city, from Benítez to Santa Catalina, to see that there may still be hundreds of young people on the streets, even though the local administration has already taken in 1125 of them. The minors will soon be distributed to the various autonomous regions within the framework of the “unprecedented” solidarity mechanism.

Among the new arrivals, the city has 920 registered by the police. In Piniers there are 171 boys and 67 girls. In the Santa Amelia sports center, 245 men and in the Tarajal warehouses, 364 others.

The procedure prescribed by law and which the child protection service headed by Toñi Palomo follows “to the letter” has started to move forward in the screening process with the help of the NGO Save The Children. They have already carried out more than 150 personal interviews with children and adolescents.

The result of these conversations was “devastating” because 92,5 percent of parents prefer that their children stay in Spain “for socio-economic, family reasons, lack of money, poverty, increased cost of medicines… ”, and in only six cases the parents agreed to take their children back.

“In reunification procedures, it is not only necessary to verify parentage, but also to assess the risks of contact, the viability of the return and the consent of parents and minors make us responsible for these minors and we cannot entrust them to the police, and even less to agents who, two weeks ago, opened the doors to them so that they could leave their country,” said Palomo.

https://freewestmedia.com/2021/06/01/ceuta-almost-all-moroccan-parents-refuse-to-take-back-their-children/