LOCKDOWNS 'UNCONSTITUTIONAL', BERGOGLIO 'DEMANDING AND STRICT'

These are truly momentous times. Today a German court ruled lockdowns unconstitutional - and perhaps more importantly, 3 days ago the man they call Pope Francis pontificated thusly: 

"If you do not follow the Council or interpret it in your own way, at your will, you are not with the Church. We must be demanding and strict on this point ”.

Does that not sound to you like a threat?

Bergoglio with Italian Bishops' National Catechetical Office

Pope Francis at the audience with members of the Italian Bishops' Conference's National Catechetical Office 
What was there in "The Council" - which was solely pastoral in character and so could announce no dogma - that we the faithful should "follow"? 

It seems that Jorge Bergoglio, in his slippery Jesuitical speech, means we should follow him and his modernist hierarchy cohort, that is - lamentably - most of the bishops of the Catholic Church, including the New Zealand Conference. 

"The Council is the Magisterium of the Church," His Holiness said. “Either you are with the Church and therefore you follow the Council, and if you do not follow the Council or interpret it in your own way, at your will, you are not with the Church. We must be demanding and strict on this point ”.

Really? Really? What a volte-face! "Demanding and strict." So much Church doctrine has been fudged, bent and downright denied since Vat II, especially by Jorge Bergoglio, who has followed the Council and interpreted it in his own way, all the while invoking a God of mercy and denying the existence of a God Who at our particular judgment will certainly be "demanding and strict" on all points of Bergoglio's and the bishops' and our own conduct, throughout our lives. 

"Naturally," writes Carlos Esteban, "the Holy Father did not have to clarify which council he was referring to: of the 21 ecumenical councils recognized by the Church, it would seem that only the last, the Second Vatican Council, which did not proclaim any dogma or rectify any erroneous doctrine, has any weight or importance in the Church today. In the same way that it would sometimes be said, according to what many enthusiastic 'renovators' comment, that Francisco is not one (Pope) in 264 and counting, but the only and definitive one.

"Regarding the prohibition on "interpreting your way, at your will" that council ... seems to ignore that free interpretation, capricious, multiform, ad libitum interpretation of the council has been more the norm than the exception. The essential axis of that "spirit of the Council" has given rise to all kinds of abuses that Rome has rarely put a stop to. 

"The Pontiff himself varies enormously in his speeches on this matter, and as soon as he tells us that asking for 'clarity' in the doctrine is harmful, because Christ himself chose not to offer it to his apostles, he charges against those who "make an idol of Truth ”and insist on respect for doctrine.

"And since our Church does not ask us to renounce thinking or denying what we have in front of our noses, in full view of everyone, it is clear that there are very free and very personal interpretations of the council that do not coincide with the official one and, however do not earn anathemas, canonical penalties or suspensions, but often appointments, applause and honors.

"It is especially significant that the Holy Father refers to the most recent ecumenical council as “the Council” and does not seem equally compelled to support and follow all the others. The Catholic Church was not born in 1965."

"The kerygma," Bergoglio pontificates in this speech, "is a person: Jesus Christ ... The kerygma calls for stressing those elements which are most needed today: it has to express God’s saving love which precedes any moral and religious obligation on our part; it should not impose the truth but appeal to freedom, as Jesus did."

Jesus - the kerygma, in Bergoglio's terminology - is Truth Itself. He taught the truth, and only the truth. "He taught as one having authority" (Mt 7:29) - authority, which by definition is the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience. In other words, Jesus "imposed the truth".

Just where and when did Jesus "appeal to freedom"? In John 8:32 - "the truth shall make you free." The truth, that is, which Jesus taught in the Gospels and is enshrined in the doctrine of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, up to and not including the Second Vatican Council, which being purely pastoral did not and could not promulgate any dogmas. 

In an address lengthy enough to send the poor catechetists to sleep, and peppered liberally with all the global-speak of the New World Order, Bergoglio once more exhorts the Church to show "a warmth and welcome which is non-judgmental” (Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium, 165). Jesus had this." 

So how could Jesus have been so judgmental as to say to the poor woman caught in adultery, "Go, and now sin no more" (Jn 8:11)? What a terrible thing to say ...

The woman taken in adultery
Rembrandt

"Please," Bergoglio had the effrontery to say, "no concessions to those who try to present a catechesis that does not agree with the Magisterium of the Church." That's rich, that is. Think of his pronouncements on Communion for Protestant spouses, for people in second 'marriages', on same-sex marriage, on LGBTQIWXYZ (all right, that's an exaggeration) ...    

And on the Wuhan virus (but surely Bergoglio wouldn't offend the CCP by calling that spade a spade): "The virus has burrowed into the living fabric of our territories, especially our existential ones, feeding fears, suspicions, mistrust and uncertainty." 

No, Your 'Holiness', not the virus, but the hysterical and manipulative reaction to the virus, including your own in saying, "Ethically, everyone should receive the vaccine," and lining up yourself, in the ultimate in betrayals of your Church's teaching, for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine which uses the HEK-293 (human embryo kidney) cell line from a 1972 abortion. 

Bergoglio's claim about the safety of the Pfizer vaccine has been questioned by a number of scientists, including distinguished microbiologist Prof. Sucharit Bhakti, who has published over three hundred articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology and parasitology and who warns that "the vaccine is dangerous and will send people to their doom."  

So Jorge Bergoglio draws up the lines of battle, and sooner or later every Catholic will have to decide which side he or she is on: the side of Truth, as taught by the Magisterium of the Church for centuries, or on the side of half-truths and assorted absolute apostasies promulgated by Bergoglio and Co for the past 50 years.

If hundreds of thousands of Germans can protest against lockdown
why can't we

As for today's ruling by the Weimar Court in Germany, that lockdowns are unconstitutional:Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, the lawyer who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures stated:“We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. 

You won't have heard it on TvOne 'News', where the insufferable Jessica Mutch-McKay lectures us with the air of a headmistress at assembly announcing her school's latest protocols and rulings, employing the Prime Ministerial 'we' with all the proprietorial confidence  of an insider - which as wife of Mass Murderer Ardern's chief minder, Mutch-McKay in fact is; and what are the chances of MM Ardern ever conceding the German judge's ruling, that lockdowns are a “catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people’s lives"?

https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/headline-news-around-the-world/item/5257-german-court-in-weimar-declares-lockdown-unconstitutional

Come off it. Conceding that would mean MM Ardern had made "a catastrophically wrong political decision"and she and all her MSM Minions like Mutch-McKay would have egg all over their faces. Dictators don't admit their mistakes. Ever. 

It's up to New Zealanders to wake up, get some gumption, and call her out. It would assist greatly if the NZ Catholic Bishops would humbly admit their terrible mistake in falling into line with MM Ardern, closing our churches and reserving Our Eucharistic Lord to themselves. That also may be too much to hope for. 

But we can hope and pray that if MM Ardern gets it into her pretty head (yes, agreed, sarcasm is the lowest form of wit) to lock New Zealand down again, the Catholic Bishops will find the strength in their Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to resist, and resist mightily. 

From a sermon by St Augustine On the ordination of a bishop in the Divine Office for today's St Blaise, Bishop and Martyr:

"That was the intention of Jesus' words: "Feed my sheep." It means: "Suffer for my sheep."