DEEP STATE IS RUNNING THE COVID TASK FORCE: Part 2

PREAMBLE: I was intending to write about George Cardinal Pell subsequent to his release from prison just yesterday. The aspect that I intended to cover was the situation he must have found himself in as the papal appointee to get the Vatican books in order [and presumably to clean up any corruption], on finding corruption inter alia with the papal foundation donated monies from the millionaire benefactors in the U.S. and the Peter's Pence donations world-wide generally. It's widely known that the PP donations have been misused to pay off administrative costs and debts rather than being directed to charitable works. It is not so well known - or wasn't a few years ago - that the recipient for donated funds was a recently disfunctional small hospital in Rome called the Derrnatological Institute of the Immaculate. Although once legitimately operational, it was cleared of bona fide staff who were replaced with stooges who would be complicit in running the show as a front for money laundering into off shore untraceable accounts for certain high profile people, including bishops presumably. Kathy Clubb wrote a recent article touching on this particular matter, and others have written of the scandal [ links below], but I hadn't seen mentioned that this involved "pope" Francis - and from memory I believe it does [and this is what I was intending to research and write about - but I have been waylaid by the allied topic of the Coronavirus Task Force because I have discovered while researching that the USCCB and Catholic Relief Services are intimately linked with the Task Force players' linked organisations].

From memory, many wealthy American Catholic philanthropists donate to the papal foundation and disperse monies from the pool upon request and discretion. The maximum amount granted to any cause is, I believe, $200,000. A few years ago, at the request of Francis himself, they were asked to give $25 million. I seem to recall that they bawked at this and gave $2 million [ but since I haven't got into the research, I am working from an aging memory]. And, they were none too happy with the eventualities upon finding out the situation with this hospital.

The Church Militant article on financial corruption included this on the hospital fiasco .....

"Recent reports also reveal that a curial official admitted to using American grant money to write off a questionable 50-million-euro loan to a scandal-ridden Rome hospital. 

The hospital in question, the Istituto Dermopatico dell'Immacolata (IDI), was investigated and indicted in 2016 for embezzlement, money laundering and tax fraud to the tune of nearly 1 billion euros. 

After securing the loan, IDI was unable to repay the amount — leading to the Vatican's attempt to recoup its losses through securing a grant via the U.S.-based Papal Foundation. The Vatican's Secretary of State Cdl. Pietro Parolin recently admitted to being behind  the controversial $25 million loan, rammed through with the help of Washington, D.C.'s Cdl. Donald Wuerl.

The grant led to an internal uprising among Papal Foundation members in 2017, with a number resigning in protest.

While Parolin has pledged to repay the loan, the terms remain broad and undefined — with no signatory on the loan, no interest rate and no penalties assessed for failure to repay — leading to further internal unrest and criticism among members of the foundation.

FULL ARTICLE HERE: https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/only-a-fraction-of-peters-pence-funds-go-to-the-poor

KATHY CLUBB'S ARTICLE HERE: https://www.fli.org.au/operation-get-pell-were-the-bullets-made-in-rome/?fbclid=IwAR07DIVemdwFj9u8jpVqUOCLJ4dTaFHgHTFV97-WtfNpvQrRfKbuzLF0qbs

PART 1 IS HERE: https://austroz.blogspot.com.knightslite.com/2020/04/deep-state-are-running-covid-task-force.html?fbclid=IwAR0rKHePHeTTuh_93nrEHDeLwfHfW4IVhdKFy45_rzq8RfFnM1K26Pwv1lk

.         *******************************************************************************




NOW, TO THE TOPIC INDICATED........... THE TASK FORCE PLAYERS AND CONNECTED ORGANISATIONS AND ALLIES.

FIRST, THE CONNECTIONS WITH THE U.S. CONFERENCE of CATHOLIC BISHOPS and the CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES.  [ I will let Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute give his summary, after which YOU MUST WATCH THE VIDEO BY AMAZING POLLY TO UNDERSTAND THE INTER-CONNECTIONS AND ALL THE PLAYERS INVOLVED].

26 COMMENTS

US Bishop Conference Lobbies Congress to Fund Agency Funding Planned Parenthood

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and Catholic Relief Services (CRS) have once again written to Congress requesting “robust funding” for two agencies deeply committed to the promotion and distribution of contraception, one of which provides millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood.

In a 1 December 2017 joint letter to the director for the Office of Management and Budget, and copied to all members of Congress, Archbishop Broglio, the USCCB’s chairman for the Committee on International Justice and Peace, and Sean Callahan, the president of Catholic Relief Services, urged Congress to “fully fund” both PEPFAR and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria.

Despite acknowledging in the letter that both PEPFAR and the Global Fund are highly involved in the distribution of contraception, neither the USCCB nor CRS asks for the cessation of those immoral activities in its bid for Congress to provide American tax dollars to both projects.  Key portions of the letter read:

With the approach of World AIDS Day on December 1, we write to urge that the administration’s budget request for FY19 fully fund U.S. global HIV and AIDS programs …

Although we have principled concerns about those PEPFAR and Global Fund prevention activities we find inconsistent with Catholic teaching and do not implement or advocate for these activities, we support the lifesaving missions of PEPFAR and the Global Fund and urge robust funding for both programs…

As you craft the 2019 budget, we urge you to protect HIV and AIDS programs from efforts to reduce funding or to alter the U.S. Government’s PEPFAR strategy in ways that would diminish the progress we have made.

As we’ve reported before, PEPFAR is deeply involved in the promotion and distribution of contraception, including abortifacients.  For instance, in a section on PEPFAR’s website titled, “Linking HIV/AIDS to Women’s and Children’s Health,” PEPFAR makes clear that its work to fight HIV/AIDS includes the promotion and spread of contraception.  PEPFAR says:

As part of its overall prevention, care and support, and treatment efforts, PEPFAR is leveraging and linking HIV services to broader delivery mechanisms that improve health outcomes for women and children. Some of these activities include:

• Expanding integration of HIV prevention, care and support, and treatment services with family planning and reproductive health services, so that women living with HIV can access necessary care, and so that all women know how to protect themselves from HIV infection

In 2016, a representative of the USCCB reluctantly admitted that PEPFAR does indeed promote and distribute condoms, but claimed that PEPFAR is not permitted to distribute or pay for other forms of contraception.

While PEPFAR is prohibited from directly funding or distributing abortifacient contraception, it establishes a framework for such distribution, allowing other organizations like USAID to provide the contraception to people in PEPFAR projects.

The Global Fund, on the other hand, not only funds the distribution of contraception, but actually provides large grants to the world’s largest abortion network, Planned Parenthood.

Here are just a few examples of the grant disbursements from the Global Fund to Planned Parenthood affiliates world-wide.

From 2012-2015, the Global Fund provided over $13 million to the Indonesian Planned Parenthood Association.

In another grant from 2009-2013, the Global Fund provided an additional $9 million to the same Planned Parenthood affiliate.

In Ghana, from 2009-2015, the Global Fund provided the Planned Parenthood Association of Ghana with over $3 million.

In another grant to the Planned Parenthood Association of Ghana, which ran from 2015-2017, the Global Fund provided $1.4 million.

In Nigeria, from 2010-2015, the Global Fund provided $6.6 million to the Planned Parenthood Federation of Nigeria.

In addition to funding Planned Parenthood, the Global Fund is promoting homosexuality and transgenderism, as can be seen from this Global Fund publication in 2012:

In 2014, the Global Fund boasted that the work of a self-professed “Condom Man” in Vietnam was supported by the Global Fund:

In January of 2017, the Global Fund published a fact-sheet which provides data that “corresponds to Global Fund’s actual mid-2016 results.”  Page 2 of that fact-sheet shows that the number one indicator for its HIV programs … by far … was the distribution of 5.28 billion condoms.

The USCCB/CRS letter to Congress claims that PEPFAR saved 11 million lives and Global Fund saved 22 million lives.  But the question here is, “how many souls did these agencies destroy in the process?”  In his 1930 encyclical, Casti Connubii, Pope Pius XI exclaims:

“Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”

In other words, the deliberate use of acts, devices or potions which prevent conception are all intrinsically evil.  When the USCCB and CRS ask Congress to provide “robust funding” to these two agencies, they are asking Congress to use American tax dollars to fund the spread of contraception.  And in the case of the Global Fund, the USCCB and CRS are asking Congress to fund the funders of Planned Parenthood.

While Catholics are left scratching their heads, asking “Why on Earth would the USCCB and CRS ask Congress to take my money and fund two agencies that are notorious in the promotion of intrinsic evils?”  The answer is very simple as it all comes down to the money that CRS would get out of it.

The PEPFAR website which tracks all of its grants to various organizations indicates that PEPFAR has allocated over $892 million to Catholic Relief Services since the year 2005.  This does not include the money CRS has received through PEPFAR as a result of being a sub-partner on other PEPFAR projects where CRS was not the principle recipient of the grant.

It’s difficult to know exactly how much CRS has received from the Global Fund over the years because the Global Fund website isn’t as comprehensive as PEPFAR’s.  That said, we have been able to confirm that CRS has received at least $264,226,459 from the Global Fund for 10 different grants.  The amounts are as follows:

• From 2012-2015, CRS received $13,810,139 for a project in Indonesia.
• From 2003-2008, CRS received $1,439,778 for a project in Madagascar.
• From 2016-2017, CRS received $6,034,778 for a project in Mali.
• From 2013-2015, CRS received $6,795,038 for another project in Mali.
• From 2010-2018, CRS received $11,098,900 for a project in Gambia.
• From 2012-2018, CRS received $85,454,539 for a project in Guinea.
• From 2011-2017, CRS received $13,064,548 for a project in Sierra Leone.
• From 2008-2017, CRS received $21,749,047 for a project in Benin.
• From 2016-2017, CRS received $32,128,902 for a project in Niger.
• From 2008-2016, CRS received $72,658,405 for another project in Niger.

Of course, all of this funding is in direct contradiction with Article 10 § 3 of Pope Benedict XVI’s 2012 motu proprio On the Service of Charity, which commands the bishop to whom a charitable organization answers “to ensure that charitable agencies dependent upon him do not receive financial support from groups or institutions that pursue ends contrary to Church’s teaching.”

Our Blessed Lord was very clear when He said that one cannot serve both God and mammon.  And when the USCCB and CRS ask Congress to take American tax dollars … your money, our money, and the money of over 70 million other registered Catholics in the US … and give “robust” amounts of it to the contraception-promoting and distributing PEPFAR and the Planned Parenthood-funding Global Fund, just so they can sweeten their own bids for funding, it becomes abundantly clear whom they are serving.

Contact the USCCB and CRS and tell them that it is unacceptable for the Catholic Church to be lobbying Congress to fund agencies that are spreading grave evils throughout the world:

Catholic Relief Services: 877-435-7277 info@crs.org
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops: 202-541-3196 scolecchi@usccb.org

LINK: https://web.archive.org/web/20181117201506/http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/usccb/us-bishop-conference-lobbies-congress-fund-agency-funding-planned-parenthood/


.               ************************************************************************************

DEEP STATE IS RUNNING THE COVID TASK FORCE: Part 1.

The Pence appointed Dr. Fauci, along with his sidekick, Dr. Birx, are supposedly heading the fight to mitigate the virus, SARS-Cov2, which results in the illness known as Covid-19 and declared to be a pandemic which in turn has prompted governments to severely restrict the movements of citizens to the extent of denying natural rights. By now, this is all well known.

What is not well known is that Fauci and Birx have intimate ties, personal and financial, to the big players in the Pharma Deep State, to wit: Bill Gates, George Soros, and other individuals as well as W.H.O., ID2020, WEF, PREPFAR, and various other organisations, along with vaccine and drug companies, especially Burroughs Wellcome. I can add to these the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops and the Catholic Relief Service [which I will deal with in Part 2].

WHY HAVE I CLAIMED THAT THEY "SUPPOSEDLY LEAD THE FIGHT TO MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF COVID-19"?  I have said this based on their modus operandi thus far, which has been [1] to promulgate overblown modeling of the infected and the likely death rate to add a panic and fear element to gain the subservience of the population to their instructions, and [2] to attribute deaths to Covid-19 which may be due to other causes.

AND WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS? In short: to gain time to bring a vaccine or drug on the market from which they can profit. Hence, this is the reason that Dr. Fauci in particular, along with others with a vested interest, have downplayed the efficacy of the anti-malarial drug, Chloroquine, [as well as other drugs mainly associated with HIV mitigation], which in some jurisdictions has been banned or has had approval delayed. For the sake of brevity I will omit the many links available to support this claim. Links are readily available showing Bill Gates advocating for the world population to be vaccinated - along with the inclusion of a nano-chip which certifies said vaccination. Along with this plea, Gates has said he does not want to see a lot of survivors with immunity !! [Refer the TED talks]. I will here give away the Gotcha Moment very early by telling you that, thanks to the research of "Amazing Polly", there is a Ms. Birx [unknown yet if she is related], who works directly for the Gates Foundation, a daughter is connected to Rep, Feinstein whose chauffeur of 20 years was known to be a Chinese CCP spy.

Below is pictured from 1990 a protest against Fauci by the gay community. The reason for this protest was that Fauci was heading the fight against AIDS and was not considered to be doing enough to employ a mitigating medication to stop deaths from the epidemic of HIV.

WHAT HAPPENED LATER?

Fauci pressured the government and FDA to rush through a medication for widespread use before trials were completed known as AZT. The drug AZT was a toxin used unsuccessfully for cancer 20 years earlier. It was totally unnecessary according to some virologists as shown in the video below by Prof. E.Michael Jones who claims additionally that Fauci's actions were responsible for many deaths. Further, he claims that Fauci was desperate to appease the homosexual community by displaying that the heterosexual were also susceptible to AIDS to obviate the stigma attached to gays and their lifestyle. Prof. Jones now makes the analogy with COVID-19 in that Fauci is indulging in scientism over reason in his tactics to design the circumstances of the need to lockdown society until the vaccine is ready. BUT, dear reader, I have only just noted references suggesting that there are moves to stop resisting the approval of Chloroquinine as there are moves to COMBINE IT WITH AZT as a proprietary medication !! [I will have to add references to this at a later date]. News is coming out daily that vaccine trials are progressing quickly anyway, so more will be added on that subject later.

FURTHER REFERENCE: https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2020/04/05/is-what-were-being-told-about-the-coronavirus-pandemic-wrong-n2566373 

.                                              **********************************

NOW, BACK TO THE [1] Modeling false paradigm, and [2] The attribution of uncertain causes of deaths to COVID-19.


These snaps ought to be enough to cast doubt and suspicion on how deaths are being recorded so I will let them speak for themselves.

I haven't heard Dr. Birx reiterate the above instructions but this tweeter does as follows....

Brit Hume

✔@brithume

Well, Dr. Birx just said it. Anyone in U.S. who dies with Covid 19, regardless of what else may be wrong, is now being recorded as a Covid 19 death.

44.7K

7:24 AM - Apr 8, 2020

.                                                   *********************************


NOW FOR POINT [2] Modeling. 

There are a multitude of references made by qualified people. I will take the view of Dr. Wm.Briggs. SOURCE: https://wmbriggs.com/post/30236/  

Yesterday I showed the deaths/cases plot. I speculated the “plot is still rocketing northwards means (1) cases are under-reported (lack of measurement), (2) deaths over-attributed (dying with is not same as dying from), or (3) both.” (1) is surely happening, but Hume’s tweet is proof (2) is, too.

Adjusting numbers is one good way to boost numbers to get them to align closer to forecasts.

Blaze has a list (thanks to David Legates for this) of model predictions.

Summary (all are quotes):

• Think Global: Total U.S. deaths: 1.64 million. Social distancing taken into account? No.
• CDC: Total U.S. deaths: 200,000 to 1.7 million. Social distancing taken into account? No.
• Imperial College of London: Total U.S. deaths: 2.2 million. Social distancing taken into account? … might reduce peak healthcare demand by 2/3 and deaths by half.
• University of Massachusetts – Amherst: Total U.S. deaths: 195,000 by the end of the year. Social distancing taken into account? …had the option to account for measures in their answers.
• The Coronavirus Task Force Model: Total U.S. deaths: 100,000 to 240,000. Social distancing taken into account? Yes
• Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation: Total U.S. deaths: 81,766. Social Distancing taken into account? Yes, model assumes full social distancing through May. [MAY!]

BMJ has one of the first papers on the subject: Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19 infection: systematic review and critical appraisal, by Wynants et al.

…27 studies describing 31 prediction models were included…

This review indicates that proposed models are poorly reported, at high risk of bias, and their reported performance is probably optimistic. Immediate sharing of well documented individual participant data from covid-19 studies is needed for collaborative efforts to develop more rigorous prediction models and validate existing ones…Methodological guidance should be followed because unreliable predictions could cause more harm than benefit in guiding clinical decisions.

This is harsh considering we’re not even at the end, yet.

The AP has an article by the usual suspects expressing wonder scientific models can be wrong: Modeling coronavirus: Uncertainty is the only certainty’.

The only problem with this bit of relatively good news? It’s almost certainly wrong. All models are wrong. Some are just less wrong than others — and those are the ones that public health officials rely on.

Welcome to the grimace-and-bear-it world of modeling.

ITALIAN BISHOPS REFUSE TO CONSECRATE ITALY TO MARY

..

FATIMA, CONSECRATION: BISHOPS ITALY NOT RECEIVED. DON STRUMIA.

March 26, 2020 Posted by Marco Tosatti 13 Comments -

Marco Tosatti

Dear friends and enemies of Stilum Curiae, we are very happy to receive and publish a short comment by Don Alberto Strumia to the consecration that took place yesterday in Fatima by the Portuguese and Spanish bishops of their countries to the Virgin, in such a dramatic moment for the world and for 'Europe. And once again we become part of the desire of many Italian faithful that a similar gesture is also made by our bishops. Enjoy the reading.

§§§

The recitation of the Holy Rosary which was held on the day of the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in Fatima, ended with the triple act of consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, of Portugal, pronounced by Card. Marto - visibly moved - in union with the Bishops of other Churches scattered throughout the world, was of an absolutely touching religious intensity.

In a moment of emergency like that of the current pandemic triggered by the notorious Covid-19, knowing how to re-cling to the Heart of the Mother of God is the testimony that discriminates against those who still have the true Catholic faith from those who have been overwhelmed by resignation. There are no middle ground, possible compromise roads.

And at the same time it was sad and painful to have to ascertain the total absence of a signal, at least of remote communion, on the part of the Italian ecclesial community. Our Bishops, also solicited by many requests, sent to them by e-mail, starting from the initiative promoted by this blog , signed by dr. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, have not shown the slightest sensitivity in the face of the request to join, as an Italian Church, to that extraordinary act of renewal of the consecration to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

I can not even remotely think that this was done out of malice - in case only God will be able to judge - not being able to doubt the sincerity and kindness of several of them that I personally know. Rather, I must think that this is further proof of our still fragile faith that the Lord wanted to ask of us. The thought went to me - and at the beginning of the thought it cannot be commanded - at that passage of the Old Testament that speaks of Moses who cannot convince the Pharaoh of Egypt to let the people of Israel leave, enslaved in that country. In that passage it is God himself who says: "I will harden the heart of Pharaoh" (Ex 7,3). But immediately afterwards it is also said: "I will multiply my signs and my wonders".

I await with full confidence that, precisely and also through these and other tests for our faith, the Lord will obtain a true conversion for all our people. The system is jumping at all levels and, even the Church, which up until a few years ago had ruled, is now yielding to us in its public visibility; but not in the most hidden part of the minds and hearts of many lay faithful and clergy.

If you want, there is still time to perform in Italy an act similar to what happened in Fatima, thus renewing what was done by Pius XII in 1942.

In any case, at least individually, if the Italian Bishops are silent, entrenching behind the initials of the CEI - almost as if the episcopal conferences were bodies of divine law, instituted by Christ (!) - the individual lay people will be able to perform, even repeatedly, an act of individual or community consecration, even from a distance. And the priests will be able to consecrate their parishes in their private celebrations behind closed doors, like those of the Upper Room ("while the doors of the place where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came", Jn 20:19) to consecrate their parishes , their religious communities, the groups of faithful entrusted to them. I am sure that many will and will do well to make it known on friends blogs , like this and many others. It will be an example for everyone!Veni Sancte Spiritus, come for Mariam!

Don Alberto Strumia

§§§

CRITIQUE OF THE AMAZONIAN EXHORTATION.

 

Resisting the Grave Errors in Pope Francis’s Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia

March 3, 2020 | Luiz Sérgio Solimeo 

Resisting the Grave Errors in Pope Francis’s Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia

On February 2, Pope Francis finally made public the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia. It was eagerly awaited: With joy by those seeking a new and desacralized Church, and with concern by those who love the Church.

The Errors in the Synod’s Prior Documents Were Not Condemned

Querida Amazonia neither corrected nor condemned the grave errors in the Synod’s previous documents, both the Instrumentum Laboris,¹ and the Final Document, titled The Amazon: New Paths for the Church and for an Integral Ecology.² Instead, the Apostolic Exhortation retained those documents’ inspiration, namely the pantheistic evolutionism of the modernist heresy and Fr. Teilhard de Chardin, S.J.
Consequently, the serious criticism from cardinals and bishops that the Instrumentum Laboris contains heresies and is implicitly pantheistic remains valid.³

Querida Amazonia Quotes Poets, but not Fathers of the Church

Querida Amazonia does not quote Church Fathers and Doctors,⁴ as would be expected in a pontifical document. Instead, it highlights communist writers and poets. This makes the papal document almost surreal.⁵
On the other hand, Querida Amazonia attributes to the Amazonian indigenous peoples beliefs and customs that do not exist there. They belong to natives from other regions. Such is the case, for example, with the Pachamama “goddess”—which became the symbol of the Amazon Synod. Pachamama is not worshiped by the Amazonian indigenous people, but by those of the Andes mountain system.⁶

A Fictional Amazon

Like the Synod of Bishops for the Pan-Amazon region itself, Pope Francis’s Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia does not discuss the Amazon region as it is. Rather, the exhortation dreams of a Utopia, “an imaginary place or state in which everything is perfect,”⁷ calling it Amazonia.

The Amazon Synod and the Vatican’s Radical Environmentalism

Like the “noble savage” (or good savage) dreamed up by eighteenth century Enlightenment philosophy, the denizens of Querida Amazonia are also fictional: Perfect, pure, and wise indigenous living in direct contact with a pristine Nature, a world where both jungle and tribesmen are as yet “uncorrupted” by progress and civilization.
Since the “noble savage” myth pervades all of the Pan-Amazon Synod’s documents, the Synod itself, and is one of the keys to understanding Querida Amazonia, it is worthwhile to explore it a bit more.

Querida Amazonia and Rousseau’s “Noble Savage”

Writing in 2004 on the myth of the good savage, Canadian professor Jany Boulanger offers interesting insights on the topic:

“Free, sensual, polygamous, communist, and good: these are the common features, highly caricatured, of the inhabitants of this ‘best of all worlds.’ … Without a doubt, Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778) is recognized as the one who most shared this myth by defending this idea, which runs through most of his work: ‘Nature has made man happy and good, but society makes him depraved and miserable.’”

For Rousseau, civilization and private property are evil. Prof. Boulanger continues:

“In his philosophical essays, Discours sur les sciences et les arts (1750), and Discours sur l’origine et les fondements de l’inégalité parmi les hommes (1755), Rousseau claims that man’s primitive state leads him toward virtue and happiness because his very ignorance of evil prevents it from spreading. The development of his intellect and his search for luxury, property, and power, encouraged by social institutions, are what cast man out of a paradise possibly closer to Nature.”⁸

Querida Amazonia and Aboriginal “Wisdom”

And so it is for Querida Amazonia as well. For Pope Francis, the Amazon’s so-called original peoples have not been “corrupted” by social institutions. They have preserved an “ancestral wisdom,” which they should transmit to the civilized world. Moreover, their “wisdom” must inform “Gospel inculturation” in the Amazon region.
A grouping of phrases from the exhortation Querida Amazonia illustrates the decisive role it ascribes to the natives’ so-called ancestral wisdom:

“The wisdom of the way of life of the original peoples” (no. 22).
Integration into urban life “disrupts the cultural transmission of a wisdom that had been passed down for centuries from generation to generation” (no. 30).
“Even now, we see in the Amazon region thousands of indigenous communities…. Each distinct group … in a vital synthesis with its surroundings, develops its own form of wisdom” (no. 32).
“For centuries, the Amazonian peoples passed down their cultural wisdom orally, with myths, legends, and tales” (no. 34).
“The wisdom of the original peoples of the Amazon region ‘inspires care and respect for creation, with a clear consciousness of its limits, and prohibits its abuse’” (no. 42).
“To protect the Amazon region, it is good to combine ancestral wisdom with contemporary technical knowledge, always working for a sustainable management of the land while also preserving the lifestyle and value systems of those who live there” (no. 51).
“For the Church to achieve a renewed inculturation of the Gospel in the Amazon region, she needs to listen to its ancestral wisdom” (no. 70).
“[W]e are called ‘to be their friends, to listen to them, to speak for them and to embrace the mysterious wisdom which God wishes to share with us through them.’ [103] Those who live in cities need to appreciate this wisdom and to allow themselves to be ‘re-educated’” (no. 72).

Does Grace “Suppose Culture”?

The concept of indigenous “ancestral wisdom” is one of Querida Amazonia’s central points. Where would this so-called wisdom come from? What is its nature? The papal exhortation claims that it was supposedly transmitted “orally, with myths, legends, and tales.” However, the exhortation says nothing about its origin and nature. Is this “mysterious wisdom” of natural or supernatural origin? Is it the result of grace or primitive revelation? Since Pope Francis claims that this “ancestral wisdom” should “inculturate” the Church, then it would seem likely that he considers it to be of divine origin, immanent in man. That is also what the modernist heresy sustains.⁹
The word “inculturation” is used twenty times in Querida Amazonia. It partners, as it were, in tandem, with the “ancestral wisdom” myth. But if the natives already possess wisdom and goodness (“the goodness that already exists in Amazonian cultures” – no. 66), then the role of the Church is not to convert them. Instead, the Church “brings it [the supposed goodness] to fulfillment in the light of the Gospel” (no. 66).

A Mission That Baptized No One in Fifty-Three Years:
The Flawed Evangelization Model of the Pan-Amazonian Synod

The Apostolic Exhortation exaggerates the role of culture, using the term forty-five times. It urges a dialogue with, an understanding of “Amazonian sensibilities and cultures from within” (no. 86). But Pope Francis goes far beyond this when he changes the classic theological axiom that “grace presupposes nature”¹⁰ to affirm that “grace supposes culture” (no. 68).¹¹
Now, according to the classic definition, grace is “a supernatural gift of God to intellectual creatures (men, angels) for their eternal salvation, whether the latter be furthered and attained through salutary acts or a state of holiness.”¹² Hence “[o]nly a rational or intellectual nature is susceptible to grace since it is by means of grace that the rational creature is lead to its ultimate perfection, which consists in the vision of God’s essence (visio beatifica).”¹³
In asserting that grace “supposes culture,” the human and angelic natures seem to be confused or identified with culture, which has a pantheistic flavor.

Inculturate the Church in “Ancestral Wisdom”

If grace supposes culture, then it follows that Querida Amazonia wants to inculturate the Gospel in the “ancestral wisdom” of the natives.
Indeed, one reads in the exhortation:

For the Church to achieve a renewed inculturation of the Gospel in the Amazon region, she needs to listen to its ancestral wisdom, listen once more to the voice of its elders, recognize the values present in the way of life of the original communities, and recover the rich stories of its peoples. In the Amazon region, we have inherited great riches from the pre-Columbian cultures. These include “openness to the action of God, a sense of gratitude for the fruits of the earth, the sacred character of human life and esteem for the family, a sense of solidarity and shared responsibility in common work, the importance of worship, belief in a life beyond this earth, and many other values (no. 70).¹⁴

These Are the Destructive Goals of the Pan-Amazon Synod

This “ancestral wisdom” of the Amazonian aborigines with which Pope Francis wants to inculturate the Gospel included the practice of cannibalism and polygamy.¹⁵ Thirteen ethnic groups in the Amazon region still practice infanticide, with some support from Brazil’s Indigenous Missionary Council.¹⁶ It is impossible to reconcile these practices with the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

Ecclesiastical Tribalism and Pentecostalism

The dream presented in the Querida Amazonia of a Church “inculturated” in the tribal molds was foreseen by the great Catholic thinker Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira in 1976 in his essay Revolution and Counter-Revolution:

“Obviously, it is not only the temporal realm that the Fourth Revolution wants to reduce to tribalism. It wants to do the same with the spiritual realm. How this is to be done can already be clearly seen in the currents of theologians and canonists who intend to transform the noble, bone-like rigidity of the ecclesiastical structure – as Our Lord Jesus Christ instituted it and twenty centuries of religious life molded it – into a cartilaginous, soft, and amorphous texture of dioceses and parishes without territories and of religious groups in which the firm canonical authority is gradually replaced by the ascendancy of Pentecostalist “prophets,” the counterparts of the structuralist-tribalist witch doctors. Eventually, these prophets will be indistinguishable from witch doctors. The same goes for the progressivist-Pentecostalist parish or diocese, which will take on the appearances of the cell-tribe of structuralism.”¹⁷

Following in the Steps of Teilhard de Chardin

As part of this inculturation of the Church with indigenous “culture,” Querida Amazonia has parts that evoke the Church-condemned pantheistic evolutionism of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., the so-called mystic of the “cosmic Christ.”¹⁸
The Apostolic Exhortation states that “the indigenous peoples of the Amazon Region express the authentic quality of life as ‘good living.’ This involves … communal and cosmic harmony” (no. 71). Querida Amazonia then goes on to this pantheistic-flavored Teilhardian tirade:

Certainly, we should esteem the indigenous mysticism that sees the interconnection and interdependence of the whole of creation, the mysticism of gratuitousness that loves life as a gift, the mysticism of a sacred wonder before nature, and all its forms of life.
At the same time, though, we are called to turn this relationship with God present in the cosmos into an increasingly personal relationship with a “Thou” who sustains our lives and wants to give them a meaning, a “Thou” who knows us and loves us (no. 73).

Querida Amazonia continues, citing Pope Francis’s Teilhardian encyclical Laudato Si’, “Similarly, a relationship with Jesus Christ, true God and true man, liberator and redeemer, is not inimical to the markedly cosmic worldview that characterizes the indigenous peoples, since he is also the Risen Lord who permeates all things. …[T]he Son of God has incorporated in his person part of the material world, planting in it a seed of definitive transformation” (no. 74).

The Anti-Pastoral Work of the Amazon Synod. What You Need to Know

Again citing Laudato Si’, the Apostolic Exhortation states:

The inculturation of Christian spirituality in the cultures of the original peoples can benefit in a particular way from the sacraments since they unite the divine and the cosmic, grace, and creation. In the Amazon region, the sacraments should not be viewed in discontinuity with creation. They “are a privileged way in which nature is taken up by God to become a means of mediating supernatural life.” They are the fulfillment of creation, in which nature is elevated to become a locus and instrument of grace, enabling us “to embrace the world on a different plane (no. 81).

Still citing Laudato Si’, the document suggests that matter is divinized and presents the Eucharist as a “fragment of matter”: “In the Eucharist, God, ‘in the culmination of the mystery of the Incarnation, chose to reach our intimate depths through a fragment of matter.’ The Eucharist ‘joins heaven and earth; it embraces and penetrates all creation’” (no. 82).
It is clear in these passages, perhaps more than in other places, how Pope Francis’s new document exploits the Amazon and its indigenous peoples, using them as a mere pretext to spread evolutionary cosmic pantheism.

Learn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times

Will “Pachamama” Worship Be Part of an Inculturated Liturgy?

The exhortation explains the liturgy’s inculturation: “‘[E]ncountering God does not mean fleeing from this world or turning our back on nature.’ It means that we can take up into the liturgy many elements proper to the experience of indigenous peoples in their contact with nature and respect native forms of expression in song, dance, rituals, gestures, and symbols. The Second Vatican Council called for this effort to inculturate the liturgy among indigenous peoples” (no. 82).
A telling illustration of how to do this Amazonian inculturation in Church ceremonies was the worshipping of the Pachamama goddess (Mother Earth) done on October 4, 2019, in the Vatican Gardens, then in Saint Peter’s Basilica, and in a procession with two bishops carrying the idol on a kind of float from the Basilica to the hall in which the Synod Fathers gathered. Pope Francis was present on all these occasions and gave the Pachamama idol a blessing during the first one.¹⁹

Having Worshipped Pachamama, Pope Francis Now Disparages Mary’s Co-Redeeming Role

In Querida Amazonia, Pope Francis seeks to justify all these ceremonies worshipping the Pachamama goddess:²⁰ “It is possible to take up an indigenous symbol in some way, without necessarily considering it as idolatry. A myth charged with spiritual meaning can be used to advantage and not always considered a pagan error” (no. 79).
Querida Amazonia also reiterates the moral laxity of Amoris Laetitia: “[T]he Church must be particularly concerned to offer understanding, comfort, and acceptance, rather than imposing straightaway a set of rules that only lead people to feel judged and abandoned by the very Mother called to show them God’s mercy” (no. 84).

Not a Victory for Conservatives

Since Querida Amazonia does not mention the ordaining of married men (viri probati) as priests or women as deaconesses, some conservatives claimed victory. It is true that many liberal Catholics were looking forward to this step, and the Final Document called for it. Thus, in a sense, one can say that the omission was a conservative victory. However, as we will see below, it was not a true victory, but a pyrrhic one.²¹ Pope Francis transcended the issue, addressing it on a much higher plane and in a devastating manner. The sad truth is that Querida Amazonia points to a change in the priestly ministry and liturgy that achieves the same results in practice, without appearing to do so. This subversive change is in line with the new Church’s understanding of grace and the sacraments.
Querida Amazonia points out the way ahead for progressives in the form of a rhetorical question: “Inculturation should also be increasingly reflected in an incarnate form of ecclesial organization and ministry. If we are to inculturate spirituality, holiness, and the Gospel itself, how can we not consider an inculturation of the ways we structure and carry out ecclesial ministries?” (no. 85).

Listen to the Amazon Indians Not Liberation Theologians!

True, the document states that only an ordained priest can consecrate and “preside at the Eucharist” (see nos. 86–90). However, it also says that Amazonian inculturation “requires the stable presence of mature and lay leaders endowed with authority … requires the Church to be open to the Spirit’s boldness, to trust in, and concretely to permit, the growth of a specific ecclesial culture that is distinctively lay” (no. 94).
These “mature and lay leaders” sound very much like the Synod’s “viri probati.” Since the type of authority these male or female mature and lay leaders will receive is not made clear, bishops or episcopal conferences may interpret it as they see fit. This is how the bishops of Malta and Argentina interpreted Amoris Laetitia regarding the admission of divorced and “remarried” Catholics to Holy Communion.²² And, just as those bishops received the pope’s approval and that approval was proclaimed Church magisterium and incorporated into the Acta Apostolicae Sedes, so also now, one can reasonably foresee that Pope Francis will similarly approve these new “Church with an Amazonian face” inculturation steps implemented by bishops in Brazil, Peru, Congo, India … or elsewhere.

Inculturating the Priestly Ministry in the New Lay Church

This methodology seems all the more likely since Querida Amazonia, as seen, exhorts the fostering of “a specific ecclesial culture that is distinctively lay.” If, as discussed above, “grace supposes culture,” and culture must be clearly and distinctly lay, are we not headed to a lay Church in which the priest’s role is reduced to the consecration of the Eucharist and the absolving of sins, and he is stripped of all authority and superiority over the non-ordained laity?
Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, of La Plata, Argentina, a close friend, ghostwriter for, and adviser to Pope Francis, made a very important remark on this secularization of the Church in an article published by L’Osservatore Romano on February 17, 2020.²³

Why Priestly Celibacy?

After stating that the Pope in Querida Amazonia did not close the door on married priests but only refrained from dealing with the matter, the archbishop states:

“In any case, the ecclesial dream expressed by Francis gives new impetus to the renewal of the Church. His appeal to create a ‘distinctively lay’ Amazonian Church (no. 94) is particularly strong. That is why Francis demands that the laity be ‘endowed with authority’ (no. 94). This entails reviewing a way of understanding the priesthood that relates too much to its power in the community. Francis explicitly talks about it in points 87 and 88. Francis specifies that, when it is said that the priest is a sign of Christ the Head, it must be understood as the source of grace, especially in the Eucharist, and not as a source of power. Therefore, the leadership of communities can be entrusted to lay leaders endowed with authority who can create a more participatory Church.”

Along the lines of a “distinctively lay” Amazonian Church, one of the reasons Pope Francis presented for not ordaining women as deaconesses is that to do so would be “clericalism”: “It would lead us to clericalize women, diminish the great value of what they have already accomplished, and subtly make their indispensable contribution less effective” (no. 100).

An Intermediary Stage Toward a New Synodal Church

In addition, it must be pointed out that, the pope has failed to sign an official teaching document of the Church using the classic formula: “Given in Rome, at Saint Peter’s, etc.” In signing the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia, Pope Francis employed a new and unconventional formula: “Given in Rome, at the Cathedral of Saint John Lateran…”
This is not a meaningless detail. On the contrary, it signals yet another step toward creating a new Church that is no longer hierarchical and monarchical—with the Pope as its Supreme Authority—but, instead, an egalitarian “Synodal Church” in the mold of the schismatic and heretical Orthodox churches which are governed by synods of bishops. In this new synodal church, the pope would become merely the primus inter pares—the first among equals, having a primacy of honor, no longer a primacy of jurisdiction.

FREE PDF Download, or
Purchase the Book here (Free Shipping).

Indeed, while Saint Peter’s Basilica symbolizes the pope’s universal power (with the tomb of Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles, in its crypt), the Basilica of Saint John Lateran is the cathedral church of the Diocese of Rome, of which, the pope is the bishop. By abandoning the classic formula for signing a papal document “at Saint Peter’s…” Pope Francis appears to signal that he is acting only as Bishop of Rome, not as the pope. He does this in a “synodal” document in which he strongly insists on the Church’s “synodality.”

Nothing Was Corrected, and New Errors Were Added

Except for its form, Pope Francis changed nothing of the Synod’s prior documents in this new exhortation. Querida Amazonia presents the same errors contained in the Synod’s Instrumentum Laboris and Final Document. Appearances were altered, but the essence remained the same. Worse, other errors were added, including doctrinal confusion on grace and culture, the sacraments, and the priestly ministry.
Given its depth, global scope, and, above all, its undermining of the papacy and the priesthood, the Synod of Bishops on the Amazon region, and its documents, including the Apostolic Exhortation Querida Amazonia, are symptoms of a crisis the likes of which Holy Church has never known.
In the face of this situation, we cannot fail to render special veneration to Saint Peter and all popes who shone for their sanctity on the pontifical throne. The errors and attitudes of Pope Francis should not lead anyone to sedevacantism, the disparagement of the papacy, or diminishing the authority and powers conferred by Our Lord on Saint Peter and his successors. To resist Pope Francis’s error is not to revolt, which is never legitimate. Rather, it is filial obedience. It is to imitate Saint Paul, who resisted Saint Peter on the issue of the Judaizers (Gal. 2:11).²⁴
Convinced that Our Lord will be with His Church every day until the end of time, and confiding in the Blessed Mother’s promise at Fatima, that finally, her Immaculate Heart will triumph, with God’s grace, we must continue the fight, resisting every infiltration of error and evil into the One, Holy, Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

 https://www.tfp.org/resisting-the-grave-errors-in-pope-franciss-apostolic-exhortation-querida-amazonia/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Grave+Errors+in+Pope+Francis+s+Apostolic+Exhortation&utm_campaign=TFP200306m+-+Grave+Errors+in+Pope+Francis+s+Apostolic+Exhortation