Here is a letter written by a French priest, after they published that first lame article, I think:
[The context of this communication is a group email correspondence, in which he is responding to another priest who notified him of the SSPX article. It is translated and published with permission.]
"This article is repugnant, scandalous, completely in line with the new progressive moral theology and slavishly attached to the media soap opera. It is full of implications that are worth unfolding. It seems as though it could have been written by Fr. Paul Robinson, with this concern to follow "Modern Science".
Implications:
1. What right do they have to say that taking a vaccine or drug made from an aborted fetus is a material collaboration? What other abuses does this open the door to? Can we imagine Pius XII making such recommendations?
Aborted fetal tissue is a material substantially united to an aborted human form...
We are in the most formal of situations, unlike the plumber who repairs leaks in an abortion room. The starting point of the action is a baby abortion.
In 2000, Fr. Peter Scott argued that there is a [direct] causal relationship between the baby abortion and the vaccine. In 2006, he recognized the insidious Roman docuмent of 2005.
What remains of the doctrinal rigor of the SSPX of yesteryear? It is completely outdated on this subject, even by conservative liberals.
Let us summarize: there is a FORMAL LINK, and an obvious CAUSALITY LINK between abortion and these vaccines. "Let us not do evil to obtain good," says St. Paul. "The end justifies the means," says Machiavelli.
2. The laboratories mentioned as honest, competent institutions are both criminal and ʝʊdɛօmasonic enterprises, this is abundantly proven. (See the excellent article by Abbe Rioult).
I learn that the remdesivir (Gilead) is made from aborted tissue, further confirmation of the degree of criminality of these organizations.
A show of hands is not enough.
Calling people who did the research and inform people, such as RFK jr., Professor Raoult, etc., "fundamentalists" bears witness to typically liberal contempt. Liberals do not want to find the truth where it really is, while they err on the side of the single thought as the foundation of all thought. They are the fundamentalists.
3. The author further assumes that covid is a serious health phenomenon, which is still a huge lie. The official motive of cutting off the population in a neocommunist surveillance regime is supported.
It assumes that there has not been an excessive vaccination policy for 40 years... despite all the studies that have been done on this subject.
We are told about "Promising Vaccines" even though their development is rushed (In theory, we must trust vaccines because they are tested over years): the author repeats what has just come out of La Figaro and the world... on TV, on CNN... or on "The Lancet".
He refuses to warn that the vaccine is only the gateway to a multitude of other totalitarian measures. Covid is a political phenomenon, a seizure of power of the political body by medicine and over medicine.
It assumes that there is no alternative to the vaccine, (i.e. Hydroxychloroquine+Azithromicine in the first two stages of the disease).
It only recommends Remdesivir, which is criminally manufactured using aborted cells, and proves ineffective. ...
4. "What does the Church say? The docuмent quoted, from the year 2005, comes from the Conciliar Church, our enemy, the one we must bring down. And this docuмent insinuates that if we are far enough away from the act of abortion, the moral link with abortion that made the vaccine possible becomes purely material, free of fault. This docuмent is very subtle, but remains an open door... and as proof, we must accept Remdesivir, also developed from aborted tissues.
Since when do we have to comply with the conciliar magisterium?
5. How did we come to a DUTY ("recommended as prudent") to take unnecessary vaccines or even vaccines derived from aborted babies? Where is the limit? When will people see fetal organs in their pills? (I exaggerate of course, being a fundamentalist).
Abortion is Niet! What is this Wojtylian theology bordering on Bergoglian? Francis says we mustn't exaggerate about abortion...
Now we should stop exaggerating about the atrocious manipulations resulting from abortion.
In all satanic civilizations, the counterpart of human sacrifice is cannibalism. The Mayan Empire was the perfect example. The criminal practices of abortion, duly affine of science (as if stem cells could not be taken from the placenta), have this same double counterpart.
WHAT TO DO?
Under threat and restrictions, (In fact we are already promised the gulag,... sorry, the perpetual confinement says Christophe Barbier, or I don't know which one the preventive health internment center), a Catholic could take a synthetic vaccine.
But even then, it is also necessary to know what such a vaccine contains and what are the dangers and finally the stupidity to be vaccinated against some usual flu, even if it is of artificial origin, as Montagnier says. Normally, with the Orwellian Ministry of Health, the cure will be much more dangerous than the disease, and we just have to observe its effects on those who will be in a hurry, and our corresponding well-being.
With this pseudo-scientific juice, let us count on the neoSociety to collaborate until the end, and more and more with those who seek to shed us.
Is Fr. Pagliarani going to have this damning cloth removed? In my opinion, yes if there are waves, but not without.
In any case, this article is for the English-speaking world, even German-speaking, controlled by more liberal priests... while another speech half fig and half grape is the law elsewhere.
Thank you for warning me and giving the subject of my sermon.
Topic: Official position of the FSSPX on the 'Vaccine'? (Read 1904 times)