Vincent Lambert: Another Victim of the Modern Azetecs in White Smocks and Black Robes

As has been documented on this so many times in the past, most hospitals today are run and staffed by modern-day Aztecs who are eager to declare living human beings dead when they are still very much alive. A supposed medical “declaration” of “brain death,” which is myth invented by medical ghouls intent on finding a way to create a market of transplantable human organs, makes possible the vivisection of living human beings.  


In most cases such declarations of “death” and/or decisions to cease treatment on a patient after a few days or a few weeks are accepted by relatives out of respect for the “expertise” of those who have a vested interest in turning a profit on the dismemberment of living human beings. It is only occasionally that a family actually has the courage to challenge the diagnoses made by supposed medical “experts,” although more and more people are learning the truth of the manufactured, profit-making that is “brain death” thanks to the work of the heroic Dr. Paul A. Byrne and, among other groups, Life Legal Foundation.

A French man, Vincent Lambert, is the most prominent publicly known human being to be victimized by the modern Aztecs in white smocks who pose as medical "professionals" and those among the Aztecs in black robes who pretend to be judges when they are doing nothing other by playing God and arrogating decisions about the lives of innocent human beings that are not theirs to make. The case of Mr. Lambert, which has been cited on this website in the past (see No Court Has Jurisdiction Over Any Innocent Human Life), is all too eerily familiar as there are scores upon scores of like cases in the United States of America and elsehwere in the world that go unreported because the "professionals" usually are very successful in blunting whatever opposition they might face from family members by using any number of emotional smokescreens designed to justify the dehydration and starvation of innocent human beings who are in need of loving care, not abandonment and execution.

Here is a summary of Mr. Vincent Lambert's tragic case that is reminiscent of what happened to Mrs. Theresa Marie Schindler Schiavo fourteen years ago:


June 28, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – The French Court of Cassation has decided that Vincent Lambert, France’s Terri Schiavo, must die. 

At the end of a whirlwind procedure, it published its arrest of cassation at 5 p.m. Friday in Paris, agreeing with the French state that the administration had in no way violated the tetraplegic, brain-damaged young man’s rights by a form of legal “assault” in refusing to sustain his life regardless of provisional measures demanded by the UN Committee for the Protection of Disabled Persons (CDPH).


The stopping of his food and hydration can “resume” immediately, according to the mainstream media.

Bishop Xavier Malle of Gap and Embrun in the south of France immediately published a tweet recalling that “hydration is not a disproportionate treatment but an elementary right of man.” He also spoke of his “great sadness.” “Are we once again going to witness an almost live death?”

The Court of Cassation’s role is to judge not the facts but the proper application of the law. In its most solemn configuration comprising 19 presidents of chambers, it has handed down a decision which, in practice, constitutes a death sentence.

It is also a highly political decision. The Court was faced with a demand intent on making it justify all the actions of the government, the health administration and a hospital whose agents are civil servants, in order to make Lambert die of thirst, because human life must not be considered sacred in France.

Is this the decision of last resort, the real endpoint of this case, as Rachel Lambert's lawyer, Patrice Spinosi, told the press? How soberly he talked to the press, expressing himself with utmost seriousness on behalf of Vincent's wife, who also exercises guardianship over him.

There were no cries of victory, as when Jean Paillot and Jérôme Triomphe learned Vincent’s life had been saved on May 20. But his satisfaction was obvious. 

This decision is, however, not the end point of this case, for two reasons.

First of all, there is still a glimmer of hope at the time of this writing, and it stems from the wording of the arrest of the Court of Cassation. As Triomphe pointed out, the supreme judges did not rule on France's duty to respect the provisional measures requested by the UN Committee for the Respect of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) from France, which was asked to refrain from taking any irreversible action until the CRPD has been able to examine the case.

However, there is nothing more irreversible than death, and France as a signatory to the optional protocol by which it undertook to respect the decisions of the said committee, would violate its own international commitments by ignoring them.

That battle is not over, and Viviane Lambert, Vincent’s mother, will have the opportunity to speak at the 41st ordinary session of the UN commission on human rights to plead for her son’s life on Monday, July 1. She will be accompanied by her lawyers, who will give a press conference to diplomats and accredited journalists at the UN.

By law, Dr. Vincent Sanchez of Reims University Hospital should therefore respect these provision measures that remain standing and on which the Court of Cassation has not ruled.

The second reason is that even if Vincent Lambert were to die of thirst – while France is smoldering in a heat wave and vulnerable persons are being encouraged to drink – after being subjected to deep and legally irreversible sedation, the Lamberts’ lawyers will demand accountability, in particular on the basis of the CRPD's decision.

“If the government were to go against this request, we would immediately initiate criminal proceedings against the ministers concerned. If Dr. Sanchez makes to restart the death process, we will sue him as civil parties for the premeditated murder of a vulnerable person,” Triomphe warned at a press briefing at the Paris Palace of Justice on Friday evening, minutes after the decision of cassation without remand was made public.

A word about that. The whole Vincent Lambert affair was marked by the constant disdain of a certain political, medical and judicial class for the members and friends of Vincent's family who wanted him to be treated according to his needs as a disabled and severely brain-damaged person. The first attempt to kill Lambert by stopping feeding and almost stopping hydration in April 2013 was thus made without his parents being informed. They would only discover the fact after two weeks and complained that he be fed again 31 days after the procedure began.

Medical experts have commented on the fact that a severely handicapped and brain-damaged person who wants to die – as the supporters of Lambert’s supposed desire not to live as he is now – cannot survive for such a long time in those conditions if he does not have a strong will to live.
On May 20, after the appeals before the Council of State and the European Court of Human Rights failed and despite the CRPD's request for interim measures, Sanchez, the head of the gerontology and palliative care department at the Reims hospital, once again refrained from informing Vincent Lambert's parents before subjecting him to deep sedation in the early morning and pulling his feeding tube.
These lethal proceedings were interrupted that same evening by the miracle decision of the Court of Appeal condemning the “assault.”
Deep sedation, by the way, is a requirement of the Leonetti-Claeys Act of 2016 as part of these let-die decisions, which are in reality slow euthanasia. This sedation is meant to avoid any suffering for a patient even though he is claimed to be in a vegetative state, without any awareness of the world around him.
This perhaps explains why the doctor did not even consider it useful to inform the mother of the person he was going to kill on the eve of the execution.
As for the judges of the Court of Cassation, they also acted as if Viviane and Pierre Lambert no longer existed, tweeting their decision on the absence of “assault” on the part of the French state at 5 p.m. Friday, June 28, at the same time posting on the Court's website, without the lawyers even taking the time to share it with Lamberts’ parents and two siblings, Triomphe told LifeSite. This was despite the judges’ commitment to give the family a bit of time. Even this small manifestation of humanity was denied them.
But it is humanity itself that is the victim of this abominable and protracted judicial battle for the life of an innocent man. Humanity has been denied and flouted in the person of the profoundly handicapped Vincent Lambert, whom the mainstream press falsely insisted is in a “vegetative state.”
We have here a “vegetable” who cried during the first attempt to killing him in 2013, who cried again in front of his parents on the eve of May 20 when his feeding tube would be pulled. (His doctors probably had, because treatment protocols require it, to tell him what they were going to do.)
This “vegetable” sometimes responded clearly and in his own way to his mother's requests. He was a “vegetable” who followed people with his eyes. He was even recorded swallowing spoonfuls of cream or yogurt given by his mother under the watchful eye of a camera, when the doctors kept declaring that he was unable to swallow.
However, there was nothing more urgent than to decide to put him to death and the French state succeeded in having the Court of Cassation rule with unprecedented speed in order to approve it.
This victim was needed to confirm that human beings in France do not benefit from constitutional protection of their right to live. General Prosecutor François Molins urged the Court of Cassation not to accept that the French state should have been found guilty of “assault” for violating Vincent Lambert's fundamental freedom. And he also explained why, saying they should not put into jeopardy the French abortion law and the Leonetti-Claeys law on the end of life by recognizing a fundamental right to life. So these are death laws, without question.
Suspending the death protocol - merely suspending it! - for Vincent Lambert would have deprived him of the effectiveness of a patient's right not to be subjected to unreasonable obstinacy, France claimed before the UN when refusing its provisional measures
France’s justice is now imposing this "right" to die with an iron fist on a helpless human being. In a country that suffered so much under the 1789 Revolution, this is a new form of terror. (France's Top Court Decides that Vincent Lambert Must Die.)
France, which rejected its Catholic past with great violence, which included a bloodletting against believing Catholics, the sacking of Catholic churches and the destructions of shrines, statues and relics (a precursor of the conciliar revolution, obviously), thirteen days shy of two hundred thirty years ago, is still suffering the consequences of its rejection of the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by His Catholic Church in all that pertains to the good of souls. 


Additionally, there are cases of human beings declared to “brain dead” or in “persistent vegetative states” that make the “mainstream” news media when they recover, sometimes years later, after such a declaration. Such is the case of a man in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Dylan Rizzo:


Even in an era of seemingly endless media sources, when an item appears on one of the networks, it has traction. Take CBS Sunday Morning.

Correspondent Lee Cowan does a terrific job in telling the more- common-than-we-think story, in this case of Dylan Rizzo, who was involved in a devastating car crash in 2011 when he was 19.

Rushed to Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, “Within an hour neurosurgeons had removed the left side of his skull and part of the right to make room for his brain to swell,” Cowan explained.

Not unexpectedly he slipped into a deep coma. When he did awake he “had transitioned into what’s called a vegetative state,” where his eyes were open but he was unaware (or seemed unaware) of his surroundings.

Spoiler alert. Five years later Dylan has made tremendous progress in his recovery. But what makes the story so powerful is the larger lesson his recovery illustrates.

Let’s go back to 2011. Dylan didn’t make much progress in the month after he had awakened.

“Doctors broke the news to his parents that unless he came out of it soon, Dylan would likely stay in that vegetative state for life,” Cowen explained. More than one patient has had his or her organs harvested when that artificial–and unrealistic–deadline is met.

Then the all-important transition:

But one man, Joseph Giacino — not a medical doctor, but a researcher brought in to study the case — thought that Dylan’s brain might just need more time.

“We were sort of lumping everyone into this vegetative state category.”

Exactly. As we have written so often in NRL News Today, there is (what Cowan described as) “a growing number of experts warning of what he calls a “rush to judgment” in cases of consciousness.

Ciacino, a neuro-psychologist at Boston’s Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, is one of that growing number of skeptics.

“As many as 40% of individuals who have been diagnosed with vegetative state, actually retain some conscious awareness,” he said. “That’s a fairly alarming number.”

Ciacino dispatched at least one enduring myth in his conversation with Cowan. “The adage was, the brain is not a muscle, so you know, just simply exercising it is not going to help it,” he said. “Now, there’s evidence that if you do rehearsal of a particular behavior, including in a damaged brain, it may well get better.”

The bulk of the remainder of 9-minute video is a testimony to Dylan’s family, his doctors, his therapists, and Dylan himself. They pushed Dylan and Dylan responded.

Cowan ends his delightful story with additional evidence of Dylan’s optimism:

His amazing journey has surprised everyone — his friends, his family, and his doctors. The only person NOT surprised by it all is Dylan Rizzo himself.

Cowan asked, “You sort of knew that you were going to get better, didn’t you?”

“Yeah, it was guarantee-able,” Dylan replied. “I’m going to be better, that’s it. Just keep going. That’s what I always say, just keep going, that’s it.” (Man Recovers Five Years After Declared to be in a Vegetative State.)

Human beings are not vegetables. Even those with supposedly low brain functions are entitled to ordinary care, including the provision of food and water no matter how administered. It is an offense against truth to claim that the provision of food and water to a human being declared “brain dead” or in a “persistent vegetative state” constitutes “medical treatment.” That is a lie.  Dylan Rizzo is just one example of many that have broken through the steel curtain of the “mainstream” media in recent years.

It's the same everywhere, whether in the United States of America or Denmark or France or Canada or the United Kingdom or the Federal Republic of Germany. Men and women who are trained in an industry that supports the frustration of the conception of children and their execution by chemical and surgical means if they should wind up being conceived despite all of their "preventative" measures will have no respect for life after birth. After all, why should those who kill for profit and in the name of utilitarian rationales before birth have any hesitancy to do so any point thereafter? Perhaps even more to the point, why does any Catholic, no less one who claims to be "fully traditional," accept the word of an industry that is so corrupted by one diabolical lie after another?

Yes, as pointed out in Dispensing With The Pretense of "Brain Death," anyone who can remain unmoved by these stories has got a guilty conscience, one that is unwilling to admit error and to correct grievous mistakes that have cost the lives of costly scores of innocent human beings in the name of "compassion" and "giving the gift of life." And those who know that this is so and remain silent about such crimes are just as guilty in their commission as those who know what Jorge Mario Bergoglio does when He offends God by the esteeming of the symbols of false religions and propagating false doctrines is wrong but who nevertheless remain silent for one reason or another. Truth is truth. Those who refuse to defend it are as guilty as those who attack it directly.

Yes, as pointed out in Dispensing With The Pretense of "Brain Death," anyone who can remain unmoved by these stories has got a guilty conscience, one that is unwilling to admit error and to correct grievous mistakes that have cost the lives of costly scores of innocent human beings in the name of "compassion" and "giving the gift of life." And those who know that this is so and remain silent about such crimes are just as guilty in their commission as those who know what Jorge Mario Bergoglio does when He offends God by the esteeming of the symbols of false religions and propagating false doctrines is wrong but who nevertheless remain silent for one reason or another. Truth is truth. Those who refuse to defend it are as guilty as those who attack it directly.

One lie begets other lies. "Brain death" is a lie from beginning to end.

As those of you who are old enough to remember might recall, nearly forty articles were published on this site between late-2003 and the death by court-ordered starvation and execution of the late Mrs. Theresa Maria Schindler-Schiavo, on March 31, 2005. The details of this sad case, which came to light only because Terri Schiavo’s parents, the late Robert and Mary Schindler, and her siblings, Robert and Suzanne, fought hard to save her life from the clutches of her faithless, adulterous husband, Michael Schiavo, and Judge George Greer, can be found in an article published on this site last year, Ten Years Later. Terri Schiavo was never given the chance to recover as she was denied the sort of treatment that would have helped her.

This having been noted, however, it would not have mattered in Terri Schiavo never recovered as she was still a living human being deserving of food and water. A little boy who tried to enter Woodside Hospice in Piniellas Park, Florida, to give her a cup of ice was denied entry by the police. No human being should have to die in such a terrible way because of the unwillingness to provide ordinary care to a living human being.

Indeed, the Vincent Lambert case returned to public prominence at time that a Brazilian neurologist to speak publicly about the manufactured, profit-making myth of brain death that has been opposed for so long by Dr. Paul Byrne, who has also been sounding the alarm in recent years about the disguised killings of innocent human beings that is called “palliative care,” something that is incorporated into the entirety of medical education and practice around the world:

ROME, June 5, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — A respected Brazilian neurologist is seeking to blow the lid off the “brain death” myth, saying it is being perpetuated to supply an international multi-billion-dollar transplant industry. 

Doctor Cicero G. Coimbra, MD PhD, a neurologist and professor of neuroscience at the Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil, has also said recovery for comatose patients is often possible, but a tightly controlled medical establishment is not giving doctors and medical students the facts they need to “do the best they can” for their patients.

LifeSite sat down with Dr. Coimbra for an in-depth interview in Rome, during a May 20-21 conference on “Brain Death”: A Medicolegal Construct: Scientific & Philosophical Evidence, sponsored by the John Paul Academy for Human Life and Family

Dr. Coimbra, why is “brain death” a myth?

By the end of the 1960s, the first human heart transplant performed by the surgeon Christiaan Barnard in South Africa triggered a demand for transplantable single vital organs to be harvested from those patients considered to be “hopelessly comatose.” It was the common understanding that, by using all possible techniques and knowledge available at that time, those patients could not be restored to a normal life and would rather eventually evolve to cardiac arrest within a matter of days; they would not recover consciousness. An ad hoc committee at Harvard Medical School decided to call their clinical condition “brain death,” so that they could remove vital organs maintained viable due to sustained heart beating (maintained supply of oxygenated blood) and use those organs to improve the health [of] other people — patients, for instance, who had liver failure, kidney failure, or end-stage heart failure. These people would benefit from having the organs from patients who were “hopelessly comatose.” 

Calling these patients “dead” enabled the ad hoc committee to overcome all legal problems related to removing vital organs from comatose patients that could not recover according to the concepts and medical scientific knowledge that we had available by that time, i.e. by the end of the 1960s.

In order to transplant organs, they had to be removed from someone while they are still alive, while the heart is still beating? 

Yes, they removed them from a comatose patient. But they thought it would not be possible to recover those patients, because they did not have the technology and knowledge to recover them. 

The main mistake was to consider those patients “irreversibly” brain damaged, but their brain damage was considered irreversible due to the limited knowledge that they had at that time. Later on, as time went by, new knowledge and neurological scientific achievements offered other ideas about what was really going on in these patients. For instance, by the end of the 1960s — when the concept of “brain death” was introduced into medicine — doctors believed that, when there were no signs of brain activity that could be detected by neurological examination, the only possible reason would be the absence of blood circulation in the brain. And because the absence of brain circulation would destroy the brain within minutes, they decided to call it “brain death.”  

The problem is that in the 1980s everything started changing. The practice of transplanting vital organs had already spread across the world, but already by 1984 or 1985 experiments carried out in animals — in rodents — demonstrated that when you decrease blood flow to the brain to only 50 percent of the normal range, the brain falls silent. This is because there is not enough energy to sustain what we call “synaptic activity.” Synapsis is the site where one neuron communicates with another neuron. Synaptic activity, which is the release of neurotransmission at the synaptic site, was no longer possible in these brains, because the brain blood flow was 50 percent of the normal range, and that would not provide enough energy for synaptic activity, for neurons to communicate with one another. So, the brain was silent, but the neurons would not die just because the blood flow was reduced to 50 percent.

So, the brain was silent but not dead…

Yes, silent but no neuronal death — no “brain death.” Necrosis, i.e. the process of neuronal death, is a process that takes several hours and is triggered when the blood flow is lower than 20 percent of the normal range.

This interval (approximately between 20 percent and 50 percent of the normal level of circulation) is now known as the “penumbra zone.” It was initially described in situations where there is an obstructed artery that supplies part of the brain. In the peripheral area of this so-called “ischemic” part of the brain, there was a collateral flow of blood supply between 20 and 50 percent of the normal flow, as demonstrated in animals. If you could recirculate that artery, you would save the peripheral area because it was only silent. It was not necrotic; it was not destroyed. 

It is quite clear that when you have a patient with head trauma, and the brain is swelling, at some point the arteries that supply blood to the brain start being compressed, because the brain size is increasing within the intracranial space. The intracranial space is protected by bones, and bones cannot expand to accommodate the increase in brain volume. So, if the size of the brain increases as a result of what we know as “brain edema” or “brain swelling,” then the vessels are progressively compressed, and the blood flow to the whole brain decreases proportionally to increases in intracranial pressure. At some point, you will reach the level of a 50 percent decrease as compared to normal range. At this point the whole brain is silent — not a part of it but all of it is silent — but it is still recoverable. It is not dead; it is alive. And that situation was unknown at the end of the 1960s, when the concept of “brain death” was introduced into medicine.

So, it is clear that some of those patients are actually alive. What do I mean by alive? The brain was not destroyed; it was only silent. And the transplantation system has been taking organs from patients who had brain tissue that theoretically could be recovered. That brain tissue is not destroyed. 

To me, it was quite clear by the end of the 1990s when the phenomenon of “ischemic penumbra” — a silent brain but no brain destruction — was demonstrated in humans, not only in rodents, that this situation could be called “global ischemic penumbra.” 

The problem is that one of the tests used to diagnose “brain death” — called the “apnea test” — involves switching off the respirator. You disconnect the respirator for 10 minutes. When you do that, the high level of carbon dioxide increases sharply. This in turn further increases intracranial pressure and may decrease arterial pressure. So, you increase the compression on the brain vessels and you decrease the pressure within the brain vessels during the apnea test.

What was the purpose of the apnea test? 

The aim of the apnea test is to demonstrate that the patient cannot breathe on his own. 

In any culture in the world, it would be unacceptable to say that someone who is breathing is dead. Spontaneous breathing in any culture means life. So, for instance, when a baby is born, and it never breathes, you say that it was born dead. But if the lungs expanded at least once, for legal purposes, even if the baby immediately dies, you say that the baby is alive. The question of whether the baby is alive or dead when the baby is born has considerable legal consequences. No one in any culture of the world — Indian culture or Western culture, etc. — would accept anyone to be dead if that person is capable of breathing on his own. So, the purpose of the apnea test is to demonstrate that the patient cannot breathe on his own and can be regarded as dead.

But imagine for a moment: the respirator is disconnected from the lungs for 10 minutes. In order to breathe on your own, you need your respiratory centers in your brain to be working. They control the diaphragm and the respiratory muscles in general. If you switch off the respirator, and there is no breathing for 10 minutes, they say: “Ok, you see, this is one more piece of evidence that the patient is dead, because he cannot breathe on his own.” The apnea test is considered the fundamental test to diagnose “brain death.” No medical doctor anywhere in the world would diagnose “brain death” without doing this test. So, whenever you hear that a certain patient has been diagnosed as “brain dead,” you know that the apnea test has been performed. 

Why isn’t the apnea test legitimate?

It’s not legitimate. Actually, it disrupts the most basic concepts of medicine. For instance, imagine if I prevent you from breathing for 10 minutes, what will happen? You will die.

But in this case, a respirator is helping the person to breathe.

Yes, right. The respirator is helping the person to breathe. You’re correct, no problem about that. The issue is: you are testing the vitality of the respiratory centers. But what will happen to the respiratory centers in a silent brain if you induce a test that decreases the blood flow to the respiratory centers? The respiratory centers were already silent, because they need synaptic function to work. If the blood flow is within the penumbra zone — between 20 and 50 percent — the respiratory centers cannot work, not because they are irreversibly damaged but because they are silent. You would not diagnose this as “brain death.” You will not differentiate the condition of global ischemic penumbra from irreversible brain damage by testing the respiratory function.

You can actually destroy the respiratory centers — as you can damage all parts of the brain — by further reducing the blood flow during the apnea test. Forty percent of the patients who are submitted to the apnea test have a major drop in their blood flow, in their blood pressure. Blood pressure is the pressure that is within the arteries; it’s the pressure that provides the driving force to maintain circulation in the brain. So, when you perform the apnea test, you may actually induce irreversible damage to the brain when you were only supposed to diagnose irreversible brain damage.

That would seem to go against the Hippocratic oath? You are harming the patient in order to apparently test whether a silent brain is dead.

The silent brain is not dead. You induce irreversible damage to the respiratory centers and to the whole brain just by performing the apnea test. So, as you said, they are not respecting the Hippocratic oath, because the most basic concept of medical practice is what you just said: First, “do no harm.” And the second is, “do the best you can.” So, neither of these basic concepts of the Hippocratic oath are being respected in this situation.

If this research has been done in humans as well as in rodents, why is the “brain death” theory still prevalent? And what are students in medical school being taught about this? Would they hear about this latest research?

Well they may hear about it, if you provide information to the general public as you were trying to do. But in medical schools these concepts that I am telling you about — although they are published — are not available in medical textbooks. They are not available in medical meetings. In medical conferences you cannot find them. 

Nowadays the transmission of information within the medical community in general — not only in this country or that, but worldwide — is probably, or certainly, the most well controlled system of transmitting information, because it is worth billions of dollars per year. If you put information in a textbook, it can redirect the flow of money from one sector to another. It’s the most well controlled type of transmitting information in our society that I know of.

Are you saying that, for the sake of the organ donation and organ transplant industry, the general public and medical students are not being given this information?

Yes, I have been trying to talk to the neurological community in my country and in other countries, and the reaction that we see is that some [doctors] will tell you — “Okay, I understand what you are saying, but never tell anyone that I agree with you”  — because they don’t want to mess with the transplant system. The transplant system is a wealthy system; it is a powerful system. They are everywhere in the medical community. They are in medical councils and medical academies; they are everywhere. They are very powerful. Politically, they are very powerful.

What could happen to a doctor if he tried to go against the system?

Well, maybe what happened to me. I had to fight in court to hold on to my license to work as a doctor for 19 years in Brazil. And that was a long time. So, you understand why some doctors that are aware of what is happening do not want to talk freely about that. They simply do not want to mess with powerful people. 

They even control and have an influence in the press. Sometimes it is said, “Oh that doctor is against ‘brain death.’” The brilliant idea of the transplant system was to call what they thought to be irreversible brain damage “brain death.” Because whenever you say someone is against “brain death,” you think: “How can someone possibly be against death? They don’t believe in death?” But “death” is just a word that was given to a “hopelessly comatose” patient — but they were “hopelessly comatose” at the end of the 60s, not now.  

Now you can understand that, in a very large number of those patients, they have no damage at all — no brain damage at all — they just have a silent brain. And that was confirmed in the middle of the 70s. In the mid 70s, some people from histopathology or pathologist[s] started wondering how a doctor since 1968 (when “brain death” was introduced into medicine) can say that there is necrosis of the whole brain — that there is irreversible damage of the cells in the whole brain, just by doing a neurological examination? Pathologists started wondering what is happening here. They wondered: “How can they possibly use a term like ‘necrosis,’ which is the terminology that only pathologists use when they look at the tissue under the microscope.”

So, they started checking into this. They did histological examinations in patients who were diagnosed as “brain dead” for 48 hours — so time enough for full necrosis to occur. No signs of brain activity, no evidence of blood flow for 48 hours. The whole brain should be necrotic; it’s time enough for full necrosis. When they examined those brains — I think the article was published by 1976 — they saw that about 60 percent of those brains had no signs of necrosis at all. 

People who were in favor of “brain death” had to defend themselves when these papers were published. They said, “Okay, necrosis in those cases is indicated by such tiny signs that you cannot see it in the microscope. That’s why you cannot see it, but we know it’s there. We know, because there is no possible explanation for absence of blood flow for 48 hours.” Again, when more and more evidence was available to demonstrate that what they had thought in 1968 — which was complete absence of blood flow — was not true, they tried to say something else or invent something else in order to explain it — even as a hypothesis.

You saw that in this conference [on “Brain Death”: A Medicolegal Construct: Scientific & Philosophical Evidence] — it was said several times — that when the practice of “brain death” was introduced into medicine, there were no scientific papers to support it, no scientific research. It was simply a concept: “Ok, we believe that those patients have no blood flow, because they have such a severe edema that the blood vessels are completely compressed. There’s no blood flow. There is no way that the brain could survive after a few hours under no blood flow. So, we will call it ‘brain death’ because that’s what we believe is going on.”

But as I told you, and as you heard from several speakers, there was no preliminary scientific research on the concept of “brain death” to support the concept of “brain death.”

While they claimed that the brain was “dead,” what was going on in the body? The heart is still beating…

Yes, because if it’s not beating you cannot use vital organs. If there is an arrest in circulation, you have damaged organs that you’re trying to transplant to other people. 

people are. . . .

Imagine that you knew a very well-known, prestigious transplant surgeon, who has been performing vital organ transplants for 30 years. He is very skillful surgeon, possibly world-renowned. And then you come to him and say that “brain death” is not death anymore, because now we know much more than we knew in 1968, when brain that was introduced into medicine. 

Imagine that you tell him he should stop doing vital organ transplants. He has been doing them for 30 years, and he is very skillful, perhaps a world-renowned doctor. Do suppose that he will accept that peacefully? It’s difficult. After 30 years, all the prestige that has accumulated and then you tell him he should look for another way of making money — another specialty because transplants are no longer possible.

It seems it goes back to the Hippocratic oath. A doctor makes a vow when he becomes doctor. It is a sacred vow.  

Yes, definitely. (Brazilian Neurologist Discusses the Myth of Brain Death Behind Multibillion Dollar Ogan Transplant Industry.)

Mind you, while Dr. Coimbra's information is very useful, it is not an "expose" of brain death as Dr. Paul Byrne has been explaining this myth for a very long time now, much to the disdain of the modern Aztects and even of the conciliar officials themselves. Dr. Coimbra's information is important, to be sure, but Dr. Byrne has been in the vanguard on this matter and has traveled around the world, mostly at his own expense, to come to the assistance of the victims of the modern Aztecs.

No one, especially believing Catholics, should believe in the medical industry’s manufactured. money-making myth that is brain death at this late date. One must deny the truth in order to do so just as surely that “conservative” and “resist while recognize” Catholics deny the truth about the simple fact that the counterfeit church of conciliarism is not the Catholic Church and that its officials are nothing more than spiritual robber barons who are wolves dressed up in the clothing of shepherds.

Similarly, one must be suspend all rationality in order to serve as a stooge of a medical industry that has been hijacked by funds provided by the Robert Wood John Foundation and the Soros Foundation to accept, no less participate in and/or consign our relatives to the fate of, the death-dealing lie that “palliative care.”

A report from the Life Legal Foundation indicated how a woman in Alabama is being held in hospice against her will until at this very time:

BIRMINGHAM, AL: Life Legal is working with the daughter of an elderly Alabama woman who has been forced into hospice care against her will. Nancy Scott contacted us in despair after she learned that her elderly mother, Marian Leonard, was transferred to hospice even though Marian is not terminally ill. The state of Alabama placed Marian in protective custody and appointed a third-party guardian to take over Marian’s care after erroneously believing Nancy moved her mother to home care against a doctor’s recommendation.

Ms. Scott says she had the “full permission and blessing” of the doctor to move her mother from a nursing home in Tennessee back to the family’s home town in Alabama.

The court-appointed guardian transferred Marian to Diversicare of Riverchase over Nancy’s strong objections. The facility has a rating of 2.8 out of 5 stars on Google, with reviewers saying the facility is “filthy,” “deplorable,” “non-responsive,” and “incompetent.” Even former employees say nurses are “horribly inept.”

Nancy has reported that her mother is not being given sufficient food and that the guardian had authorized Marian to be given antipsychotic drugs, including Haldol, even though Marian has no history of mental illness.

When Marian was first placed into the guardian’s custody, she could walk, was energetic, and was able to eat a regular diet. Now, she is bedridden, lethargic, and suffers from bed sores. 

The guardian has not permitted Nancy to visit her ailing mother for nearly a year. Nancy had to secure the services of a local attorney just to obtain restricted visitation. She is only permitted to see her mother twice a month for one and a half hours per visit.

The last time Nancy went to see her mother, Marian pleaded with her to take her home, saying, “If you don’t get me out of here, they’re going to kill me.”

Journalist Terri LaPoint has written extensively on “medical kidnap” cases and recently visited Marian at Diversicare. LaPoint reports that Marian asked for Nancy and does not understand why she has been separated from her daughter. “Marian Leonard deserves to spend her last years near family and enjoy their care and company,” said LaPoint. “Instead, she has been placed under the ‘protection’ of a stranger and is faring far worse under state care than she ever did with her daughter. When the state can sever deep family bonds with a stroke of a pen and place innocent people in harm’s way against their will, the state has too much power.” LaPoint’s most recent observations about Marian’s care are available here.

“We are appalled that Alabama’s Department of Human Resources would consign an elderly woman to a facility against her will and then allow her condition to deteriorate so rapidly,” said Life Legal Executive Director Alexandra Snyder. “Life Legal will do whatever is in our power to ensure that Marian Leonard receives the care she needs, including frequent visits from her daughter.”

Life Legal is considering Nancy’s legal options at this time. (Women Held in Hospice Facility Against Her Will.)

Physicians once healed. Many of them now kill, whether at the beginning of life in the womb or at any time thereafter. All is done according to their own arbitrary decisions.

I wrote a great deal in The Wanderer about Dr. Death, the late Jack Kevorkian, who popularized “doctor-assisted suicide,” back in the 1990s when it was illegal. Jack Kevorkians can be found now in all manner of medical facilities in the United States of America and across the world. Such must be the logic of world gone mad, a world that has overthrown the Social Reign of Christ the King and thus dispenses with innocent human beings in the process without seeing in each person the Divine impress—and without seeing in each suffering person the very face of the Our Lord Himself, Who suffered to redeem us during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross.

Yes, far, far more dangerous than the deader than dead Doctor Death are those men and women in white coats in hospitals and hospices who routinely dispatch human beings by various devices, including increasingly higher doses of Dilantin and potassium chloride and morphine. The same "profession" that gave us baby-killing, both by chemical and surgical means, under cover of law has given us, first in a de facto manner and now in a de jure manner in some states, the abject, direct, intentional killing of the infirmed and disabled and the chronically and terminally ill, using a variety of linguistic devices to anesthetize and/or justify the reality of these killings while at the same misrepresenting the true state of patients' health in order to expedite their deaths to take advantage of "living wills" and/or organ donation laws to harvest their bodies for "spare parts" before they are actually dead. (Please re-read Dr. Paul Byrne on Brain Death (From The Michael Fund Newsletter.)

Although quoted just a few days ago in a reflection on the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, the following passage from Pope Pius XI’s Caritate Christi Compulsi, May 3, 1932, apply to the monstrous circumstances in which we find ourselves today even more than they did to the circumstances extant eighty-seven years ago:

Lamenting this unhappy state of things from our innermost heart, We are compelled as by a certain necessity to express, according to our weakness, the same words that came from the love of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, crying out in like manner: "I have compassion on the multitude" (Mark viii. 2). But, indeed, the root itself from which this most unhappy state of things arises is yet more to be lamented; for if that judgment of the Holy Spirit, proclaimed by the Apostle St. Paul, "the desire of money is the root of all evils," was always in close agreement with the facts, this is more than ever true at the present time. For is not that avidity for perishable goods which was justly and rightly mocked, even by a heathen poet as the execrable hunger of gold, "auri sacra fames"; is not that sordid seeking for each one's own benefit, which is very often the only motive by which bonds between either individuals or societies are instituted; and, lastly, is not this cupidity, by whatsoever name or style it is called, the chief reason why we now see, to our sorrow, that mankind is brought to its present critical condition? For it is from this that come the first shoots of a mutual suspicion which saps the strength of any human commerce; hence come the sparks of an envy which accounts the goods of others a loss to itself; hence comes that sordid and excessive self-love which orders and subordinates all things to its own advantage, and not only neglects but tramples upon the advantage of others; and, lastly, hence come the iniquitous disturbance of affairs and the unequal division of "possessions, as a result of which the wealth of nations is heaped up in the hands of a very few private men, who -- as We warned you last year, in Our Encyclical Letter Quadragesimo anno -- control the trade of the whole world at their will, thereby doing immense harm to the people.

4. Now if this excessive love of self and of one's own, by an abuse of the legitimate care for our country and an undue exaltation of the feelings of piety towards our own people (which piety is not condemned but hallowed and strengthened by the right order of Christian charity) encroaches on the mutual relations and the ties between peoples, there is hardly anything so abnormal that it will not be regarded as free from fault; so that the same deed which would be condemned by the judgment of all when it is done by private individuals, is held to be honest and worthy of praise when it is done for the love of the country. In this way, a hatred, which must needs be fatal to all, supplants the Divine law of brotherly love which bound all nations and peoples into one family under one Father who is in Heaven; in the administration of public affairs the Divine laws, which are the standard of all civic life and culture, are trampled under foot; the firm foundations of right and faith, on which the commonwealth rests, are overturned; and, lastly, men corrupt and obliterate the principles handed down by their ancestors, according to which the worship of God and the strict observance of His law form the finest flower and the safest pillar of the state. Furthermore -- and this may be called the most perilous of all these evils -- the enemies of all order, whether they be called Communists or by some other name, exaggerating the very grave straits of the economic crisis, in this great perturbation of morals, with extreme audacity, direct all their efforts to one end, seeking to cast away every bridle from their necks, and breaking the bonds of all law both human and divine, wage an atrocious war against all religion and against God Himself; in this it is their purpose to uproot utterly all knowledge and sense of religion from the minds of men, even from the tenderest age, for they know well that if once the Divine law and knowledge were blotted out from the minds of men there would now be nothing that they could not arrogate to themselves. And thus we now see with our own eyes -- what we have not read of as happening anywhere before -- impious men, agitated by unspeakable fury, shamelessly liking up a banner against God and against all religion throughout the whole world. (Pope Pius XI, Caritate Christi Compulsi, May 3, 1932.)

The modern Aztecs in white smocks and black robes who consign so many innocent human beings to their state-sponsored executions are living examples of those who have arrogated unto themselves that which belongs to God alone. They are the products of an anti-Incarnational, Pelagian world that has left has all in their clutches as disposable units to be executed at their own arbitrary decisions that had no foundation in the binding precepts of the Divine Law and the Natural Law.

Moreover, the entire of law, education, government and politics today is devoted more than even to the eradication of the true Faith from the minds of men, an end to which the conciliar revolutionaries continue to advance in the name of what their “restorer of tradition,” Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, called an “official reconciliation” with the principles of the “new era inaugurated by the events of 1789:

5. It is true, indeed, that wicked men were never wanting, nor men who denied the existence of God; but these last were very few in number, and, being alone and singular, they either feared to express their evil mind openly, or thought it inopportune to do so. The Psalmist, inspired by the Divine Spirit, seems to hint this in those words: "The fool hath said in his heart: There is no God" (Ps. xiii. 1, lii. 1); as though he showed us such an impious man, as one solitary in a multitude, denying that God his Maker exists, but shutting up this sin in his innermost mind. But in this age of ours, this most pernicious error is now propagated far and wide amid the multitude, it is insinuated even in the popular schools, and shows itself openly in the theaters; and in order that it may be spread abroad as far as possible, its advocates seek aid from the latest inventions, from what are called cinematographic scenes, from gramophonic and radiophonic concerts and discourses; and possessed of printing offices of their own, they print books in all languages, and, taking a triumphant course, they publicly display the monuments and documents of their impiety. Nor is this enough; for dispersed among political, economical and military parties, and closely associated with them, through their heralds, by means of committees, by pictures and leaflets, and all other possible means, they labor diligently in the evil work of spreading their opinions among all classes and societies, and in the public ways; and to carry this further, supported by the authority and work of their universities, they succeed at last by forceful industry in binding fast those who have incautiously allowed themselves to be aggregated to their body. When We consider all this careful labor devoted to the advantage of an unlawful cause, that most sad complaint of Christ our Lord spontaneously rises in our mind and on our lips: "The children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light" (Luke xvi. 8).

6. Now, the leaders and authors of this iniquitous faction do all they can to turn the present distress and need of all things to their own purpose; and they seek, by infamous cavils, to persuade the people that God and religion are to blame as the cause of all these great evils; and that the sacred Cross of Christ our Savior itself, the ensign of poverty and humility, may be compared with the ensigns of the modern lust of domineering; as though, forsooth, religion was joined in friendly union with those conventicles of darkness which have brought such an immense mass of misery upon the whole world. And by this line of argument they strive, not without fatal effect, to mix up the struggle for daily food, the desire to possess a smallholding, to have a fair wage, an honorable home and, lastly, those conditions of life that are not unworthy of a man, with their iniquitous war against God. It may be added that these same men, going beyond all measure, treat alike the legitimate appetites of nature and its unbridled lusts, so long as this seems to favor their impious plans and institutions; as though the eternal laws promulgated by God were in conflict with man's happiness, whereas they create it and preserve it; or as if the power of man, however much it may be augmented by the latest inventions of art, could prevail against the most mighty will of God the Best and Greatest and give to the world a new and a better order.

7. And now, indeed, which is much to be lamented, immense multitudes of men, having completely lost touch with the truth, adopt these delusions, and believing that they are fighting for livelihood and culture utter violent invectives against God and against religion. Nor is this directed against the Catholic religion alone. For it is against all those that acknowledge God as the Author of this visible world, and as the Supreme Ruler of all things. Moreover, the Secret Societies, which by their nature are ever ready to help the enemies of God and of the Church -- be these who they may -- are seeking to add fresh fires to this poisonous hatred, from which there comes no peace or happiness of the civil order, but the certain ruin of states.

8. In this wise, this new form of impiety, while it removes all checks from the most powerful lusts of man, most impudently proclaims that there will be no peace and no happiness on earth until the last vestige of religion has been uprooted, and the last of its followers beheaded -- as though they thought that the wondrous concert wherein all created things "show forth the glory of God" (cf. Ps. xviii. 2) could ever be reduced to everlasting silence. (Pope Pius XI, Caritate Christi Compulsi, May 3, 1932.)

The powerful of this world, however, will have to reckon with Omnipotence Himself at the moment of their Particular Judgment, and it will not go well for them if they do not repent of their crimes that will one day bring day the visible wrath of God upon us all.

We fool ourselves, however, if we do not realize our own need to make reparation for our own sins that wound ourselves, the world around us and the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal. The most effect instrument of making reparation for our sins and for those of the whole world is Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary. Our Lady, she who is Reparatrix, a role that Pope Saint Pius X explained in Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904:

11. If then the most Blessed Virgin is the Mother at once of God and men, who can doubt that she will work with all diligence to procure that Christ, Head of the Body of the Church (Coloss. i., 18), may transfuse His gifts into us, His members, and above all that of knowing Him and living through Him (I John iv., 9)?

12. Moreover it was not only the prerogative of the Most Holy Mother to have furnished the material of His flesh to the Only Son of God, Who was to be born with human members (S. Bede Ven. L. Iv. in Luc. xl.), of which material should be prepared the Victim for the salvation of men; but hers was also the office of tending and nourishing that Victim, and at the appointed time presenting Him for the sacrifice. Hence that uninterrupted community of life and labors of the Son and the Mother, so that of both might have been uttered the words of the Psalmist “My life is consumed in sorrow and my years in groans” (Ps xxx., 11). When the supreme hour of the Son came, beside the Cross of Jesus there stood Mary His Mother, not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, but rejoicing that her Only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind, and so entirely participating in His Passion, that if it had been possible she would have gladly borne all the torments that her Son bore (S. Bonav. 1. Sent d. 48, ad Litt. dub. 4). And from this community of will and suffering between Christ and Mary she merited to become most worthily the Reparatrix of the lost world (Eadmeri Mon. De Excellentia Virg. Mariae, c. 9) and Dispensatrix of all the gifts that Our Savior purchased for us by His Death and by His Blood.

13. It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis). The source, then, is Jesus Christ “of whose fullness we have all received” (John i., 16), “from whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in charity” (Ephesians iv., 16). But Mary, as St. Bernard justly remarks, is the channel (Serm. de temp on the Nativ. B. V. De Aquaeductu n. 4); or, if you will, the connecting portion the function of which is to join the body to the head and to transmit to the body the influences and volitions of the head — We mean the neck. Yes, says St. Bernardine of Sienna, “she is the neck of Our Head, by which He communicates to His mystical body all spiritual gifts” (Quadrag. de Evangel. aetern. Serm. x., a. 3, c. iii.).

14. We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace — a power which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us “de congruo,” in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us “de condigno,” and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus “sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high” (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son — a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).

15. These principles laid down, and to return to our design, who will not see that we have with good reason claimed for Mary that — as the constant companion of Jesus from the house at Nazareth to the height of Calvary, as beyond all others initiated to the secrets of his Heart, and as the distributor, by right of her Motherhood, of the treasures of His merits,-she is, for all these reasons, a most sure and efficacious assistance to us for arriving at the knowledge and love of Jesus Christ. Those, alas! furnish us by their conduct with a peremptory proof of it, who seduced by the wiles of the demon or deceived by false doctrines think they can do without the help of the Virgin. Hapless are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ! As if the Child could be found elsewhere than with the Mother!

16. Under these circumstances, Venerable Brethren, it is this end which all the solemnities that are everywhere being prepared in honor of the holy and Immaculate Conception of Mary should have in view. No homage is more agreeable to her, none is sweeter to her than that we should know and really love Jesus Christ. Let then crowds fill the churches — let solemn feasts be celebrated and public rejoicings be made: these are things eminently suited for enlivening our faith. But unless heart and will be added, they will all be empty forms, mere appearances of piety. At such a spectacle, the Virgin, borrowing the words of Jesus Christ, would address us with the just reproach: “This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me” (Matth. xv., 8).

17. For to be right and good, worship of the Mother of God ought to spring from the heart; acts of the body have here neither utility nor value if the acts of the soul have no part in them. Now these latter can only have one object, which is that we should fully carry out what the divine Son of Mary commands. For if true love alone has the power to unite the wills of men, it is of the first necessity that we should have one will with Mary to serve Jesus our Lord. What this most prudent Virgin said to the servants at the marriage feast of Cana she addresses also to us: “Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye” (John ii., 5).

Now here is the word of Jesus Christ: “If you would enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matt. xix., 17). Let them each one fully convince himself of this, that if his piety towards the Blessed Virgin does not hinder him from sinning, or does not move his will to amend an evil life, it is a piety deceptive and Iying, wanting as it is in proper effect and its natural fruit.

18. If anyone desires a confirmation of this it may easily be found in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. For leaving aside tradition which, as well as Scripture, is a source of truth, how has this persuasion of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin appeared so conformed to the Catholic mind and feeling that it has been held as being one, and as it were inborn in the soul of the faithful? “We shrink from saying,” is the answer of Dionysius of Chartreux, “of this woman who was to crush the head of the serpent that had been crushed by him and that Mother of God that she had ever been a daughter of the Evil One” (Sent. d. 3, q. 1). No, to the Christian intelligence the idea is unthinkable that the flesh of Christ, holy, stainless, innocent, was formed in the womb of Mary of a flesh which had ever, if only for the briefest moment, contracted any stain. And why so, but because an infinite opposition separates God from sin? There certainly we have the origin of the conviction common to all Christians that Jesus Christ before, clothed in human nature, He cleansed us from our sins in His blood, accorded Mary the grace and special privilege of being preserved and exempted, from the first moment of her conception, from all stain of original sin.

19. If then God has such a horror of sin as to have willed to keep free the future Mother of His Son not only from stains which are voluntarily contracted but, by a special favor and in prevision of the merits of Jesus Christ, from that other stain of which the sad sign is transmitted to all us sons of Adam by a sort of hapless heritage: who can doubt that it is a duty for everyone who seeks by his homage to gain the heart of Mary to correct his vicious and depraved habits and to subdue the passions which incite him to evil? (Pope Saint Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904.)

Catholic empires, kingdoms and principalities used to honor Our Lady publicly with pilgrimages, processions and festival on her feast days, including those feast days particular to a local area or region and those not included in the universal calendar of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. Moreover, Catholics who participated in these pilgrimages did so out of love for Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother as they sought to make reparation for their sins. Unlike Jorge Mario Bergoglio and most of his conciliar comrades, these Catholics had horror for and detestation of their sins, and they did not want anyone to “accompany” them in those sins. They sought to quit their sins and implore the intercessory help of Our Lady, without whose loving help we are lost. Doomed. Damned.

Pope Saint Pius X explained that Our Lady’s example of perfect humility and ready obedience to the will of God is for us all to imitate:

20. Whoever moreover wishes, and no one ought not so to wish, that his devotion should be worthy of her and perfect, should go further and strive might and main to imitate her example. It is a divine law that those only attain everlasting happiness who have by such faithful following reproduced in themselves the form of the patience and sanctity of Jesus Christ: “for whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be made conformable to the image of His Son; that He might be the first-born amongst many brethren” (Romans viii., 29). But such generally is our infirmity that we are easily discouraged by the greatness of such an example: by the providence of God, however, another example is proposed to us, which is both as near to Christ as human nature allows, and more nearly accords with the weakness of our nature. And this is no other than the Mother of God. “Such was Mary,” very pertinently points out St. Ambrose, “that her life is an example for all.” And, therefore, he rightly concludes: “Have then before your eyes, as an image, the virginity and life of Mary from whom as from a mirror shines forth the brightness of chastity and the form of virtue” (De Virginib. L. ii., c. ii.) (Pope Saint Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904.)

We live in a world that rewards and celebrates unchastity, impurity, indecency and perversity. It is up to us as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary to make reparation for the paganism, satanism, materialism, naturalism, hedonism, pantheism, relativism, utilitarianism, egalitarianism, authoritarianism, statism and globalism that promises men “happiness” here in order to lead them to eternal unhappiness and punishment fire for all eternity in hell while being deprived of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity. Our acts of reparation for our sins and those of the whole world will help to plant a few seeds for the conversion of men and their nations to the true Faith.

Although we are living at the time of Holy Mother Church’s Mystical Burial rather than her Mystical Infancy in the first three centuries of the First Millennium, it is nevertheless true that the Apostles and those who followed them, including the saint whose feast is celebrated today, February 1, 2019, Saint Ignatius of Antioch (see Appendix B for his hagiography as contained in Matins for today’s Divine Office), who had the privilege as a little boy to sit on Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s knee, to labor and to pray without looking for success.

Catholics are neither pessimists nor optimists. A pessimist is a sad idiot. An optimist is a happy idiot.

Although we may have done many dumb and/or idiotic things in our lives, it is not to be a “happy idiot” to be filled with the Supernatural Virtue of Hope as we step back from the terrible events of the world and run with childlike simplicity to the loving embrace of Our Lady, who told Juan Diego the following atop Tepeyac Hill:

Know for certain that I am the perfect and perpetual Virgin Mary, Mother of the True God. . . . Here I will show and offer my love, my compassion, my help and my protection to the people. I am your merciful Mother, the Mother of all those who love me, of those who cry to me, of those who have confidence in me. Here I will hear their weeping and their sorrows and will remedy and alleviate their suffering, necessities and misfortunes. . . . Listen and let it penetrate into your heart. . . . Do not be troubled or weighed down with grief. So do not fear any illness or vexation, anxiety or pain. Am I not here who am your Mother? Are you not under my shadow and protection? Am I not your fountain of life? Are you not in the folds of my mantle? In the crossing of my arms? Is there anything else that you need?

We do not play God in life. We want to know, love and serve Him as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His Catholic Church so that He will greet us when we meet Him at the Particular Judgment with these consoling words: 

Well done, good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will place thee over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. (Matthew 25: 21.)


Isn't it time to pray a Rosary of reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

Cor Jesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

Cor Jesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.