Austrian Catholics Lead the Way

A Wayside Crucifix in Austria

The controversy has been raging now for a year. It all began with an anonymous posting on the sspx.org website of the U.S. District of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) late last November (2020). We faithful were given guidance that allowed, under certain conditions, the acceptance of what have come to be called “abortion-tainted vaccines.” That post was taken down and replaced shortly thereafter with one by the SSPX Secretary General, Fr. Arnaud Sélégny. All over the world, SSPX faithful were incredulous, and in one of the largest Society bastions, Post Falls, Idaho, USA, a “vaccine presentation” was held by the SSPX priests to assure the modest gathering that, in fact. there were indeed circumstances under which we Catholics could acquiesce to the “jab”.

Then, two months ago, Fr. Sélégny penned another opinion piece, in which he urged Catholic faithful to adopt a “practical” stance in response to the COVID19 “vaccines”. It was just too much for loyal Catholics to endure. Letter writing to the SSPX leadership proved fruitless.

Last week, we received a most encouraging email from Mr. Franz Kalwoda of Austria, apprising us of an international effort to respectfully request the SSPX leadership to reject the so-called vaccines and unequivocally strengthen the faithful in their decision for uncompromising good. You may read the document yourself below in its entirety. If you agree, please offer your name as a signatory to Mr. Kalwoda at:

(franz_kalwoda@yahoo.com)

Please provide him with the country where you reside, as well.

There are already names of Catholic faithful from several countries. We are asking our dear readers to join this effort to respectfully ask the SSPX leadership to re-evaluate what so many of their faithful clearly see as obduracy in the face of evidence that these “vaccines” are immorally tested, developed and concocted.

Here is the document originated by our fellow Catholics in Austria:

________________________________

Brief Critical Comment on the Statement by Fr. Arnaud Sélégny FSSPX dated 24.09.21

The General House of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X published a statement called “Practical considerations for vaccination against Covid-19” by Fr. Arnaud Sélégny on September 24, 2021. This already triggered critical reactions. Criticism of Fr. Sélégny’s overly positive attitude towards the novel vaccination, which many believers find incomprehensible, came, for example, from a layman, Anthony Ambrosetti , from the USA who is affiliated with the Society. As one can hear, he is far from being alone: priests and faithful associated with the SSPX, as well as others, are shocked and scandalized. Some wonder how it can be that the bulwark of the full Catholic faith gives space to relativism here.

Recognition of the activity of the Priestly Society of St. Pius X.

We recognize with the expression of gratitude that since its foundation the Priestly Society has worked beneficially, preserving the full faith, liturgy and morals throughout the apostasy following Vatican II. Above all, we recognize that in some countries afflicted by “lockdowns”, the Society has maintained devotion to God and care for the faithful in an exemplary manner. For this reason, nothing is further from our minds than to join in a denigration of the Society, such as, unfortunately, has recently been carried out by media outlet in the United States.

Identification of a serious shortcoming in the statement in question.

However, out of love for the truth, out of concern for the integrity of the Society, and out of concern for the salvation of souls, Fr. Sélégny’s statement cannot go unchallenged: Even if the Reverend Father deals with the objections that had reached him before September 24, thus showing that he is dealing with the moral problem, and even if he admits that “unknown factors surround the question” and that “pressure is being exerted,” which increase the “difficulties,” the opinion of September 24 is the expression of a profound moral-theological uncertainty. Recall the information guiding all arguments and considerations that the novel COVID vaccine in many cases involves the harvesting of cell lines from aborted children (in development and/or testing). According to insider reports, even viable children are taken alive from the womb and dissected alive, without anesthesia (!). In this respect, the clarity of Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider (“cannibalism”, “beginning of the apocalypse”) must be considered exemplary. Fr. Sélégny’s statement does not adequately portray the appalling sin of abortion, with which the production of vaccines is associated. To put it bluntly, the production and/or testing of the vaccines involves human sacrifice. Moreover, the use of the vaccines has led to so many deaths and other, often very serious, damages in the last eleven months that one must speak of human sacrifices here as well. The citation of Thomas v. Aquinas used by Fr. Sélégny, De malo, q. XIII, a. 4, ad 17, raises serious questions: Is the thought process of the Doctor universalis actually pertinent here? The sensus fidei resists that Thomas should actually be an accomplice in the present tyranny of falsehood. The whole line of thought of Father Sélégny, with all the correct statements it contains, is unfortunately working into the hands of the powers that use the COVID plague for their purposes. It therefore unfortunately also works into the hands of the current Vatican leadership, which has shamelessly made itself an accomplice of the political powers.

Disregarding the obvious: Where is the analysis of circumstances?

The moral-theological analysis of an action traditionally includes three aspects: the object of the action, the intention, and the circumstances. According to our observation, in the vaccination issue, the consideration of the circumstances occurs much too little, even among church officials and, unfortunately, also with Fr. Sélégny. The following should be taken into account: According to the open-hearted statements of Bill Gates and others, virus outbreaks are apparently controllable and are probably being controlled (Gates: “the next virus will get the attention it deserves”, billionaire Warren Buffet: “a new, deadlier wave will come”). Bill Gates also openly stated that he favors population reduction. Vaccination campaigns should also be used for this purpose. On the other hand, he admitted as recently as November 2021, that COVID vaccination had minimal effect in terms of disease prevention (!). At the same time, he spoke ominously of future “bioterrorist attacks”. Here shows the audacity of the propagandist and ruler who is not committed to any truth. All these circumstances surrounding the vaccination must be taken into account for a moral theological analysis.

Where is the discernment of spirits?

The “discernment of spirits” (1 Cor. 12:10, Ignatian Spiritual Exercises) shows us the satanic character of lying propaganda, the murder of unborn children and the simultaneous concealment and denial of abortion in the process, and fear-mongering. In addition, there is an enormous amount of money involved. Where there is mammon, the devil is not far behind. It is an insult to the mind to regard the COVID vaccination campaign as nothing but a medical measure. In view of these facts, it makes no sense to try to interpret away the evil in this matter with moral-theological sophistry.

What would Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre say?

We cannot imagine that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre would have approved of this. After all, we owe it solely to his indomitability that the full Catholic faith was saved in the 20th century. Of course, to this faith belongs the unabridged morality, which in turn includes the absolute prohibition of intrinsece malum, the intrinsically bad act. Only resistance to the evil of the misnamed “vaccination” against COVID can contain further sin and harm and appease the wrath of God. We therefore request that the leadership of the Priestly Society unequivocally strengthen the faithful in their decision for uncompromising good and against the defilement by a lying dictatorship in the name of hygiene.

Vienna, Presentation of Mary, Nov. 21, 2021.

Signed:

Mag. theol., Mag. phil. Wolfram Schrems (A)

Anthony Ambrosetti (USA)

Victoria Ambrosetti (USA)

Mag. Karl Schlagenhaufen (A)

Patricia McKeever (Scotland)

Dr. med. Johann Wilde (A)

Inge M. Thürkauf (D)

Dr. iur. Georg Roth (A)

Kamil Polakowski (PL)

Hofrat Mag. Thomas Lintner (A)

Mgr. Michal Semin (CZ)

PhDr. Radomír Malý (CZ)

Lucie Cekotová (CZ)

Roman Ďuriš (CZ)

Maria Fellner (A)

Erwin Fellner (A)

Kamil Polakowski (PL)

Jee Soo Susanna Yun (A)

Pia Kim (Kor)

DI Claudia Schneidenbach (D)

Joanna Lee  (Kor)

Hans-Jörg Karrenbrock (A)

Justine Veronika Renner (A)

Walter Froschauer (A)

Hilda Froschauer (A)

DI Christian Schöbel (A)

Mag. Dr. Eleonora Kummer (A)

Helene Kurjata (USA)

Ginger Estrada (USA)

Michael Estrada (USA)

Mary Wood (Australia)

Bridget Schafer (USA)

Richard Raymond (USA) 

Monique Raymond (USA)

Jolanta Makowska (Can)

Jacob McLardy (New Zealand)

Tania McLardy (New Zealand)

Jane Giannattasio (USA)

Daniel Dostie (USA)

Carl Vander Wouden (Can)

Marie Tucker (USA)

Chere Bernhard (USA)

Kenneth N. Jensen (Denmark)

David Hillebrand (USA)

Toni Hillebrand (USA)

Andrew Quernmore (England)

Bill Grijalva (USA)

Melanie Grijalva (USA)

Violet Bagtas (USA)

Patrick Neal Fuller (USA)

Lori Wilson (USA)

Leonorah McGlame (Scotland)

Charles Leipold (USA)

Michael E Fanning (USA)

Patrick DeSantis (NY, USA)

Allen Loyd (California, USA)

Gloria Loyd (California, USA)

Graeme J.A. Taylor (Scotland)

Nigel Dickens (England)

Magdalena Jezierska (Australia)

Martin Blackshaw (Scotland)

Patricia Blackshaw (Scotland)

Kenneth Dewar (Scotland)

Jacqueline Dewar (Scotland)

Sean Dewar (Scotland)

Gemma Dewar (Scotland)

James Blackshaw (Scotland)

Maureen Hendrick (Scotland)

Thomas Hendrick (Scotland)

Bill Pfeiffer (USA)

Leslie Pfeiffer (USA)

Joe Pfeiffer (USA)

Thomas L. Massett (USA)

Patricia Wolfenden (Scotland)

Anthony Wolfenden (Scotland)

Bill Crofut (USA)

Thomas J. Fortino (NY, USA)

Renée Neuville (Wales)

E. Marlies Parker (Wales)

Frances Petty (Scotland)

Frank Payne (USA)

Lori Payne (USA)

Maria Plöb (A)

Anna-Maria Kaufmann (A)

Monika Kaufmann (A)

Irene Pichler (A)

Franz Matthias Pitscheneder (A)

Dr. Michael Ratzenhofer (A)

DI Andreas Kirchmair (A)

Manuela Hirschmugl (A)

Monika Rauch (A)

Michael Koziolek (USA)

Debbie Koziolek (USA)

Samuel Koziolek (USA)

Irene Rutherford (Scotland)

James Trosky (USA)

(Mrs.) Kimberly Riddell (Canada)

DI Alfred Gindl (A)

Marcus Lambert (A)

Michael Fuller (USA)

Sonia Fuller (USA)

Mag. Elisabeth Hillier (England)

Yana Kalwoda (A) 

Franz Kalwoda (A)    Initiator

Ad maiorem Dei gloriam

Selection of sources demonstrating the drama surrounding the issue of “research and production for vaccines from cell lines”:

Here a Pfizer Whistleblower Leaks Execs Emails: ‘We Want to Avoid Having Info on Fetal Cells Out There”

Here is evidence of five babies a week disemboweled for research purposes.

USA: Ethics of Fetal Tissue Research – A Conversation with Tara Sander Lee, molecular and cell biologist unmasks trading and research with fetuses.

From Lifesite News: Dr. Stanley Plotkin is considered the Godfather of Vaccines. He is an American physician who worked as a consultant to the biggest vaccine manufacturers and biotechnology firms, non-profits, and governments. And then, Dr. Plotkin reveals other macabre aspects of the abortion link to vaccines. Not that it should make a difference to pro-lifers, but the children aborted were not disabled babies who were likely to die in the womb anyway. They were not miscarriages either, as is so often presented to assuage the consciences of people conflicted about taking abortion-tainted vaccines. That is just a complete falsehood. He even says that all of them were over three months gestation. If that is not grotesque enough, Dr. Plotkin’s response to harvesting organs from these dozens of babies, who were aborted all after the third month of pregnancy, is even further disturbing. So, they were healthy unborn babies all beyond three months gestation and they had to be three months in utero or older because they needed to have developed the organs these mad scientists were after, organs like their pituitary glands, the unborn children’s lungs, their skin, their kidneys, spleen, hearts and tongues. At a later point in the video, the lawyer asks Dr. Plotkin if he is aware that his client was objecting to the vaccines because what they contain were developed from aborted babies.

Lozier Institute: analysis of Covid vaccination producers.

Father Arnaud Sélégny, SSPX: Pragmatist

Father Arnaud Sélégny, SSPX

It was only a matter of time.  The latest missive from Fr. Arnaud Sélégny, posted on the SSPX USA District website on 24 September 2021, is deeply disturbing for any Catholic with a sensus fidei and a well-formed conscience.  It is full of the very same arguments we have been pummeled with for months now; but someone in Menzingen thought we needed to hear it all again.  Unfortunately, it is even worse than the first two tries (last November and December) to convince us of the moral liceity of what have come to be termed abortion-tainted vaccines.  Sounding like a spokesman for the Vatican, Fr. Sélégny writes that “the inevitable loss of one’s professional activity or social responsibility” permit us to partake of the tissue/DNA of murdered babies.   Yes, you read that right: by “professional activity” he means your job, so if you are one of those countless Catholics who is hoping to receive a religious exemption from the Joe Biden vaccine mandate, beware!  Fr. Arnaud Sélégny just threw you under the bus!

In his latest piece, Father Arnaud Sélégny plays the moderate, urging a “practical” stance in response to the Deathvaxx being shoved down our collective throats by bishops’ conferences, governments, and even private industry. Father wants us to abjure the “absolute and categorical positions” in favor of “a practical conduct that is up to everyone to adopt”. He considers the decision to take the vaccine as a “prudential” one, arguing that one’s circumstances should dictate how one responds to this evil attempt by the world to make compliant sheep of us all:

It must therefore be concluded that the fact of consenting to be vaccinated against Covid-19 may sometimes be an eminently prudent act, in the moral sense of the term. It is up to everyone to choose whether to do this or not, depending on their circumstances, after having taken the information or advice of people competent in their field.

Yes, it was indeed just a matter of time for Fr. Sélégny to promote the argument that basically holds that there are no moral absolutes with regard to this issue. We remind our readers that Francesca Romana said it best here. Her eloquent words in that memorable article, written in early April of this year, were a response to those who urged accommodation and — it turns out — anticipated the ever-softening position of bishops and clergy like Fr. Sélégny. Her words ring true more than ever:

. . the absolutists  against a vaccine-derived from human-fetal-cell-experimentation (like myself) are being condemned as intolerant, unreasonable and rabidly anti-intellectual.   I don’t get it.  Isn’t the truth found in absolutes?. . . Is it not absolute Catholic truth that human fetal-cells-used in scientific experimentation come from a “human-being” – conceived and loved by God from the very moment of his or her existence – and made in His very image – known to God even before being formed in the womb?  And that any present benefit through vaccines derived from the use of harvested aborted-human-beings, made in the image and likeness of God, has a taste – however remote – of cannibalism about it?

When Fr. Sélégny first published his original misguided opinion piece on the morality of the COVID-19 vaccines in December of 2020 (see his article here and our analysis of that unfortunate article here) most of us held our breath, waiting for the other shoe to drop.  And now it has indeed dropped — with a very loud “thud”.

After reading Fr. Sélégny’s original vaccine-related piece on the SSPX USA District website last December, we requested and were granted a meeting with the local SSPX prior.  He provided reasons for his Order’s conditional acceptance of the vaccines that seemed to us to have been taken from a talking point paper. A short time after that meeting, a “Vaccine Presentation” was held for the faithful in the first several days of the New Year (see our report here)

The presenting priest made it clear to us who were in attendance that (inter alia):

(a) you should trust your priests to give you the right moral guidance;

(b) moral theology is very complex, so since you folks in the pews are not trained as theologians, refer back to “a” above;

(c) over time, cooperation in evil can become remote rather than proximate.

We were appalled at, and extremely disappointed in, the pure arrogance and logical fallacies from that propaganda session.  When no response was forthcoming from a letter we had written to the SSPX District Superior (in response to Fr. Sélégny’s December article), we decided on 22 February 2021 to write a three-page letter to Fr. Davide Pagliarani, SSPX Superior General.  After showing evidence against Fr. Sélégny’s argument of “remote material” cooperation in evil, we made it clear that the disagreement over those concepts was actually secondary to the issue of encouraging medical “researchers” to do evil by accepting (the moral theology term is partaking of) their ill-gotten goods, thereby being accessory to their continuing sin.  We asked Fr. Pagliarani to forget the myth that this evil industry involved a remote one or two murdered babies long ago.  We showed him that the harvesting of stem cells and organs from babies extracted ex utero, who are butchered before being put out of their misery, has continued unabated.  Here, we presented this evidence to our readers — the same evidence we included in our letter to the Superior General of the SSPX.  Summarizing this aspect of the issue, we implored him:

[W]e can see how correct Bishop Athanasius Schneider was when he, along with four other prelates, warned us nearly three months ago that accepting abortion-tainted vaccines was a “concatenation” in evil.  The definition of “concatenation” is a linkage that involves an “interdependence.”  How true his words are!  There is only one conclusion: this issue is certainly not remote, and now that we know the truth, it may even be formal cooperation in evil rather than material.  One thing is certain: the Pontifical Academy for Life, the USCCB, and the SSPX — and any prelates or clergy who have guided naïve and ignorant souls to accept these evil vaccines — are complicit in the deaths of innumerable babies. This is infinitely worse than murder, as you know, Don Davide, for these children are denied the possibility of Baptism, and will likely not enjoy the Beatific Vision from Limbo. It is an outrageous crime against Almighty God!

Further on in our letter, we even predicted the current sad situation wherein Catholics find themselves being persecuted for upholding the teaching of Holy Mother Church.  Remember, we wrote these words on 22 February, many months before Biden’s mandate:

Don Davide, this acceptance by the SSPX of the vaccine is really a betrayal!  We say this because in the current political and hysterical climate, the far-reaching ramifications of such an acceptance will be disastrous. For example, employers will mandate vaccines, and when a Catholic employee explains that he cannot receive such a vaccine, the employer will go to the Vatican and USCCB websites and perhaps even to sspx.org.  The employer will require the employee to demonstrate why his brand of Catholicism is different from the Vatican’s, the American bishops, and even the traditional SSPX.  What a scandal!  I ask you to evaluate whether this is not possible in light of what we have seen this last year.  Moreover, this betrayal will affect familial relationships: many of us have children whom we are trying to bring back to the Faith, children who will consider parental guidance against illicit vaccines as one more “fanatical” opinion of marginalized Catholics these misguided offspring sought to escape.  As St. John Fisher said, “the fort is betrayed by those who should have defended it.”

But instead of Fr. Pagliarani writing back to us, we received a letter from Fr. Arnaud Sélégny, informing us that the Superior General had asked his Secretary General to respond.  Taking exception to our assertion to Fr. Pagliarani that “the arguments of ‘proportionate cause’ and ‘grave reason’” could readily be disproved by “any first-year Moral Theology student,” Fr. Sélégny at the very first threw a bit of a temper tantrum, writing: “I would like to know how a first-year moral theology student would refute my arguments.”  He then provided a very strange statement about concatenation: “There can only be concatenation for a past and distant sin,” showing clearly that he absolutely refused (and continues to refuse) to recognize that we are, through this interdependent linkage (concatenation), creating and continuing a demand for the ghoulish work of medical “researchers.”  For Fr. Sélégny, it is all about whether a decades-old act is remote or proximate, formal or material, with no room in his reasoning for the fact that when we accept abortion-tainted vaccines and pharmaceuticals, we are “partaking” of the evil-doer’s ill-gotten goods and encouraging him to continue his evil deeds.  Father knows well that this is what moral theologians clearly describe as being “accessory to another’s sin,” but he refuses to acknowledge this.  Why?

Fr. Sélégny’s letter of 29 March 2021 to us was full of logical fallacies:

—  he cites the incident in Chapter 8 of St. Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, making a false moral equivalence that eating food blessed by idolaters is the same as taking into our bodies material that is per se evil.  He should know better.

— he has a misunderstanding of the true dangers of rubella to expectant mothers that causes him to allow for the acceptance of these evil vaccines — which have some of the highest counts of fetal stem-cell material of all current vaccines;

— he actually admits that we are prolonging the fetal cell industry research, but with a wave of the hand, says that we have done our duty if we avoid “as much as possible” abortion-tainted vaccines.

From his disappointing response to our letter, it is truly a small step to the article published on September 24 on the sspx.org website.  Clearly concentrating on the concerns over the safety of the vaccines, Fr. Sélégny tells us that we just have to appreciate the “circumstances,” since whether or not to be vaccinated is really a “prudential decision”. Read these words again, and please consider whether or not this is, in effect, the extension of the Vatican’s dubious marital “internal forum” into the sphere of cooperation in evil:

 . . . it is up to everyone to decide, according to their prudential discernment, whether or not to be vaccinated. After investigation, reflection, or even consultation with competent persons to assess the objections mentioned above, everyone can freely make their decision, according to their knowledge and appreciation of the circumstances. 

Ever the expert in the use of sophistry and logical fallacies — in this case, false moral equivalence — Fr. Sélégny pontificates: “It is just as abnormal to want to dictate to someone how to behave in this case as it is to want to compel them in matters of insurance, tobacco or even diet.” So, the decision to accept into one’s body vaccines that were tested and developed with, or contain, tissue and DNA from butchered babies is the same as the decision to purchase insurance! It is worse than sophistry — this reasoning is actually disingenuous. And speaking of sophistry, here is a real gem from Fr. Sélégny (sounding just like Francis, who has been telling us we must take the vaccine out of love for our neighbor):

Another necessity, that which arises from charity, sometimes requires making sacrifices to ensure the salvation or the good of the neighbor. It does not have the same force as the necessity imposed by justice, but it does exist and concerns every man in regard to his neighbor. However, if a health pass is needed to circulate, it may happen that the obligation to fulfill a duty of charity prompts us to agree to be vaccinated.  

And here Fr. Sélégny shows us that he still does not get the fact that by accepting abortion-tainted vaccines, we are “accessory to another’s sin”:

Here it is a question not of an evil which one commits oneself, but of a sin committed by another: and this is why it is first necessary to reprove the past sin and not to consent to its malice… We must then make it clear that we do not consent to the sin from which we profit: this is why we will be careful to act only for a “proportionate” reason.

Thank you for that, Father.  Yes, every time you, as a Catholic, get jabbed with an immoral vaccine, just tell the nurse that you don’t approve of the way it was developed, and that obviates all moral responsibility on your part.  Oh yes, that has worked so well for us since we first read that guidance from the Pontifical Academy for Life and from the SSPX over fifteen years ago.  In the meantime, David Daleiden has documented countless hours of recordings proving the increased harvesting of aborted baby organs.  Additionally, there is a whole new stem cell line that is being exploited by medical “researchers”.  But Fr. Sélégny would have you believe that you can sleep with a clear conscience by “making it clear (to whom?) that we do not consent to the sin from which we profit.”  What a pathetic, spineless response to what is arguably the greatest evil of our day!

Had enough yet?  If you have not tired from these snippets of Fr. Sélégny’s sophistry and moral mental gymnastics ad nauseam, read the entire article, if you dare.  It is a tragic reminder that regardless of the auspicious beginnings of an organization (in this case, a faithful missionary order begun by the saintly Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre), it can always go sour.  Ask any Jesuit!  But this disappointing article is also a reminder that we must place our trust only in Almighty God, not in any one man or group of men.  We would be remiss if we didn’t remind our readers that there are indeed some priests in the SSPX who are opposed to the vaccine and who, like Fr. Trevor Burfitt and Fr. Kevin Robinson, have successfully fought back against the tyrannical mandates in their states.  But the willingness of the leadership — in Menzingen and in the various District houses — to accommodate this evil is too heartbreaking for words.  And the propagation of such drivel as that of Fr. Sélégny is more than a little disheartening.  God willing, those of us who knew and loved the Archbishop will have our prayers answered that his wayward sons will, on this most important issue, find their way back to the true teaching of the Gospels.