jump to navigation

Wait till you see how a Vatican prelate responds to criticism of having pro-aborts speak at “climate change” conference – UPDATED May 21, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, Papa, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, shocking, SOD, the return, the struggle for the Church.

Dear Lord, Life Site News posted yesterday an exchange between Archbishop Sanchez Sorondo, Chancellor of the Pontifical Academies of Science, and the large pro-family group C-FAM.  C-FAM queried him, in very polite terms, about the scandal of having major pro-abort activists being given a platform to spread their diabolical errors at the recent Vatican conference on so-called climate change.  His responses were incredibly hostile and dismissive.  I mean, he doesn’t even try to hide his enormous bias or the fact that he’s very much on the progressive side of things, he simply chided and rebuked C-FAM for every mild criticism they raised.  Get a load of this (questions from C-Fam in bold, I add comments):

Q. Were you aware before your collaboration with Sachs at the Vatican of his public position on abortion in the book “Commonwealth”, where he says abortion is a “low-cost” and “low-risk” intervention to reduce fertility in the event that contraceptives fail?

Sánchez Sorondo (S.S.) I’ve just come back from Argentina, where I attended a conference to combat new forms of slavery, like human trafficking, forced labor, prostitution, and organ trafficking, which I consider, together with Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, to be a crime against humanity. Unfortunately, there is not only the drama of abortion, but there are also all these other dramas, in which you should also be interested, because they are closely related. The climate crisis leads to poverty and poverty leads to new forms of slavery and forced migration, and drugs, and all this can also lead to abortion. [Note, he didn’t even remotely answer the question, he simply changed the subject.  Certainly human trafficking is a huge concern and is most rampant in muslim nations (why don’t the Archbishop use his voice to chide muslims on that?!?) but it has no relation to “climate change.”  But it gets worse…..]

Q. Several Catholic intellectuals and media sources criticized your decision to collaborate with Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs on climate change, because of their positions on abortion and population control. Do you have any reply to these concerns?

S.S. The Tea Party and all those whose income derives from oil have criticized us, but not my superiors, who instead authorized me, and several of them participated. [Oh come on!  My income doesn’t derive from oil, you petulant snot, and I’ve just been one of thousands, if not millions, scandalized by this biased watermelon festival. Give me a break!]

Q. Undoubtedly, you discussed Ban Ki-moon’s and Jeffrey Sachs’ position on abortion and population control in the lead up to the conference. How were any questions resolved?

S.S. Yes. We had these discussions, and as you can see, the draft SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals) don’t even mention abortion or population control. They speak of access to family planning and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. The interpretation and application of these depends on governments. Some may even interpret it as Paul VI, in terms of responsible paternity and maternity. Instead of attacking us, why not enter into dialogue with these “demons” to maybe make the formulation better, like we did on the issues of social inclusion and new forms of slavery? [Now just wait a minute.  This is diabolical.  In every Western country including all of Latin America, “family planning and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights” are synonymous with contraception and abortion.  This is diabolical in the use of code language to communicate to what I have to assume was the intended audience – the radical sexular pagan enviro-left – that the Vatican, or at least this conference, is on board with their agenda, while leaving some wiggle room to say “oh, we didn’t endorse abortion,” even while they had huge pro-aborts speaking for this conference all over the place.  Don’t you like how they’re trying to drag Humanae Vitae back into this, as well?  “Responsible parenthood” means, according to Pope Francis, “3 kids is about right,” and contraception is back on the table. I also like how he tries to chide C-Fam for being critical, asking why they didn’t join in the process?  The reason they didn’t is because they couldn’t, they weren’t invited, and even more, any noted pro-life pro-family “conservative” groups were blocked from entering the conference!]

Q. Critics of this collaboration lament how Catholics and non-Catholics alike may be confused about participating, even remotely, in the grave moral errors that Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs promote. At the same time, Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs have derived great benefit from their participation, confirmed in the enthusiastic media coverage of the conference, which may in turn also raise a lot of interest for Pope Francis’ new encyclical on the environment.

S.S. We are happy that Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs have accepted the theory on climate that the Academy has maintained for thirty years, namely, that human activity based on fossil fuels determines climate. [Based on what?!? Global temperatures have not increased in 20 years even as carbon emissions have greatly increased!  This is a conclusion looking for evidence, and a perversion of science.]  The members of the Academy have defined this “anthropic climate” or “anthropocene,” chief among them being Nobel Prize winners Paul Crutzen and Mario Molina. You should also be happy, because the consequences of climate change fall especially on the poor, and this also puts them in situations where they then accept abortion. [He is here directly reiterating Sachs’ claim at the conference, and simply espousing left wing talking points with essentially no basis.  If you make fossil fuels vastly more expensive, that’s going to put great pressure on the poorest to abort, not “climate change.”]  Moreover, we are happy that Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs have accepted to modify the proposals on social inclusion by adding new forms of slavery such as human trafficking, forced labor, prostitution, and organ trafficking, which were not even present in the last drafts. You should be happy about this too, because if there is anything that threatens the family, of which you call your self a supporter, it is prostitution, which Pope Benedict called an absolute evil precisely because it destroys the cell of social order. [His words drip with venomous derision.  This man is a snake]

Q. The Declaration on climate change that was released after the conference unequivocally assigns responsibility for climate change to human activity. Is this a position that is shared by pope Francis?

S.S. This I do not know. But I suppose yes, because he would not write an encyclical just to say that man is responsible for the Earth but that everything is fine! Perhaps, you believe, like those who live off oil, that everything is fine? [This is how a Vatican prelate speaks?  With the baiting emotion-laden language of the left?  “You’re not one of those evil oil profiteers, are you?”  I’ve never read or heard anything about this guy before, but he comes across as a thug in cassock.] The Academy says otherwise, as do all the rest of scientific academies in the world. Only a few scientists paid by lobby groups opine differently. [This is a wicked and unsubstantiated calumny.  This is utterly beneath the dignity of an archbishop. Note his entire argument is this: climate change is happening, because we say it is, and how dare you say anything different!  Now just shut up!]

————-End Quote————

There is a bit more at Life Site News.  I’m sorry for abusing fair use, but this is so incredibly revealing I felt it had to be shared.

This guy was promoted to his position 17  years ago by Pope JPII.  He has written very extensively.  It seems he started out perhaps a bit progressive with occasional orthodox positions thrown in.  But he seems to have tacked hard left since……surprise!………March 2013.  Gee……I wonder what happened then that could have precipitated a sudden shift?

Geez……..if this is any confirmation of the kinds of attitudes percolating at the Vatican over the past 2  years, things are going to get out of hand very quickly.  Then again, many would argue they already have.

Here’s a question……how much money has the Vatican/Church been promised for their climate change advocacy?  I don’t think that’s an unfair question, things like this don’t just “happen,” there is almost always money involved.

UPDATE:  Sheesh, how blind do you have to be to leave a comment like this (I paraphrase):

I think I see the hand of the Holy Ghost here.  These bad bishops have always been in the Church, but Pope Francis is really encouraging them to come into the open.  I’m sure he’s just giving them enough rope to hang themselves, and that Pope Francis will squash them soon.

My mouth hangs agape. And yet such willful blindness is everywhere.  This is not just withholding judgment. This is self-delusion.


1. Murray - May 21, 2015

Well, at least we now know who all the Company Men are, both in and out of the hierarchy.

On a side note, it’s amusing to see how the Tea Party has become a kind of all-purpose bogeyman for leftists worldwide. A grassroots movement to enact change through the democratic process? The horror!

Baseballmom - May 21, 2015

I noticed that “Tea Party” comment too and thought it quite bizarre. This man just takes his marching orders from the leftist hierarchy and likely does not even know who/what the Tea Party is. Then he has the cahonies to say “we did not talk of abortion” but then says they discussed “reproductive health” – which any moron with a room temperature IQ knows is code for abortion, sterilization and contraception…..
Don’t insult our intelligence sir. I pray you return to the Faith before you die,

TLM - May 26, 2015

The ‘Tea Party’? What does this guy think the ‘Tea Party’ has to do with ‘Catholicism’? Are they really trying to run the Church of Christ in the Vatican or are they just another arm of the Democrat Party?

2. camper - May 21, 2015

The thing that horrifies them is probably not the appeal to rebellion, tax evasion, and destruction of property, which is what the original tea party represented, but support for low taxes.

3. camper - May 21, 2015

They’re the rabble ordained. We need to write a book calling out their sins.

4. Peter - May 21, 2015

C-Fam has for years been effective and indefatigable at the United Nations fighting the relentless powerful pro-abort lobby. All on a shoestring budget. I contribute regularly and urge others to do the same.

5. M P P - May 22, 2015

It seems that almost every day, and at least every week minimum we hear of some high prelate–bishop, archbishop, cardinal, etc–supporting or sometimes even promoting what is sinful and this to continuing loss of souls, not to mention their own.

We read from St. Paul’s letter to the Galations; 7-8:
7Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap. 8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.…

What is “sown in the flesh”? Sins of the flesh from contraception, abortion, lust, pornography, sodomy, all homosexual acts, fornication, adultery, etc. Those prelates who say ‘bravo’ to sin or who champion those who do, those who call sodomy “luv” and support it…even those who by sin of omission never speak of these evils to their flocks and so let them be catechized by the world…well, we see corruption everywhere.

And those who are preaching the Truths of the faith and who uphold morals and speak about sin are persecuted and maligned. But Our Precious Lord Himself told us that John 15:20″Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you… and James 4:4 You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.

It is not a good sign when ‘the world’–the corrupt leaders and promoters of evil–extol a person. It generally means that person has compromised with the world or looked the other way or has come into line with the immoralities of the world.

We know Matthew 7:15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. And even the ‘elect’ (the faithful) can be led astray as Our Lord also warned us. We seem to have many wolves in shepherds clothing these days.

TLM - May 26, 2015

Umm…yea….’Wolves in sheep’s clothing minus the clothing!’ They don’t even hide anymore, they are ‘out and proud’ with their diabolical agenda. Satan’s ‘useful idiots’.

6. Obsever - May 22, 2015

We need to ask the question, what motivates Archbishop Sorondo and those like him? They are very much team players and dutiful apparatchiks for ‘Team Vaticano’, but they most definitely are not on our team.

Dismas - May 22, 2015


Different team = different religion?


plmainville - May 24, 2015

Why somebody sacrifice never having a family to be a priest if they didn’t believe? Only one answer I can think of – They are homosexuals who became priests to cover up their homosexuality.

Dismas - May 24, 2015

That is a well-documented fact. And there are other reasons as well. As a seasoned diocesan priest once told me, “It is a good life. People respect you and doors open up for you. Unless you want to, you really don’t have to give up anything you like.” Among other things he was referring to sexual activity in its various forms.

Sacrificing “family” is distinct from being celibate – as you so well point out.

Maybe part of the answer lies as well in the definition of “believe.” Maybe some of them are very serious about what they believe, with the only fly in the ointment being that they believe in something other than what the Catholic Church actually authentically teaches.

TLM - May 26, 2015

Can anyone say ‘Freemasonry’?

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: