Skip to main content

Silicon Valley's "Hidden Persecution" of the Catholic Church which it apparently Considers Lower in Priority than Dog Parks

The Catholic Monitor was informed of the Silicon Valley Santa Clara County's "hidden persecution" of  the Catholic Church this week.

The county is enforcing unconstitutional tyrannical guidelines for Catholic and all religious services which are apparently considered lower in priority than dog parks as can be seen below in its listing of activities:

Appendix C-2: Allowed Additional Activities - Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) - County of Santa Clara

(4) Use of Dog Parks

  1. Basis for Addition. Dog parks are outdoor locations that typically provide ample space for people to distance from one another.  Risks associated with this activity can be mitigated through measures that ensure adequate social distancing and limit intermixing between households. 
  2. Description and Conditions. Dog parks may open to the public subject to the following limitations in addition to those required elsewhere in the Order:
    1. No person shall enter a dog park if it is not possible to easily maintain at least six feet of separation from all other persons.
    2. Face coverings must be worn at all times, except by people who are exempted from the face covering requirement pursuant to the Health Officer’s Critical Guidance on Face Coverings.
(5) Small Outdoor Ceremonies and Religious Gatherings

  1. Basis for Addition. Although ceremonies and religious gatherings carry a substantial risk of transmission, they are vital to people’s social and spiritual well being.  The risk associated with these activities is mitigated when the activities occur outdoors, and when the total number of participants is limited.  Risks associated with these activities can be further mitigated through measures that decrease exposure, ensure adequate social distancing, and limit intermixing between households. 
  2. Description and Conditions. Outdoor ceremonies and religious gatherings, including but not limited to funerals and weddings, may occur subject to the following limitations in addition to those required elsewhere in the Order:
    1. Ceremonies and gatherings must occur entirely outdoors, except that participants may use restrooms, provided that the restrooms are frequently sanitized.
    2. No more than 25 persons may be present at any one time.
    3. A person or business, as that term is defined in the Order, must serve as the designated host for the ceremony or gathering, and must ensure compliance with all requirements in the Order and in this Appendix C-2.
    4. The host must maintain a list with the names and contact information of all participants. If a participant tests positive for COVID-19, the host shall assist the County Public Health Department in any case investigation and contact tracing associated with the gathering.
    5. Food, beverages, and other concessions may not be provided or sold for consumption at the ceremony or gathering, except as necessary for ceremonial purposes with maximization of all safety precautions and avoidance of sharing.
    6. No equipment or items may be shared amongst persons, except amongst members of the same household or living unit.
    7. No singing or shouting is allowed due to significantly increased risk of COVID-19 transmission.
    8. All participants must wear face coverings at all times, except people who are exempted from the face covering requirement pursuant to the Health Officer’s Critical Guidance on Face Coverings.
    9. Except for members of the same household or living unit, all participants must remain at least six feet from one another at all times. [https://www.sccgov.org/sites/covid19/Pages/health-order-appendix-c2-additional-activities.aspx

    Santa Clara County rule iv. is unconstitutional and tyrannical:

     "The host must maintain a list with the names and contact information of all participants. If a participant tests positive for COVID-19, the host [church] shall assist the County Public Health Department in any case investigation and contact tracing associated with the gathering."

    The Supreme Court judged such a rule unconstitutional:


    Freedom of Association

    NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE v. ALABAMA ex rel. PATTERSON, ATTORNEY GENERAL, 357 U.S. 449 (1958)

    Argued:
    January 15, 1958
    Decided:
    June 30, 1958
    Decided by:
    Warren Court, 1957
    Legal Principle at Issue:
    Did an Alabama law that required the NAACP to provide the names and addresses of all its members and agents in the state violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments?
    Action:
    The Court ruled that the NAACP could not be compelled to disclose the names and addresses of its members.
    [https://www.thefire.org/first-amendment-library/decision/national-association-for-the-advancement-of-colored-people-v-alabama-ex-rel-patterson-attorney-general/

    Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.


​​​​​​​ 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk