Is Barrett's "Jacobson" Pro-Lockdown Decision "Mocking God" and Paving the Way for "Forced Sterilizations & Detention Camps"?

"Idaho Police Arrest 3 at Outdoor Church Worship" - [https://www.breitbart.com/]

Apparently, anti-First Amendment court decisions that allow anti-Catholic Mass government draconian restrictions to stay in place are "mocking God" according to Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone:

"'One person at a time in this great Cathedral to pray? What an insult. This is a mockery. They are mocking you, and even worse, they are mocking God,' Cordileone said."

"Three separate Eucharistic processions Sept. 20 began at St. Anthony, St. Patrick, and Star of the Sea parishes, and converged at United Nations Plaza near San Francisco City Hall before proceeding to the cathedral."

"The archdiocese ordered banners for parishioners to carry during the processions; 100 in English, 15 in Spanish, and 5 in Chinese that read: 'We Are Essential: Free the Mass!'” [https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/09/20/archbishop-cordileone-san-francisco-mass-restrictions-mocking-god/]

In a Washington Post opinion piece, Archbishop Cordileone declared:

"I never expected that the most basic religious freedom, the right to worship — protected so robustly in our Constitution’s First Amendment — would be unjustly repressed by an American government." [https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/22704303/809174827958692446]

It appears that Amy Coney Barrett may not agree with Archbishop Cordileone that anti-First Amendment court decisions that allow anti-Catholic Mass politicians in power to place draconian restrictions are ‘mocking God.'"

Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that apparently Barrett is a pro-Democrat government lockdown disaster for Catholics who are demanding that their First Amendment rights be honored by judges:

- "Barrett sided with the government on almost every civil rights case, every big employer case, every criminal case, while also siding with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations." [https://twitter.com/barnes_law/status/1308233568099860481?s=21]

- "Read the excellent opinion by Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh & Thomas, that refutes and directly disagrees w/ the #Barrett pro-lockdown decision: "it is a mistake to take language in Jacobson as the last word on what the Constitution allows." supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf" [https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law]

- "#Barrett exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps. Read: politico.com/f/?id=00000174" [https://twitter.com/barnes_law/status/1308233568099860481?s=21]

Moreover, is Barrett's pro-Democrat government regime lockdown "Jacobson" decision not just "mocking God," but paving the way for "forced sterilizations & detention camps"?

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

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ? On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace. The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...

The Catholic Monitor

Search This Blog