In our “corona-crazy” time, our political leaders receive much advice from medical “experts”. Some leaders are attacked in the media for not following the advice of the “experts”. For example, radical Democrat, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, attacked President Trump for not “listening to the medical experts”. Pelosi means Trump was not making decisions which followed the opinions of the “experts”.
Even if we assumed that the medical “experts” all agree (which they do not) concerning how to respond to the current corona-craziness, who should run the country? Should Trump (or any political leader) simply do whatever the health “experts” tell him to do?
In other words, should specialized “experts” run the government and the nation? No! A nation (and other political bodies) should no more be run by specialized “experts” who are focused on a particular field than an individual man should make all of his decisions based on one of his passions which is focused on a particular desire.
Let’s look at how an individual man should weigh competing concerns when making his decisions
A man has many desires such as food and sleep. He has many passions such as fear and anger. These passions and desires are good and are part of the nature God gave him. But a man should not be ruled by those desires and passions. For example, he should not allow his fears to rule him.
Instead, man should be ruled by reason, while taking reasonable account of “advice” he receives from his passions. So, e.g., a man should “consult” his fears while his reason is weighing what decision to make. But if a man’s fear rules him then he acts wrongly because he acts as if nothing is more important than to be safe. He lives (and wastes his life) locked up in safety, whereas there are many things more important than safety.
If a man’s desire for food ruled him, then he acts as if nothing is more important than eating. His decisions would lack balance (and temperance) and all of his decisions and actions would serve the goal of eating.
If a man’s desire for sleep ruled him, then he would act as if nothing is more important than sleeping and his need for sleep would not be balanced with other parts of life. The man would get a full night’s sleep every night but would lose his job because he does not come to work on time.
If a man’s desire for health (or fear of disease) is allowed to rule him, then he would stay away from all possible health risks and he would waste his life in useless fear. Here is how billionaire Howard Hughes allowed himself to be ruled by the desire for health (or the fear of disease):
Howard Hughes – the billionaire aviator, motion-picture producer and business tycoon – spent most of his life trying to avoid germs. Toward the end of his life, he lay naked in bed in darkened hotel rooms in what he considered a germ-free zone. He wore tissue boxes on his feet to protect them. And he burned his clothing if someone near him became ill. …
He wrote a staff manual on how to open a can of peaches – including directions for removing the label, scrubbing the can down until it was bare metal, washing it again and pouring the contents into a bowl without touching the can to the bowl.
This is unreasonable! The correct course is for a man’s intellect to rule him and to make decisions which take into account all of the various desires and passions as far as they are reasonable. A person should take risks, act reasonably, weigh the different competing concerns, the advantages and disadvantages, all in light of his Final End and the Common Good.
Now let’s apply this principle to see how a leader must make decisions for a nation
A nation’s leader should act like a man consulting his passions as far as they are reasonable, but making his decisions with his intellect. A nation’s leader should be a man of reason and prudence, analogous to the intellect in that individual man (in the example above). This nation’s leader (just like the intellect of an individual man) must balance competing concerns, advantages and disadvantages of different courses of conduct, and make decisions for the Common Good.
This leader should take into reasonable account the advice of “specialists” and “experts” but he should not necessarily follow their advice. This is analogous to an individual man taking into account the “advice” of his other faculties (such as the desire for food which reminds him that he should maintain his strength and his health by eating when reasonable and appropriate).
So, a nation’s leader should receive advice from military experts. But these military advisors tend to elevate the importance of military concerns – which is the focus of their careers – often downplaying other important aspects of life. The nation’s leader should no more slavishly follow the advice of such an expert than an individual man should slavishly follow one of his passions, e.g., fear – whose single-focus is avoiding danger.
The advice of this military expert (like the individual man’s passion of fear) should be weighed by reason and then the nation’s leader should make an independent judgment what is best for the nation.
Likewise, other specialized “experts” (e.g., doctors), tend to focus mainly on the concerns of their own specialized field (e.g., medicine). So, a nation’s leader should no more follow – slavishly – the advice of an expert in infectious disease prevention, than a man should slavishly follow his passion whose single-focus is food. Instead, the advice of the experts should be weighed by the leader before he makes an independent judgment what best promotes the Common Good of the nation.
If a nation’s leader is not “listening to the infectious disease experts”, this does not tell us that he is wrong. It might be better not to follow them in the particular circumstances.
A nation’s leader should not be singularly focused on disease prevention or any other single aspect of national life. He must weigh competing concerns and make a prudential judgment what is best for the country, based on the Common Good.
 There is evidence that the danger of the coronavirus (COVID-19) is greatly exaggerated in order to justify heavy–handed government intrusion and destruction of rightful liberty. However, even if this virus were terrifying and not exaggerated, this virus presents the issue of whether our leaders should simply follow “the experts” in making their decisions.
Catholic Candle note: This article pertains to the hoax that there is a human-caused, climate-change emergency. The article does not pertain to the natural cycles of the climate which result in no year’s weather being identical to any other year’s weather, nor any century’s weather being identical to any other century’ weather. Those natural fluctuations have always occurred and always will occur. There are long-term cycles and short-term cycles. That is how God created the world.
The second half of the article (below) discusses how the conciliar popes have promoted an important goal of the enemies of Our Lord Jesus Christ. However, a reader would be mistaken if he assumed that these popes’ cooperation in this evil somehow means that they lost the papacy.
Sedevacantism is wrong and is (material or formal) schism. Catholic Candle is not sedevacantist. On the contrary, we published a series of articles showing that sedevacantism is false (and also showing that former Pope Benedict is not still the pope). Read the articles here:
In the 1970s, the government and media hyped a global-cooling climate scare which they called “the new ice age” – until it became too clear to everyone that the world was not cooling in any relevant way.
Then, beginning in the 1980s, the climate scare was global-warming – until it became very clear that the evidence did not support this hoax.
Consequently, the New World Order elites (working for a one-world government) began promoting “climate change” as their preferred climate “emergency” because this allows them to use all bad weather to further their power-grab agenda.
Moreover, normal “bad” weather is now often hyped in the extreme. Here are the words of one Time magazine writer who contrasts this current hype to earlier times when routine “bad” weather was merely treated as routine:
Now, every cold front that threatens to slicken roads and cause airport delays along the Eastern corridor (where, not merely coincidentally, almost all network TV news executives live and work) has become urgent news. And not just in winter. Springtime thunderstorms, summer heat waves, the first cold snap of the fall — all of them get breathless treatment, often accompanied by a barrage of scary stats: “14 states under severe weather watches”; “24 million people at risk for the possibility of tornadoes”; “43 million people at risk for flash flooding.” I grew up in Kansas City, Mo., in what used to be known as Tornado Alley. In the late spring and early summer, we were always at risk. It never seemed to make the national news.
Not only is routine bad weather now hyped in the extreme, but the climate catastrophes of the past are ignored. The examples are too numerous to count. For example, in the Central American Country of Belize:
In 1931 an unnamed hurricane destroyed over two-thirds of the buildings in Belize City and killed more than 1,000 people. In 1955 Hurricane Janet leveled the northern town of Corozal. Only six years later, Hurricane Hattie struck the central coastal area, with winds in excess of 186 mph and a storm surge (ocean tide) of more than 13 feet. Hattie was the second hurricane to devastate Belize City, in only thirty years.
Who could doubt that, if those catastrophes occurred now, they would be used as “proof” that climate change is real?
Further, our fallen human nature makes it easy for the New World Order elites to succeed in this climate-scare fraud because fallen man has always been quick to exaggerate any current weather problems and to suppose that the weather was better in the past. Here is how St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, explained 1600 years ago how fallen man unreasonably tends to suppose that the weather is becoming more extreme:
Not only did our elders complain about their days, their grandparents too complained about their [own] days. People have never been pleased with the days they lived in. But the days of the ancestors please their descendants, and they too were pleased with the days they hadn’t experienced – and that’s precisely why they thought them pleasant. It’s what’s present that is sharply felt. I don’t mean it comes nearer, but it touches the heart every day. Practically every year when we feel the cold we say “It’s never been so cold.” “It’s never been so hot.” “It,” “it” – “it” is always in our minds. But blessed is the man whom You instruct, Lord, to claim him from baleful days, while a pit is being dug for the sinner.
The climate change scare aims at ushering in the power-grab of the New World Order
The purpose of the climate-change hoax is a power-grab. This hoax aims at destroying what remains of freedom and capitalism in the world’s largest capitalist nation (the U.S.) and destroying national sovereignty to pave the way for a New World Order — i.e., global governance.
This truth was admitted by Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, in February 2015. At a news conference in Brussels, she admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism. Here are her words:
This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change [i.e. get rid of] the economic development model [i.e., capitalism] that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.
Referring to the Paris Climate Accord which she was promoting, Figueres added:
This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.
Another of the U.N.’s top climate officials, Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, also admitted that the climate-change scare is not to save the environment but to redistribute the world’s wealth. Edenhofer, who was co-chair of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group III, made this admission in an interview with the Swiss Newspaper, Neue Zürcher Zeitung. Here are Edenhofer’s words:
One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy, with problems such as forest dying or ozone hole. … [O]ne has to say clearly: we are effectively redistributing world wealth through climate policy.
Currently, in the U.S., one aspect of the climate-change hoax (and socialist power-grab), is the Democratic Party’s Green New Deal proposal. Here is how this proposal is described by the (liberal) New York Times:
What is the Green New Deal?
The Green New Deal is a congressional resolution that lays out a grand plan for tackling climate change. Introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Senator Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, both Democrats, the proposal calls on the federal government to wean the United States from fossil fuels and curb planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions across the economy. …
The resolution uses as its guide two major reports issued last year by the United Nations and by federal scientists who warned that if global temperatures continue to rise, the world is headed for more intense heat waves, wildfires and droughts.
Sponsor, U.S. Representative Ocasio-Cortez, declared that our continued existence requires the Green New Deal. Here are her words:
Our goal is to treat Climate Change like the serious, existential threat it is by drafting an ambitious solution on the scale necessary – aka a Green New Deal – to get it done.
Examining the Green New Deal shows that it is a collection of goals long sought by the socialists and communists. It requires Federal Government control throughout many broad parts of people’s lives. Among many other evils, this proposal mandates the Federal Government to pass many unattainable socialist laws requiring:
· all carbon emissions are eliminated;
· all people in the United States have a free higher education;
· to enforce the sovereignty and land rights of indigenous peoples;
· all people of the United States have free high-quality health care;
· all people of the United States have affordable, safe, and adequate housing;
· all people of the United States have healthy and affordable food;
· all people of the United States have access to nature;
· all employers are forced to give paid leave and paid vacations to their employees; and
· many other mandates of socialism.
As explained above, the Green New Deal’s principal sponsor in the U.S. House of Representatives is liberal New York Democrat, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Concerning this Green New Deal, her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, (who has since left his job) revealed that the Green New Deal is not about “saving the planet”. Here are his words about the Green New Deal:
It wasn’t originally a climate thing at all … we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.
The New World Order elite is marshalling all of its forces to push the climate-change scare as a means of convincing the world’s population that the climate emergency gives people no choice but to accept unprecedented government control – especially globalist control – of all aspects of life.
The conciliar popes declare we need a world government to solve our climate emergency
The New World Order elites have been tirelessly working to install on the papal throne a pope who furthers their goal of one-world government. This allows those elites to use the incomparable power of the papacy to advance the New World Order power-grab.
Here is how the Carbonari (the Italian Masons) described their plan to subvert and harness the power of the papacy:
[W]e can conspire at our ease, and arrive little by little at the end we have in view. …
The Pope, whoever he may be, will never come to the secret societies. It is for the secret societies to come first to the Church, in the resolve to conquer the two. The work which we have undertaken is not the work of a day, nor of a month, nor of a year. It may last many years, a century perhaps, but in our ranks the soldier dies and the fight continues. …
That which we ought to demand, that which we should seek and expect, as the Jews expected the Messiah, is a Pope according to our wants. Alexander VI., with all his private crimes, would not suit us, for he never erred in religious matters. Clement XIV., on the contrary, would suit us from head to foot. Borgia was a libertine, a true sensualist of the eighteenth century strayed into the fifteenth. He has been anathematized, notwithstanding his vices, by all the voices of philosophy and incredulity, and he owes that anathema to the vigor with which he defended the Church. …
We have the little finger of the successor of St. Peter engaged in the plot, and that little finger is of more value for our crusade than all the Innocents, the Urbans, and the St. Bernards of Christianity. We do not doubt that we shall arrive at that supreme term of all our efforts; but when? but how? The unknown does not yet manifest itself. Nevertheless, as nothing should separate us from the plan traced out; as, on the contrary, all things should tend to it, — as if success were to crown the work scarcely sketched ….
You will have fished up a Revolution in Tiara and Cope, marching with Cross and banner—a Revolution which it will need but to be spurred on a little to put the four quarters of the world on fire.
This Masonic plan having largely succeeded, the post-Vatican II popes promote the globalist agenda in many ways, including promotion of the climate-change scare.
Shortly after Pope Francis’ election, the Masons declared that he was a plan (i.e., “a design”) fulfilled. Here are the words of Nicola Spinello, Adjunct-Vicar Grand Master of the Masons of Piazza del Gesù:
I believe that this pope [viz., Francis] is the realization of a design that has long wanted to be adopted.
Pope Francis has hopped onto the climate-scare bandwagon. He declared that “one of the most serious and worrying phenomena of our time [is] climate change.” To respond to the supposed climate emergency, Pope Francis declared the need for a global government. Here are his words:
The twenty-first century, while maintaining systems of governance inherited from the past, is witnessing a weakening of the power of the nation states, chiefly because the economic and financial sectors, being transnational, tends to prevail over the political. Given this situation, it is essential to devise stronger and more efficiently organized international institutions, which functionaries who are appointed fairly by agreement among national governments and empowered to impose sanctions …
Former Pope Benedict XVI likewise promoted a global government to protect the environment. Here are his words:
In the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a strongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago.
We see the climate-change hoax being used to scare people into allowing destruction of national sovereignty and control of the world’s population. Unbeknownst to most people, the ultimate goal is to prepare conditions for the coming of the antichrist.
Not only is this climate-scare a fraud, but it is a complete reversal of the priorities we should have. Modern man cares nothing for his soul and focuses entirely on the material world.
Even if the climate scare were not a fraud (as it is), nonetheless worldwide environmental catastrophe is much better than even a single venial sin. Here is how Cardinal Newman states this truth:
The Catholic Church holds it better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and for all the many millions on it to die of starvation in extremest agony, as far as temporal affliction goes, than that one soul, I will not say, should be lost, but should commit one single venial sin, should tell one willful untruth, or should steal one poor farthing without excuse.
Even if climate-change were not a hoax, we should put more effort into preventing one venial sin than stopping climate-change.
Let us not be deceived by the climate-change scare!
Let us remember that the only true evil is sin!
 Here is a small sample of information showing that the global-warming scare is a fraud:
· Volcanoes under Antarctic glaciers are cause of melting; explanation why this melting won’t cause rise in ocean levels.
Leaked emails by global warming alarmist scientists show attempt to explain-away the data because it contradicts them.
· So-called “greenhouse” gas, CO2, is only .04% of the composition of the air.
 When did routine bad weather become such big news?, by Richard Zoglin, Time magazine contributor and author. (emphasis in the original).
 Quoted from: Latin America, A Sketch of its Glorious Catholic Roots and a Snapshot of its Present, by the Editors of Quanta Cura Press, © 2016, p.59.
 St. Augustine sermon 25, section 3 (bold emphasis added; italic emphasis in original; bracketed word added for clarity). This sermon is found at this link:
 In a capitalistic economy, there is an absence of the government control which the socialists and the communists insist upon. Thus, socialists and communists hate capitalism. In capitalism, there is relative freedom – which is why the New World Order elites seek to destroy capitalism because it is incompatible with their vision of world control.
However, the pre-Vatican II popes reminded the world that, even in a capitalist economy, bosses and workers must fulfill the duties of justice and charity that those groups have to each other. See, e.g., Quadragesimo anno the encyclical issued by Pope Pius XI on 15 May 1931 and Rerum Novarum the encyclical of Leo XIII issued forty years before that. Thus, unlimited capitalism (doing whatever we can to succeed in business) is also immoral because that would disregard justice and charity.
(emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).
 Quoted in the daily financial newspaper, Investors Business Daily, available here: (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).
 This interview was published on 11-14-10 and is available here:
Here is the original German:
Man muss sich von der Illusion freimachen, dass internationale Klimapolitik Umweltpolitik ist. Das hat mit Umweltpolitik, mit Problemen wie Waldsterben oder Ozonloch, fast nichts mehr zu tun. … Aber man muss klar sagen: Wir verteilen durch die Klimapolitik de facto das Weltvermögen um.
 (emphasis added).
 (emphasis added).
 116th Congress, House Resolution 109.
 Climate-change fraud is promoted in countless ways, by countless “foot soldiers” who aid this effort knowingly or unknowingly. For example, The Oxford Dictionary promotes the climate scare by (among other things) having made the two-word phrase “climate emergency” its Word of the Year for 2019.
 The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, drafted by the Carbonari (the Italian Masonry) publicly published by the orders of Pope Pius IX and Pope Leo XIII who vouched for its authenticity. This document is found in The War of Anti-Christ with the Church, by Msgr. George Dillon, D.D., Gill & Son, Dublin, 1885, Ch.13.
 Quoted in the book, Vaticano massone. Logge, denaro e poteri occulti: il lato segreto della Chiesa di papa Francesco, by Giacomo GALEAZZI – Ferruccio PINOTTI, Edizioni Piemme, Milano 2013, p.83, as quoted here: (bracketed word added to show the context).
 (emphasis added).
 Laudato Si, section 175 (emphasis added).
 Apologia Vita Sua, by John Henry Cardinal Newman, Image Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York, © 1956, p.324.