The EWTN News portal, republishing content from The Catholic Weekly (the official organ of the conciliar Archdiocese of Sydney), reports that the “Archbishop” Anthony Fisher OP has written to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) ombudsman demanding an investigation into alleged bias in euthanasia coverage. Fisher complains that euthanasia advocate Andrew Denton received four platforms in nine days preceding an Australian Labor Party conference vote on lifting the federal telehealth ban for “Voluntary Assisted Dying” (VAD), while opposing views were marginalized. Fisher further objects that Denton misrepresented his 2011 remarks on “redemptive suffering” by omitting his qualification that the “goal of the Catholic Church is to reduce suffering.” The ABC acknowledged receipt of the complaint. This spectacle of a conciliar “prelate” invoking the procedural guidelines of a Masonic state broadcaster to beg for “impartiality” in the slaughter of the innocent exposes the total bankruptcy of the post-conciliar hierarchy: they have abandoned the social reign of Christ the King for the secularist chimera of “balanced debate.”
The Usurper Hierarchy Has No Jurisdiction and No Supernatural Mission
The very protagonist of this narrative, “Archbishop” Anthony Fisher, is a manifest heretic who holds no ecclesiastical office whatsoever. As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches, “a Pope who is a manifest heretic, by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head… a manifest heretic cannot be Pope” (De Romano Pontifice). This principle applies a fortiori to bishops. Fisher, ordained in the invalid Novus Ordo rite (post-1968) and a willing participant in the conciliar sect’s false worship, ecumenism, and religious liberty, has ipso facto defected from the Catholic Faith (Canon 188.4, 1917 Code). He possesses no jurisdiction, no authority to teach, and no mandate to govern. His “letter to the ombudsman” is the private correspondence of a layman masquerading as a prelate, devoid of any supernatural efficacy. The Defense of Sedevacantism file confirms: “By notorious and publicly manifested heresy, the Roman Pontiff… is deprived ipso facto of his personal jurisdiction even before any declaratory sentence by the Church.” The same applies to his subordinates. Fisher acts not as a successor of the Apostles, but as a functionary of the conciliar sect occupying the Vatican structures.
Appealing to Caesar’s Rules While Denying Christ’s Rights: The Syllabus Condemned This
Fisher’s strategy is telling: he does not invoke the Divine Law, the Fifth Commandment (Non occides), or the Kingship of Christ over nations. He invokes the ABC’s own guidelines on impartiality. He asks the secular state broadcaster to be “fair” in the debate on whether to facilitate suicide via telehealth. This is the heresy of Laicism condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (1864): “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Error 55); “In the case of conflicting laws enacted by the two powers, the civil law prevails” (Error 42). By submitting the defense of innocent life to the arbitrament of a secular ombudsman and parliamentary vote, Fisher implicitly acknowledges the supremacy of the civil power over moral truth. He treats the murder of the innocent as a “contentious policy debate” requiring “diversity of perspective” rather than a crime crying to heaven for vengeance that no human law can legitimize. Pius XI in Quas Primas thundered: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” Fisher’s letter is a practical application of this destruction: he derives his “standing” to speak not from Christ, but from the “impartiality guidelines” of the ABC.
“Redemptive Suffering” Reduced to Humanitarian Pain Management
The theological depth of Fisher’s correction of Denton is revealing. He complains Denton omitted his statement that “the goal of the Catholic Church is to reduce suffering.” This is not Catholic doctrine; it is secular humanitarianism. The goal of the Catholic Church is the salvation of souls (Salus animarum suprema lex), achieved through the Cross of Christ. Quas Primas teaches: “Christ reigns in the wills of men… because He inclines our free will and conquers it with His inspiration, so that we are inflamed for the noblest deeds… let Him reign in the heart, which, having despised desires, must love God above all and belong only to Him.” “Redemptive suffering” means participation in the Passion of Christ for the remission of sin and the conversion of sinners, not the minimization of physical pain as the highest good. By framing the Church’s mission as “reducing suffering,” Fisher adopts the utilitarian anthropology of the Culture of Death — the very premise that makes euthanasia “logical” to the worldly mind: if suffering is the ultimate evil, killing the sufferer becomes the “solution.” This is the Jansenist rigorism inverted into modernist sentimentalism condemned in the False Fatima analysis: a focus on external management of the body while ignoring the supernatural order of grace.
The Conciliar “Church” as an NGO: Dialogue Replaces Conquest
The article notes Fisher stressed that “providing an alternate perspective at some indefinite later time could not remedy the absence of diversity during the period in which the issue was the subject of an active and imminent political decision.” Here is the ecclesiology of Vatican II laid bare: the “Church” is reduced to a stakeholder in the public square, demanding “access” and “platforms” alongside the merchants of death. This is the fruit of Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudium et Spes — the false doctrine of religious liberty which teaches that error has rights equal to truth in the civil order. The Syllabus condemns: “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (Error 15). Fisher does not demand the criminalization of euthanasia as a violation of the lex naturalis and lex divina; he demands “comparable access” for his “perspective.” He seeks not the conversion of the nation to Christ the King, but a seat at the Masonic table. Pius XI warned: “The state must leave the same freedom to the members of Orders… who are indeed the most valiant helpers of the Pastors of the Church and contribute most to the expansion and establishment of Christ’s Kingdom.” Fisher seeks no such freedom for the true Church (which exists only in the catacombs of Tradition); he seeks “airtime” for the counter-church.
The Fruit of the False Council: Religious Liberty as Suicide Pact
The entire episode — a “Catholic” “archbishop” writing to a state ombudsman about “impartiality” regarding state-sanctioned killing — is the inevitable fruit of the conciliar revolution. The Lamentabili Sane decree condemned the Modernist proposition: “Christ did not proclaim any specific, all-encompassing doctrine suitable for all times and peoples, but rather initiated a certain religious movement, applied or applicable to different times and places” (Prop. 59). The conciliar sect has made this its operational manual. Fisher’s “defense of life” is situational, procedural, and secular. It changes with the “times and places” (Australian federal law, ABC guidelines, ALP conferences). It lacks the immutability of Catholic dogma (Truth changes not with man, contra Lamentabili Prop. 58). The “bishops” of the neo-church have become chaplains to the Revolution, managing the decline of Christian civilization while ensuring their institutional survival within the Masonic framework. As the Syllabus foresaw: “The civil government… has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs… it can pass judgment on the instructions issued for the guidance of consciences… by the pastors of the Church” (Error 44). Fisher voluntarily submits to this judgment, begging the ombudsman to rule that the ABC was “unfair.” He has no other recourse because he has repudiated the Sword of the Spirit (Eph 6:17) for the whetstone of the ombudsman.
Conclusion: This “news” item is not a victory for the pro-life cause; it is a public confession of impotence by the conciliar hierarchy. They have no authority (sedevacantism), no supernatural doctrine (Modernism), and no spiritual weapons (laicism). They beg the Synagogue of Satan (Pius IX, Syllabus intro) for “fair play” in the extermination of the vulnerable. True Catholics — those adhering to the integral Faith of the Fathers, the Traditional Latin Mass, and the Social Kingship of Christ — recognize this theater for what it is: the abomination of desolation masquerading as the Church. Non praevalebunt.
Source:
Sydney archbishop asks Australia news outlet to investigate its euthanasia coverage (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 18.08.2026