The Abominable Sands


As a spineless Balthasarian worshiper of the Hegelian Kirkengeist it is natural that Ouellet (like his Germanic twin Schönborn) should betray those fighting for the truth of the faith against the corrupt men who have taken possession of the Roman Curia. For them there is no untainted Gospel preached by the apostles from the beginning never to be believed differently, never to be understood in any other way. Instead, there is the self-realisation of “the God who is history” (in Kasper’s words) through the institution of the Church (which, for them, replaces the role played by the Prussian state for Hegel). This allows them to change their beliefs to suit the needs of ecclesiastical advancement without scruple. This allows Ouellet to call the criticism of the pope blasphemy and insinuate that Viganò is not in communion with the See of Rome because he has had the temerity to expose the immoral acts of its bishop.

On the purely tactical level his strategy is to scream insults as Viganò while conceding his central allegation to avoid the difficulty that Viganò is telling the truth.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/vatican-denounces-accusation-against-pope-but-confirms-key-point-1538912551

“In an extraordinary 11-page written testament, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused several senior prelates of complicity in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s allegations of sexual abuse, and has claimed that Pope Francis knew about sanctions imposed on then-Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.”

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/ex-nuncio-accuses-pope-francis-of-failing-to-act-on-mccarricks-abuse

 

 

The recent furore over the Polish supreme court brought to mind the general question of  Denazification. One of the justifications offered by PiS  for the clean-out of the court is the fact that this process was not properly undertaken in the early nineteen nineties. If a general restoration were to occur in a given country what measures would be necessary? It seems essential (and many people privately agree) that on the Nuremberg principle abortionists should be prosecuted and, where appropriate, given the death sentence for their crimes. This would not exclude the possibility of commutations or pardons for those who have renounced ‘choice’ in favour of life. What is less often observed is that those who have advocated abortion need to be disqualified from holding public office and the advocacy of abortion, euthanasia etc. in future must be prosecuted as incitement to murder. The procuring of an abortion by a mother cannot coherently not be recognised as a criminal offence but given the social pressures and evidential difficulties this should not (unlike the surgical act itself) be prosecuted retrospectively. Those who have performed ‘sex-change’ operations should be prosecuted even retrospectively for GBH.

“No Greek or Latin word corresponds to the modern term homosexuality, and ancient Mediterranean societies did not in practice treat homosexuality as a meaningful category of personal or public life. Sexual relations between persons of the same sex certainly did occur (they are widely attested in ancient sources), but they were not systematically distinguished or conceptualized as such, much less were they thought to represent a single, homogeneous phenomenon in contradistinction to sexual relations between persons of different sexes.”

Next Page »