Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

The Ploumen Case: Does the Vatican Have a Pro-Abortion Lobby?

The story of the award of the Pontifical Order of St. Gregory the Great being given to the Dutch pro-abortion activist Lilian Ploumen has reached such levels of absurdity that it is difficult to avoid talking about a real pro-abortion lobby within the Holy See. Also, as has already been said in the last few days, this is only the latest of a series of ever more embarrassing “incidents” on which it would have been more than opportune for the Holy See to make a definitive clarification.

Now we have the Ploumen case, uncovered in recent days by Michael Hichborn of the Lepanto Institute. As we have already explained, Ploumen, who is a minister of development for Holland and a super-activist for abortion and “LGBT” rights – and who, as a matter of fact, has a list of awards to make Emma Bonino jealous. It is difficult to understand how the Vatican could possibly give her an award given to those who are distinguished for their service to the Church.

The Vaticanist Marco Tosatti asked for an explanation from the spokesman of the Holy See, and on the evening of Monday, January 15, he received a brief statement signed by Paloma Garcia Ovejero, assistant to Greg Burke, according to which the award was given to Ms. Ploumen last June on the occasion of the “visit of the Dutch royalty to the Holy Father” and “in accord with the diplomatic custom of the exchange of honors between Delegations on the occasion of an official visit of a Head of State to the Vatican.” This honor, concludes the statement, “is therefore not in any way a placet to the politics in favor of abortion and birth control which Ms. Ploumen has promoted.”

This statement was obviously an attempt to minimize the affair, but the response – if this is possible – actually makes it worse. If one reads the statement one could think that, on the occasion of the visit of a diplomatic delegation, the Holy See prepares a table with a few medals on it, corresponding to the various orders of chivalry, which the guests then are free to take at random. But this is not the case. Such honors are given to the person and only after an evaluation of the merits of the candidate. The reason for the award being granted accompanies the awarding of the cross, the symbol of the honor.

This fact is confirmed by Ploumen herself in the video that made news of this story. She says, in fact, that her pro-abortion activism “was not mentioned,” but “it is interesting that what was mentioned was that it was for [providing] resources for society.” At any rate, she sees the award “as a confirmation of what is being done for young women and for abortion,” confessing that in recent years, she has spent a long time lobbying the Vatican, seeking its cooperation in various ways in developing countries.

Thus, this was no casual award. Who Ploumen is and what she does must be well known in the Vatican, even more because a few years ago, there was a decision to carefully restrict who would receive these honors after another scandal, which involved the same awarding of the Order of St. Gregory the Great. In the fall of 2012 in England, it came to light that the BBC presenter Jimmy Savile, who had died in 2011, was a serial molester of women and underage girls. He had also been enrolled in the Order of St. Gregory the Great. In that case, however, the award was given before the truth about him came to light, and the award was linked to the generous charitable donations he had given over the years. “No more easy awards” was the order from the secretary of state, and from that time on, there were stricter controls placed on such papal honors.

The Ploumen case is much more serious. In this case, it is well known which “civil” causes the Dutch minister promotes, but what is not known is what merit the Holy See recognizes in her work. Moreover, the Dutch cardinal Willem Eijk was not asked about the conferral of the award, as he made a point of emphasizing in his statement published on January 15. The Vatican statement – which covers up the matter and explains nothing – is therefore just as scandalous as the granting of the award.

It is beginning to become clear that there are those in high places in the Vatican profiting from this pontificate to advance agendas that have nothing to do with the teachings of the Catholic Church. On the question of abortion, it is necessary to recognize that Pope Francis’s words have always been very clear, even if he has not intervened to influence the political debate on this topic, as he has done with other issues. For example, he said, “Abortion is a crime. It is an absolute evil” during the press conference returning from Mexico on February 18, 2016. But he is surrounded by people who evidently want to turn the Church in another direction, in which the promotion of the LGBT agenda, with lots of “gay unions,” and openness to contraception while turning a blind eye to abortion all march together hand in hand.

It is therefore now more urgent than ever that there be a clear intervention by the pope to put an end to this drift, because in this case – whether intended or not – silence becomes complicity.

Editor’s note: This article originally appeared in La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana. It is reprinted here with permission, translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino.

82 thoughts on “The Ploumen Case: Does the Vatican Have a Pro-Abortion Lobby?”

  1. These bad people “surrounding” the Holy Father: who put them there? Who keeps them there? Who is ultimately responsible?

    After all, he’s not slow to remove those who fall out of favour.

    Reply
    • It is plainly PF himself who is putting the worst ones there. Obviously Monsignor Ricca, after his sodomitical exploits in Uruguay. And his right hand man Maradiaga, promoter of the fake apparitions at Medjugorge and builder of a Medjugorje shrine in Honduras. And Timothy Radcliffe, former world wide Master of the Dominicans and promoter of gay sex, which he assured us is like the self giving of Christ. And Archbishop Paglia, formerly of Terni, where he had a gay-themed mural painted up a wall. And Father James Martin….

      Any good ones promoted by PF?

      Reply
      • You seem to be implying that promoting Medjugorje is a bad thing. But most if not all of the people I know who have been to Medjugorje and believe in the apparations are very orthodox, rosary-praying, pro-life, pro-family people.

        Reply
        • Unfortunately, the children involved with Medjugorje have claimed words of Our Lady that she couldn’t possibly have told them. For example, “Orthodox and Muslims, like Catholics, are equal before My Son. For you are all my children.”

          The local bishop, who has authority in this case, declared, “These aren’t apparitions of Our Lady. There are no messages. I declare that everything is a big scam.” Also, he said “There is a huge amount of money at stake. The visionaries are manipulated very well; rewarded, made rich. I have to defend the Faith and Our Lady. I am prepared to die for the truth.” And he declared his disapproval of priests and lay Catholics who organize pilgrimages to the place.

          You can see a video on the internet where they are supposedly in a trance while praying, but when an onlooker lunged his hands out, the girl jumped back. No trance at all. She later claimed that she jumped because she saw that Mary was about to drop Jesus. This is just one small bit of evidence. There is a lot more, both in books and on the internet, to show that whatever happened there, it cannot be from God. (I can point you to them if you would like). Nor has it ever been approved by the Vatican, not even Pope Francis. (Which, to be honest, surprised me to find out).

          I mean no disrespect to your faithful friends, believe me, and apologize if this causes discomfort. I take absolutely NO delight in being some kind of know-it-all (I am obviously not), and hesitated to even respond. But on this topic I am certain. So I couldn’t remain silent. Begging pardon, but do hope that you will give it some thought. Thank you.

          Reply
          • Thanks, Michael, for a brief summary of the facts surrounding this disgusting fraud. I can hardly be accused of opposition to apparition sites – I have been to Lourdes 10 times. I went to Medjugorje in 1996, a year after the civil war ended.

            In 1996 the Medjugorje district and Bosnia generally were recovering slowly from the carnage and destruction of the civil war. There were only a handful of hotels in the village to accommodate the small number of pilgrims. Sites which had been earmarked before 1991 for an ambitious building program of new hotels were still empty. Before 1981, Medjugorje’s economy was based on growing tobacco and grapes, plus stone quarrying. The promise of untold wealth from a pilgrimage flood had not yet been realised in 1996. The fraud might have been strangled by resolute action from the Vatican in the 1990s.

            But the monster has been allowed to grow until there are 140 hotels in a once poor village. There is so much money and so many people claiming spiritual benefit that the Vatican is in a horribly difficult position. They cannot endorse the fraud and they do not want to damage the pilgrims’ misplaced faith in the apparitions.

          • Thank you, too, William, for that very informative explanation. Obviously now it becomes clear — they were just pawns in a much bigger scheme run by people older than they. Sad.

          • No offense taken. In fact, I appreciate your sharing all this. I always felt a little guilty with my Medjugorje-enthusiast friends because I never felt like getting on board with it. You’ve made me feel better about that! Although, in all honesty, I’m just uneasy with private revelations in general (exceptions: Tepeyac and Lourdes). The Bible and the Catechism are pretty much it for me.

          • It’s good of you to be so understanding. Thanks a lot for not taking offense, because devotees of Medjugorje can be very stubborn people. Telling them that the Church does not approve only makes them more defiant and virulent. It’s just another of a myriad reasons why it absolutely cannot be from God.

    • Indeed…..I don’t buy the line at all that he was ‘ignorant’ of his appointments. This man knew exactly what he was doing, and exactly who was who and what they did and didn’t believe in.

      Reply
    • Hopefully after the chastising, if this isn’t the end, or if we can repent and pull back from the edge, we will get a pope with a saintly heart that will move us to restoration. Quito comes to mind

      Reply
  2. The Jimmy Savile affair is not quite as described in the article. It is true that JS got his Papal knighthood in 1990; he died in 2011 and his multiple horrible crimes were finally unveiled late in 2012. But he had published an autobiography around 1975 and made no secret about his barely legal sex life in that book. If anyone had bothered to read the publicly available facts, he would never have got the knighthood.
    As for the charity work…as Jerry Sadowitch, one of the few gutsy critics of Savile while the molester was alive, declared publicly: he was only doing charity work to plea bargain when his case came up in court!
    Sadly JS went to his grave without a criminal conviction and to the accompaniment of huge public lamentation and praise. Not to mention a huge Requiem Mass at Leeds Cathedral.
    .

    Reply
  3. Although the Pontiff has expressed absolute opposition to abortion I am not convinced. He oversaw appointees to special forums on the family who are known world wide as notorious proponents of unlimited abortion, approval of The Meeting Point sex ed program that doesn’t address sin, the current ‘open’ discussion on contraception much of which are actually abortifacients. His orthodox statements appear as cover, a form of camouflage prompting people to think this feigned orthodoxy gives credibility to his more blatant allowance of repudiation of Christ’s Gospels and Apostolic Tradition.

    Reply
    • Hegelian synthesis.
      Janus faced.
      Speaking out of both sides of the mouth.
      Peronism – indicate left, turn right.
      Cartesian dualism.
      Can only effectively be countered by faith in The Holy Trinity.
      All else is sophistry – taking lives and souls!

      Reply
    • Addendum. As i’m reading Fr Garrigou Lagrange “where is the new theology leading us?” its a case of PF substituting “adequatio rei et intellectus” with “adequatio realis mentis et vitae”. Sums up Amoris Laetitia rather neatly as well.

      Reply
    • I’m sure he probably (and honestly) purports to be opposed to abortion… but people keep forgetting (or never realized) who Pope Francis is: He *doesn’t really care about issues*. He couldn’t care less about the theory and doctrines. It’s all *politics* for him. Giving an award to a pro-abortion advocate is not a statement in favor of an issue (abortion in this case), but rather the affirmation of a person who (for whatever reason unbeknownst us) he thinks should get the award.

      Politics is not about issues for him, it’s about people and connections. You are with him or you are against him. It doesn’t really matter to him what you stand for, it’s only whether you are “on his side” and will play to his tune. People can’t seem to wrap their heads around the fact that a man could be such a pragmatic politician as to not care about ideologies or doctrines except inasmuch as they serve for political ends. He is the Juan Domingo Peron of the Papacy.

      Reply
      • I won’t judge his conscience. Whatever his conscientious intent is I do judge the apparent purpose of his actions and their effects that are detrimental to Christ’s revelation and our tradition.

        Reply
      • Just remember that Pope Francis’s promoter Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor could not have cared less when the Hospital of St John & St Elizabeth in London was allowing referrals for abortion despite his being the Patron thereof. It is the ultimate laissez-faire liberalism.

        Reply
      • I actually think this is the most charitable assessment of the pontificate…and Church leadership culture…that can be made.

        What else explains what we see and read every day about Church leadership and, in truth, have for many years, long before Bergoglio was elected Pope?

        It also adequately explains the leadership’s support for abortion in UN work the world over, the support for and propping up of “Catholic” pro-abort politicians in the USA and elsewhere. Thus, {oxymoronic} statements condemning {that is, what goes for “condemnation” in Church lingo these days} abortion can exist hand-in-glove with promotion of the people and policies that perpetuate it. It is utterly enraging for those frogs who have only recently entered the pot like myself, the big bloody mass of flesh and bruised bone on forehead from beating against the brick wall of the Magesterium as we scream out at it to make itself known has not yet turned to a callous.

        Morality, doctrine, ethics, none of that matters. What matters is the perpetuation of the alternative institution that exists within the Church, an anti-institution of persons in a choreography of backrubbing, foot-massaging, ear-coo’ing and mutual……. Ethics, doctrines, ideals, souls, lives, what’s-best-for-people, beliefs, Truth, Jesus, are thoroughly unimportant and in fact, obstacles to promotion and affirmation of that special jet-setting class of persons at the top who run the show. People are divorced from faith, belief, morality, actions, works and the minions who will never discuss policy in Geneva but who aspire to or are satisfied with the same style of backrubbing and mutual…are pleased to go to Mass and pretend to be Catholic…because the “Pope says so”.

        We used to have a joke among us when we lived in the Deep South. Fellows would refer to someone as “Them’s Gy-ud Puyeepul” {They are Good People}. Why? Because they “got along”. They were…”nice”. Didn’t matter that “thems” have stuff like 3 kids out of wedlock plus the one they can’t find, beat their wives, were in and out of jail for petty crimes and one armed robbery {it was a long time ago…} and couldn’t hold a job tho having no trouble holding a case of Uncle Jim and threading it through the window at the drive-thru liquor store.

        In truth, I have a feeling Bergoglio might read what I have written here, smile, say something like “That f…’er is right on!” in Argentine Spanish and cheer it as a compliment to him, his life’s work and the culture in which he has lived, the culture he is now in a position to foist on the rest of the Catholic world and indeed, the world itself.

        May God Save the Catholic Church.

        Reply
    • As in any other ‘politician’ the rule of thumb is: “Yes, listen to what they say AND THEN watch what THEY DO.” ,,,,,;”What they do will tell you everything you need to know.”

      Reply
  4. The article omits another infamous Papal honour – that given to Rupert Murdock, publisher of some of the vilest British tabloids. I understand that was his reward for a huge gift to Los Angeles diocese. If true, it shows that the Papal knighthood is as worthless as British knighthoods, which can be bought for a suitable gift to political parties.

    Reply
    • However do these honours really lead to anything positive in the sense of attaining heaven? Was Saint Padre Pio, Saint Bernadette, Saint Therese Liseaux given an honour?

      King Henry 8th was i believe given an honour and it didn’t work out well for him.

      In reality these honours should be dumped as it feeds pride and arrogance.

      Reply
      • Obviously these Papal honours are merely political baubles. I am looking at a 2015 10 pence coin with Queen Elizabeth II’s image on it. It still has FID.DEF as part of the script circling the Queen’s profile – the Defender of the Faith honour given to Henry 8th!

        Reply
      • Yes. But given their obstinate dispositions, perhaps if they were somehow
        forced (in spirit) to feel the savage agony of the unborn who are slaughtered
        so unspeakably, they might then look THEMSELVES for such sacramentals!
        They ARE going to PAY dearly, God help them.

        Reply
        • Hello Barry, It’s a joy to hear from you.

          Yes so their sins are not our sins.

          I hope that you know that here in France we reside in a cesspit.

          but…………………………….

          Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins and lead all souls to heaven especially those in most need of your mercy.

          Reply
          • Hi Christopher, am aware of the bad state of France. And Ireland is
            not much better. It is the age of apostasy and has been for many years
            and sadly, worse much worse is to come…..
            Stay strong, stay faithful, keep it steady, and maintain hope.

      • Dear Margaret,

        You are a genius.

        I dare you to send this to her! In fact………… maybe that could be the good route to go. We could send medals repeatedly to all those that are inflicting Jesus Christ himself from the top to the bottom.

        Instead of writing letters we could send Medals that have been dipped in holy water!

        Brilliant.

        Reply
        • I wish I could agree with you Christopher, and Margaret as well.
          But for some reason I am left with this Scriptural quote: ” Pearls before swines” when thinking about Ploumen.

          She knowingly is enjoying seeing her diabolical agenda accepted by the Church.
          She claims she was surprised that the Vatican would give this medal to her, knowing her involvement with funding of abortions, etc. She lied as well.

          Reply
          • Indeed, in principal what is needed is an exorcism of the Vatican just as suggested by Fr. Amorth before he went to his eternal reward. But even with that and even with a ‘team’ of exorcists it would be a monumental task. From what I am reading from contemporary exorcists, what used to take a relatively short period of time to rid one of a demon, it now takes 3 times as long…… they are saying the demons are supercharged in strength……so can you only imagine what it would take to get rid of the legion that now occupies the Vatican???………St. Michael the Archangel, please please come to our aid!!!

      • And in addition to that, if possible, add a green scapular to that. I’m sure our Holy Father and some of the cardinals and bishops would like that as well.

        Reply
  5. I agree with those commenters who find absurd the argument that it is not the pope, but his subordinates, who are advancing this cause.

    I stand by the case I’ve been making for the past couple of weeks, which is that Francis is a liar when it comes to his opposition to abortion, as evidences by his friendship with Bonino and Sachs, his acceptance of Ehrlich and his refusal to say anything about the Ploumen award.

    That said, it is important to note that voices from across the Catholic spectrum, who may not necessarily agree with us on this, are nevertheless saying that the Vatican’s credibility problem is growing here.

    Reply
    • I agree with that too Steve, as you already acknowledge because he runs such a tight ship it’s virtually impossible to believe he doesn’t approve of his underlings deviations from justice. The Vatican historically a beacon of light is now an abhorrent source of darkness.

      Reply
    • Besides the Remnant and EWTN, I’d like to see some mainstream channels such as Catholic Answers and Church Militant call out PF for his errors. There is so much Papolatry in this world that we tend to forget that the Pope is bound by his predecessors and Christ, he’s supposed to be the Supreme shepherd and the guardian of the Catholic faith and it looks as though as he’s on the other side judging by his actions.

      Reply
      • Catholic Answers? LOL! I used to read those forums from time to time, until the Francis apologetics got so out of control, I fled in disgust.

        Reply
      • Catholic Answers???? In the UK Austen Ivereigh runs this under the aegis of Opus Dei. They are now advertising a forthcoming lecture:

        “You are warmly invited to our upcoming academy ‘The Proclamation of Life in a Missionary Key’ on 13th February, held at the University of Notre Dame in London. We are very fortunate to have Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia flying out to speak to us. ”

        Paglia: President of the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAL) & Grand Chancellor of the Pontifical John Paul II Theological Institute for Matrimonial and Family Science.

        Chiodi of the PAL has just said artificial contraception may be morally obligatory in some circumstances. Such is a forerunner for making abortion obligatory in similar circumstances.

        Reply
          • You need to be careful with such allegations. The Daily Mail made similar ones and Ivereigh successfully sued them for libel.

        • I’m understanding this to mean that this ‘lecture’ is the initiative of Opus Dei? If this is what you’re saying Opus Dei has now officially gone to the other side IN TOTAL.

          Reply
        • Very careless of me. I confused Catholic Answers with Catholic Voices. It is the latter that is run by Austen Ivereigh. It does hold itself as being the place to give the Catholic view. The connection with Opus Dei is: Jack Valero, coordinator and co-founder of Catholic Voices, is also Press Officer for Opus Dei in the UK.

          My impression is that they lean towards the liberal side of things which is not surprising in view of Ivereigh’s role but I have often wondered how Jack Valero fits in on all of this in view of the orthodoxy of Opus Dei although some people in Opus Dei do surprise me!

          Reply
  6. This woman received a trinket and the error has once again shown us that the powers of darkness are in places where they shouldn’t be. The positive is that at least, we are aware of this humongous error and this has been noticed.

    What’s worse is when the pro death politicians and Catholics receive communion without a great deal of objection from the people who are supposed to guide us. As stated before in our parish the confessional is empty but the communion line is full. Our priest frequently mentions confession in his homilies, he offers confession three times per week, he will hear your confession outside of the times if you ask for it, and yet nobody gets off their backsides to go.

    Reply
  7. The author has framed the discussion in terms which are a little too narrow, since it focuses primarily on abortion. The question should be “Does the Vatican have an anti-life agenda?” and the answer is a most definite “yes”. Its leader is Francis. The anti-life agenda posits that there are too many people on the planet (or soon will be) and something must be done! The question then becomes…“what must be done?”. The answer is invariably…“curb population growth” and among those who hold to this position, there’s an almost unanimous belief that abortion is one of the “solutions” which should be applied to the “problem”. Euthanasia and contraception are the other “solutions”, of course and all are gravely evil and contrary to Catholic moral teaching but all need to be included in this discussion.

    The evidence against the Vatican in this regard, is now overwhelming. Only a couple of weeks back, the Italian theologian Chiodi, was waxing lyrical about contraception, saying that it is not only permissible in some situations but indeed may also be a moral imperative. This fits a pattern with which we’re now familiar; Francis using his wingmen to push the envelope while he remains on the periphery. We saw this before the Synods on the Family, with Kasper, Spadaro et al., doing his dirty work and it’s happening again as they get ready to shred Humanae vitae.

    To the above incident, add Francis’ lauding of Emma Bonino, the gutting of the Pontifical Academy for Life and its re-population with certain individuals whose credentials are certainly not pro-life, the recent Vatican seminars with advocates of population control and eugenics from the fields of science and politics, the coarse remark to journalists aboard an airplane that we “don’t have to breed like rabbits”, the constant emphasis on the environment, “sustainability” and saving the planet, Francis’ refusal to publicly use his bully pulpit to lobby against the liberalization of abortion laws in Italy even as he shills constantly about Muslim refugees and carbon dioxide emissions, his shunning of public marches for life and so much more. His infrequent condemnations of abortion are pure prole-feed; he’s an actor reading from a script on such occasions and saying things that a Catholic Pope is supposed to say from time to time. The purpose is to buy himself wiggle room to implement the real agenda and to reassure the few pewsitters who might be starting to feel uneasy and awaken from their slumber.

    At this point, connecting the dots is easy and the true priorities of Francis are clear; allowing Muslims unrestricted access to Europe, the destruction of the Catholic Church’s moral teaching especially as it relates to homosexuality and the implementation of measures to advance the earthly utopia.

    Reply
    • ‘The answer is invariably…”curb population growth” and among
      those who hold to this position, there’s an almost unanimous belief that
      abortion is one of the “solutions” which should be applied to the
      “problem”.’

      Yes, in this way of thinking abortion is the principle safety net, saving us from the scourge of too many people!

      Reply
    • Excellent summation!! Of particular relevance is this: “His infrequent condemnations of abortion are pure prole-feed; he’s an actor reading from a script on such occasions and saying things that a Catholic Pope is supposed to say from time to time. The PURPOSE (my emphasis) is to buy himself wiggle room to implement the real agenda and to reassure the few pewsitters who might be starting to feel uneasy and awaken from their slumber.” ………This is exactly the reason for his Catholic declarations he throws out at us from time to time. He knows that the animals are getting restless, so he administers a tranquilizer every once in a while, that allows him to ‘continue on in the swinging of his wrecking ball.’ He is a LIAR to the nth degree. But then, so is his boss who has been a LIAR from the beginning.

      Reply
  8. “As we have already explained, Ploumen … is a minister of development for Holland and a super-activist for abortion and ‘LGBT’ rights.”

    The above citation from the article illustrates once again — and for the millionth time — that Abortion and Sexual Transhumanism are of a piece — two hideous sides of the same anti-human coin. They are the inseparable tag-team that the devil uses to attack the Human Race that God created, both by killing human beings (abortion) and by killing being human (lgbt).

    I pray that the many Catholics and other people of good will who still think that its possible to separate these two assaults on the nature of man will finally realize that both Abortion and Sexual Transhumanism are conjoined hydra heads of the very same diabolical dragon.

    Holy Family, pray for us!

    Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us!

    St. Peter Damian, pray for us!

    Reply
  9. This may sound simplistic to some but I am a simple man. This whole issue with the Vatican and advocates of abortion is like a farmer telling his son to lock the chicken house but make sure the fox has a key. The whole thing is way beyond simple disgust. Today is the historic feast of the Espousels of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Ora pro nobis peccatoribus.

    Reply
  10. 675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the mystery of iniquity in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of
    apostasy from the Truth.The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in the place of God and his Messiah who has come in the flesh

    676 The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope that can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the “intrinsically perverse” political form of a secular messianism.

    677 The Church will enter the glory of the kingdom only through this final Passover, when she will follow her Lord in his death and Resurrection. The kingdom will be fulfilled, then, not by a historic triumph of the Church through a progressive ascendancy, but only by God’s victory over the final unleashing of evil, which will cause his bride to come down from heaven. God’s triumph over the revolt of evil will take the form of a the Last Judgment after the final cosmic upheaval of this passing world.

    Reply
  11. Liliane Ploumen WAS minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation from 5 November 2012 to 26 October 2017. She previously was chairwoman of the Labour Party (2007–2012). Her Labour Party is a member of the European Party of European Socialists and the global Progressive Alliance. In the Dutch general election of 2017, the PvdA (as the Labour Party is called) suffered the biggest defeat in Dutch electoral history, receiving only 5.7% of the votes and losing 29 of its 38 seats, making it only the seventh-largest faction in the chamber – its worst showing ever. However, due to preferential votes Ms Ploumen still won a seat in the Dutch House of Representatives in 2017. Her party no longer participates in the actual governing coalition. Does this make any difference as for the complete devaluation of the Pontifical Order of St. Gregory the Great? Alas, I don’t think so.

    Reply
  12. “If only Comrade Stalin was told of these gulags he would put a stop to it all!” True devotees always have a means of deluding themselves.

    Reply
    • Oddly enough, he quite possibly did “put a stop to it” (if we’re talking about the biggest spate of killings by far, in the late 30s). The archives and the statistics for executions and labour-camp sentences both give some support to the narrative that 1938 was a counter-move by Stalin against Ezhov and others leading the mass killing campaign he had tolerated up to that point. If this is correct, Stalin realised that the killings were destabilising the country, and that this was quite possibly the intention of those prosecuting it. If that is true, then there was more substance to the charges in the 1938 trials than people think. The figures for executions falls very sharply at that point. Even now, a quarter century after the collapse, Soviet history is murkier than popular accounts suggest, and a lot more still has to be dredged up. Khrushchev’s charges against the dead Stalin (his famous “secret” speech of 1956) seems to have been self-serving, since he himself was heavily involved in the killings of the late 30s.

      Even if Stalin did wind down the late 30s killing campaign, that still leaves him with a lot of unjustly shed blood on his hands, of course.

      Stalin suffered a slow and solitary death – perhaps enough time to start recollecting what he’d learnt in the seminary before he turned to communism and repent of his dreadful sins?

      Reply
  13. The following is my take on the globalist attitude toward “overpopulation”. Memo to all globalists/Marxists/Communists. “For the New World Order to be implemented successfully, the herd has to be culled. The herd is too large and too widespread, which makes it uncontrollable. This could lead to pockets of rebellion against the elite ruling class. There are four ways to reduce the herd to manageable levels: 1) contraception for the heterosexuals, 2) abortion as back-up to contraceptive failures ( this is real genius as it not only terminates the fetus, but also precludes any offspring of the fetus if it was allowed to live), 3) the indoctrination of children to homosexuality so that they will not reproduce, and 4) at the other end of the spectrum, euthanasia, for the ones who have lived long enough to become useless eaters. We are also studying the feasibility of routine sterilization of the children by tubal ligation and vasectomy as a more cost-effective and easier method than items 1 and 2. In this way, we will achieve a much smaller utilitarian population who will have their basic needs equally met, and will have meaningful work assigned to them to benefit our small ruling class, who being of the highest intelligence, will finally bring to fruition the vision of the great Karl Marx, and establish Utopia on Mother Earth. At our next meeting, we will discuss the status of those important people who are on board with our program, such as leaders of the UN, the EU, top US Democrats, and, of course, our friends in the Vatican.”

    Reply
    • Do a search for “Georgia Guidestones” on YouTube and prepare to be appalled. One of their key principles is that the earth’s human population should be no more than 500 million people. That translates, I believe, to a 93% die-off/kill-off of the current population.

      Alex Jones may be extreme, but I do believe he is absolutely right on-target about the evil of the globalist power-freaks.

      Reply
      • I have debated these people from time to time and always there are “good sound reasons” why they don’t “go first”. Same reasons the use of jets, motorcades, air-conditioning, big houses and energy-consuming and waste-producing conventions, courtiers and entourages are essential elements in the lives of Algore and the Pope.

        Reply
        • They won’t “go first” nor will their children and grandchildren, because they think they are better than the rest of us “unwashed masses”.

          Reply
      • I once showed the GA Guidestones to my fairly liberal super science fan agnostic father-in-law; hoping he’d gain some insight into the motivations of the population alarmists. He thought it all sounded great. He is a really nice guy and I love him to pieces. Scary, no?

        Reply
  14. The Vatican and the Modern Church has the problem that many of its members are ashamed and embarrassed to be seen believing in the articles of the Faith. All the cool and hip people, all the journalists and gays, all the environmentalists and cultural elites, don’t believe any of that old stuff anymore. They don’t want to be associated with “conservatives”, or at least what they think of as conservatives. What they don’t realize is that the 1960’s counterculture (never well thought out) is now the culture, and the conservatives are the ones who are cool and smart and questioning authority.

    “A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it.”

    ― G.K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...