Novus Ordo apostasy

A poster-boy for the culture of death - Sunday 23rd to Saturday 29th of July

There is really only one place to start in a review of this week, and that is with the most tragic death - in the true meaning of the word tragic - of Charlie Gard. This is one of the saddest and certainly most frightening stories that I have come to know in all of Western history.

If my understanding of the facts is correct, this is what happened:

  • An unwed couple gives birth to a boy with a rare genetic defect, untreatable to date.
  • The doctors decide that the boy's disease is so serious that he will not survive and they want to turn off the life support.
  • The parents then say that he should be able to die at home, in the loving embrace of a loving home instead of a sterile hospital.
  • The hospital refuses to discharge him insisting that he must die there.
  • The parents file a suit to bring him home.
  • The hospital challenges this.
  • In the meantime, this case has brought enough international attention to it that a doctor working in the U.S. proposes to have him flown there for further treatment, insisting that there is a slight chance that he could lead a relatively normal life if the treatment works.
  • The hospital still refuses to dismiss him. The courts still agree.
  • The parents have in the meantime managed to raise the money required to take him to the U.S., almost $2 million at the time of the boy's death.
  • The high court rules that the hospital can keep him.
  • The parents keep fighting.
  • The parents appeal to the EU.
  • The European Court refuses to hear the case.
  • Trump and Bergoglio get involved, with the former saying he is willing to fly the child to the U.S. for help and the latter that he is willing to have him flown to Rome.
  • The court case drags on.
  • The parents give up, having had the U.S. doctor fly in to the U.K. to physically examine the boy and with the doctor concluding that too much time has passed without treatment for there to be any hope. Had the treatment come earlier his chances might have been good.
  • The parents still want to take him to die.
  • The hospital refuses to do that and finally...
  • Little Charlie Gard dies in a sterile and cold hospital, surrounded by his parents.

I'll have to admit that I didn't really follow this story from the start, so some of the details and timeline might be a bit off, but I think I have captured the gist of it.

My readers can rest assured that I shall not insult their intelligence by even entertaining the idea that the state of the U.K. could at any time in these proceedings have been interested in the well-being of Charlie Gard. So we must look at why the state fought so hard to make sure that little Charlie Gard died in a hospital and was prevented from leaving the country to seek treatment elsewhere.

Beneath all the headlines, the principles that the U.K., and EU were fighting for are not that difficult to piece out. They are that the government:

  • Has an absolute right to decide who gets to live or die, depending on what they deem to be a worthy life.
  • Has supreme rights which trump parental rights - primarily the parents' rights to decide what is best for the child. This is in spite of the fact that nobody in the governent will mourn for the child, hold a wake for him, or even attend their funeral - that is, assuming they are generous enough to release the body from the hospital for burial.
  • Decides when you die.
  • Decides where  you die.

I'll simply point out that the reason for keeping him a prisoner instead of releasing him abroad for treatment was because the hospital decided that his life, even if the treatment had worked, would not have been worth living. In other words, if the government determines that your quality of life is low enough, it can keep you locked up in a hospital, preventing  you from seeking treatment from a doctor of your choice anywhere else, and depriving you of any life support.

How is this any different than the most despotic and evil regimes frequently brought up in these conversations? Is it not always the case that the principal at stake for these regimes, and what made their evil snowball, was the very idea that the government assumed the power to decide which lives were worthy of not killing and which ones could be disposed of?

If this doesn't sum up the culture of death, it's hard to think what does. The most startling thing is that the very premise that the government decides what is a life worth living based on its subjective quality measure was not even challenged, as far as I could tell. It has become so ingrained in us that the governnment has absolute power of all within its borders that nobody even notices when a fundamental right is at stake.

I mean, it's so obvious that the government was morally wrong that even Bergoglio intervened on the side of Charlie Gard! In other words, he must have seen it as a very safe space for grandstanding, this being the man who tells us not to obsess with the killing of the unborn, after all.

This is what 3 generations of legal killing of the unborn has led to. We have a society in which children can be killed in plain sight with nobody batting an eyelid. Yes, I know he died naturally, but in preventing him from seeking medical aid which could have saved his life, the government in effect murdered him.

The only other issue of any note is Donald Trump re-introducing the ban on transexuals in the military. What is common sense in every non-Western countries, and what would have been common sense in any country bar none just...

When our presumed allies are just as dangerous as our enemies - Sunday 16th to Saturday 22nd of June

The real big news this week were liturgical, with the translation of an article posted by Cardinal Sarah on the 10th anniversary of Summorum Publication. The article itself was published on the anniversary, but its translation was only published this week.

In that article Cardinal Sarah argues that Pope Benedict XVI's mutual enrichment has been perceived in too one-sided a manner and that we should also see how the Novus Ordo can enrich the Tridentine Mass. Supporters of this mentioned the lectionary of the Novus Ordo as one such area, where there is somethign to be learned from the 1960s Mass. One priest writign for the Catholic Herald was quite emphatic in this assertion and when confronted with opposition he doubled down and insisted that there is near unanimity that the new lectionary is better than the age-old one, and that it is only traditionalists who disagree with this. It never occurred to him, perhaps, that it is only traditionalists who matter in this debate, because the "conservative Catholics", as he calls them, have proved themselves to have strentgh which can only be compared with that of boiled spaghetti.

Those pointing out the absurdity of unifying the lectionaries included Joseph Shaw, Gregory DiPippo, Fr. Zuhlsdorf and Fr. Tim Finigan, to name a few whose articles I read. Fr. Tim Finigan, in particular, summed it up well by pointing out that perhaps the problem is that those who make comments on the Tridentine Mass simply lack familiarity with it, and he pointed towards Fr. de Souza as an example of one such person. That may well be the case, but the same can certainly not be said of Cardinal Sarah, the Prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship, and a man who, I am quite certain, has celebrated the Roman Rite on quite a few occasions. It is worth pointing out that he is generally considered to be a friend of tradition, and one of the more sane cardinals that we have.

The owner of the DeusExMachina blog saw it rather differently and saw it rather as an attempt by Cardinal Sarah to position himself in the fight for who takes over from Bergoglio. He pointed out that there are now 3 fronts, of which the dubia cardinals are one, then we have Cardinal Müller, who finally seems to have grown a reality-based perspective, and then we have Cardinal Sarah, who is reaching out to the middle ground which is opposed to Bergoglio's perversions, but is not quite willing to accept authentic Catholicism.

With regards to Cardinal Mũller, we had yet more interviews from him and Bergoglio is not painted in a good light, and neither is the Church in Europe generally. Nor should it be. Nonetheless, it is a bit rich coming from him now given he had a whole year to speak out about Amoris Laetitia in clear terms yet failed to do so, when he could have done much good. Now that he has been dismissed, anything coming out from him smells of sour grapes, no matter how truthful it is.

On the political side we had news of a report which came out from the OPCW, which monitors chemical weapons, in effect coming as close as it could to completely absolving the Assad government. It does not come out and say that in a direct manner, but let it be known that any report released by an international body of that sort which falls as far away as it did from the American and Western European positions is basically a confirmation that the EU and the U.S. are lying. Peter Hitchens has, as usual, done good work on this and his articles on this are well worth reading.

Then we had the MAKs airshow in Moscow, in which the MiG-35 made its public debut. One cannot say that the Russians have not done a good job of rebuilding their military infrastructure, and any time the Russians come up with a high-tech weapon it is good for peace. One should also take the time to not that there were very many countries involved in that airshow, and I hope that those who parrot the line that Russia is isolated can take the time to see that it is the EU and the U.S. which are isolating themselves on these issues.

This is no more evident than with the news that Turkey is on the verge of signing a deal with Russia to procure the highly advanced S400 anti-missile system, the best that Russia has to offer. Bear in mind that Turkey is a key NATO member, in fact, the flagship member of NATO apart from the U.S., given its strategic position both geographically and culturally! That Turkey would turn to Russia, the very country against whom NATO  propagates for its very existence, shows that around the world people have come to the realisation that it is better to turn away from the West. This comes not long after The Phillipines under Duterte made similar overtures to Russia, while essentially sabotaging its military alliance with the U.S. and it is also my understanding that even Croatia has purchased military weapons.

We also had the first joint Russian-Chinese naval drill in the Baltics. All the tough anti-Russian propaganda has done, it seems, is to drive Russia and China closer together. Make no mistake about it, this was a message to the West boldy stating "this world is yours to ruin as you please no longer!"

Finally we have more information of just how heinously anti-Catholic Bergoglio really is. Indeed, it wouldn't be a normal week nowadays without more details about how the pope is anti-Catholic. The man is not happy with even Novus Ordo vocations. We can therefore dismiss, as I already had before, any claim from him that he is concerned about a lack of vocations.

Returning to Cardinal Sarah, it is quite obvious to see that as long as a Catholic holds Vatican II as a good thing,...

Pages

Subscribe to Novus Ordo apostasy