As Monsignor Schooyans details in his book entitled "La face cache de L'ONU" (which exposes the agenda of the United Nations for a world government and dictatorship): "In 1948, the United Nations worked out and ratified the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights,' which recognized the dignity and primacy of the human person. Today, the UN and some of its agencies behave more and more openly as if the had received a mandate to develop a conception of human rights that is radically different from that expressed in 1948. According to the UN, man is a fragment of the cosmos, and has no eternal destiny. Man is the product of evolution and his final destiny is death. He is but an individual in search of pleasures, unable to recognize truth. This is the source of the new 'human rights' of the UN. These new rights are no longer recognized and declared; they are rather imposed, and are the expression of the will of the mightiest. Man must revere Mother-Earth, Gaia (the goddess of the earth in Greek mythology), in place of God, his Creator and the Creator of the earth. Under the pressure of some radical feminist and homosexual movements, the competence of the International Criminal Court...could be extended to 'crimes' against the so-called new human rights. For example, to the extent that abortion, homosexuality and euthanasia are recognized as 'new rights,' the opponents to these rights could be judged and sentenced by the International Criminal Court."
Read what LifeSiteNews had to say:
The Vatican has recognized the disparity in the vision of a world order from the perspective of the United Nations and from a Christian perspective. Writing in the Italian newspaper Avvenire in 2000, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, denounced the UN vision of a "new world order." Ratzinger noted that "at the base of this New World Order" is the ideology of "women's empowerment," which erroneously sees "the principal obstacles to [a woman's] fulfillment [as] the family and maternity." The cardinal advised that "at this stage of the development of the new image of the new world, Christians - and not just them, but in any case they even more than others - have the duty to protest." ( See here).
Landolt warned that the ICC is "a very dangerous thing" and suggested that "the Pope could be called before the ICC." Landolt's comments echo those of Dr. Richard G. Wilkins, Professor of Law at Brigham Young University. Wilkins, a leading authority on the ICC who regularly acts as legal counsel for pro-family NGOs (non-governmental organizations) at the United Nations, told LifeSite that the ICC could eventually be used to try "the Pope or other religious leaders" since issues such as abortion and homosexuality would inevitably fall within the ICC's jurisdiction. He explained that the ICC "currently is without sufficient checks and balances. It has the most powerful prosecutor ever with the vaguest criminal statute passed anywhere. The ICC leaves open to total discretion of the prosecutor and the court the determining of what the 'crimes' mean." (See here).
2 comments:
At this moment of history, we do not need "Catholics" within the Church founded by Jesus Christ agitating for homosexual sex and homosexual unions. The confusion caused by people like Fr. John Unni, John Kelly and other "rainbow Catholics" is undermining the Church at a time when the world sorely needs the truths of the Gospel.
They are traitors within the household of God. Trojan Horse Catholics seeking to destroy the City from within or at least weaken it so that the secular humanists and atheists on the outside can bring it down.
Would we have the "gay marriage" victory in New York if Cardinal O'Malley - and certain other Bishops - had spent more time defending the Church's teaching regarding homosexuality rather than working tirelessly to make homosexuals feel like their lifestyle is not really that serious?
Our Bishops are failing us. Just like the lukewarm, mediocre priests in their charge.
Post a Comment