Thursday, January 08, 2009

The International Criminal Court (ICC)

The International Criminal Court was created on July 18, 1998. The ultimate aim of the ICC, as explained here, is to "establish jurisdiction of a permanent international court capable of trying and convicting individuals who commit violations of international humanitarian law: war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and aggression. (The definitions are broad, and feminist influence in interpretation is considerable."

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." ( )
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." ( )
The possibility that the ICC could try the Pope is hardly far fetched. Pro-abortion groups have long planned to use the ICC to force abortion on countries and individuals unwilling to bend to other pressures. At the UN Beijing +5 Prepcom in 2000, at a panel discussion, Rhonda Copelon of the International Women's Human Rights Law Clinic, who served as the chief ICC legal strategist for the powerful UN Women's Caucus for Gender Justice, said the court was a "tool" that will serve as a "model" that she said "can be used to change domestic laws" to conform with feminist goals. ( )
During the preparatory conferences for the ICC, the UN Women's Caucus for Gender Justice released a pamphlet which proposed that "withholding abortion from raped women should be explicitly defined as a war crime and a crime against humanity." International Planned Parenthood followed up on this tack in June 2000 accusing the Pope and the Catholic Church of war crimes. "The opinion and actions of the Holy See in regard to sexual and reproductive health and rights are seen by many as a kind of war, a war that contributes to the suffering and deaths of millions of innocent people, a war not conducted with guns and fire but with condemnation and psychological terror," said the IPPF letter. ( )
Read full text here.
Related reading: New World Order to emerge in 2009?


Sanctus Belle said...

I know I've said this before, but I'll say it again: I can't think of a better reason for being persecuted, imprisoned or executed (read martyred) than resisting these false laws. Amen+

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

I believe the Church may be in the catacombs soon the way things are developing. Time will tell. But the days of being an ostrich-Catholic are over. If one cannot see the danger lurking on the horizon, one is truly blind.

Anonymous said...

Every Catholic who reads this post should contact c-fam to see what they can do. Jerry over at Dogpatch has a post pertaining to this organization. Do get involved.

Michael Cole said...

In England, one church has removed a crucifix because children find it "scary." In the New World Order, the crucifix - which has to do with sacrifice and pain - will be sanitized. This is just a harbinger of things to come. Antichrist will also outlaw the Holy Mass, which is a sacrifice.

The spirit of Antichrist will do everything to banish true Christianity and its message of a personal Savior Who died for our sins on a Cross.

You will note how the crucifix is deemed "scary" but the movies coming out of Hollywood as of late - such as Saw III, Hellboy and Twilight are not considered too "scary" for our youth.


Paul Anthony Melanson said...

The link to that story is here:

You are correct about the Antichrist abolishing the Holy Mass Michael. It was St. Alphonsus de Liguori, "La Messa e l'Officio Strapazzati" in Opere Ascetiche, who said: "The Devil has always managed to get rid of the Mass by means of the heretics, making them the precursors of the Antichrist who, above all else, will manage to abolish, and in fact will succeed in abolishing, as a punishment for the sins of men, the Holy Sacrifice of the altar, precisely as Daniel had predicted."

Anonymous said...

Mgsr. Schooyan's book sounds fascinating. I am looking for a translation in English. It is amazing that you hear nothing about all of this in the diocesan newspaper or at your parish. The silence is eerie.

Anonymous said...

Some of Msgr. Schooyans' books (but not La face cache de L'ONU) have been translated into English by Fr. John H. Miller, C.S.C., S.T.D., the late director of the Catholic Central Verein (Union) of America and editor of its magazine, Social Justice Review. See its website at for descriptions and reviews of its books by Msgr. Schooyans as well as by Fr. Miller.

Anonymous said...

Correction: Msgr. Schooyans' La face cache de l'ONU" is available in English (The Hidden Face of the United Nations) for $15 from SOCIAL JUSTICE REVIEW,
3835 Westminster Place, St. Louis MO 63108, 314.371.1653,

Also, ZENIT had an interesting interview the monsignor in 2000 (it is no longer available on ZENIT but cached at

Michel Schooyans on problems facing the family

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 11, 2000.

A three-day congress on "Children, Springtime of the Family and Society" began today at the Vatican, in preparation for the upcoming Jubilee of Families this weekend.

Some 6,000 people are attending the congress on children, including bishops, priests and couples in charge of the pastoral care of families. Among the experts on hand at the congress is Msgr. Michel Schooyans, regarded as one of the major experts in bioethics and demography in the Catholic world. ZENIT spoke with him about the objectives of the congress.

Msgr. Schooyans has just published the book "New World Disorder" ("Nuovo Disordine Mondiale," San Paolo publishers) in Italy. He is a professor at the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium. He achieved international fame with the publication of the book "The Totalitarian Deviation of Liberalism" ("La dérive totalitaire du libéralisme").

The Holy See has asked him to write the meditations that will be read during the "Families' Via Crucis" in St. Peter's Square this week.

ZENIT: The theme of the Jubilee of Families is "Children, Springtime of the Family and Society." Why was this theme chosen?

Msgr. Schooyans:

According to popular wisdom, the child who comes into the world is a "gift." This is a saying that our grandmothers repeated often, before the existence of an abundance of consumer goods to which we are accustomed today.

The child is not a burden. He is, above all, a gift, the most beautiful gift that a woman can give her husband; the most beautiful gift that a man can give his wife; the most beautiful gift that the family can give to society.

It is true that a birth does not produce anything and does not imply income, but it is a powerful stimulus for the parents who wish to give the child a pleasant environment, good education, clothes, vacations, etc. At the same time, the child stimulates the public powers to improve the infrastructure, the educational system, and to modernize.

Thus, the child not only stimulates the family, but also economic, social and political life. Therefore, it is aberrant to establish a simplistic principle according to which the child is a burden... and, therefore, abortion and sterilization are "economically preferable" to a birth.

Sometimes there is the feeling that some U.N. international agencies are happier over the birth of a cow than of a child. What is more, a baby seems to be regarded as a catastrophe.

ZENIT: "The family is the natural and fundamental element of society and has the right to be protected by society and the State," Article 16, 3, of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states. Unfortunately, 52 years after the publication of this declaration, representatives of developing countries believe that to defend the family implies to impede the intervention of United Nations organizations. In fact, the programs of population control in Asia, Latin America and Africa, involve sterilization and abortion, becoming genuine violations of human rights. How have we arrived at this situation?

Msgr. Schooyans:

Several convergent signs prove that the 1948 declaration is threatened. The threats come, above all, from the desire to prolong the list of human rights, including some "new rights," among which is the right to "sexual and reproductive health," which includes "the right of abortion," even for minors and without parental consent, the juridical recognition of homosexual couples and different models of the family.

The International Federation for Family Planning and Family Care International, together with many other organizations, are doing everything possible to spread this new mentality.

The European Union plays a fundamental role in this connection. In the U.N. International Conferences in Cairo and Beijing, it became one of the principal promoters of these "new rights." The Global Health Charter, prepared by the World Health Organization, also mentions them.

For this mentality, the heterosexual, classic family exists, but there is also the homosexual family. There is also the case of mothers "for rent," or of biological mothers who work for couples who cannot have children.

Cases thus arise that are impossible to resolve legally. Who is the mother? Who are the parents? Hence, the ambiguous use of the word family could lead to the disappearance of economic, social and cultural rights of traditional families.

ZENIT: At a recent meetings of sexologists in Berlin, professor Judith Mackay of Hong Kong, who works in the World Health Organization (WHO), said that in the future "only some obstinate, ultraconservative people will lead the rearguard resistance: throughout the world religions will accept the pill and other contraceptives, they will admit homosexuals and lesbians as priests, and they will struggle together in the U.N. against sexual discrimination. Whoever wishes to have descendants will be able to choose made-to-order children as regards their intellectual coefficient or hair color. 'Cybersex' will cause a crisis among couples: virtual eroticism will be the first reason for divorces. No one will feel as a man or woman for the whole of life, roles will disappear." According to WHO's expert, this is progress. What do you think?

Msgr. Schooyans:

A very active feminist current developed the "gender" ideology. It distinguishes the biological differences (sex) of the roles attributed by society to man and woman (the word "gender" stems from this). According to this ideology, the differences among human "genders" are not natural, but rather appeared in the course of history and are created by society. Hence, these are cultural differences.

According to this ideology, it is necessary to abolish totally all distinctions between men and women. Words like matrimony, family, mother must be eliminated, as they do not correspond to any of the realities admitted by this ideology. What is more, they recall historical situations that have been surpassed, which the ideology must denounce and destroy.

If the differences between man and woman are eliminated, the first consequence is that the masculinity and femininity proper to the human being no longer make sense. In this way, for the individual the body becomes a simple instrument to enjoy all kinds of pleasure - homosexuality, selfish pleasures - even if this implies abortion.

Clearly, we are faced with a plan that attempts to upset the cultural models. This is not just about adding new rights, but something far deeper: to radically reinterpret rights that had previously been recognized.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

Thank you for that information on where to purchase the book anonymous. I'm fortunate in that I read French (I'm Acadian) and am able to read the manuscript in the original. Often something is "lost in translation." There is an old expresion: "Every translator is a traitor." Thanks again.

Site Meter