en English
nl Dutchen Englishfr Frenchit Italianes Spanish

Just another WordPress site


Men are we, and must grieve when even the shade
Of that which once was great, is passed away.”

(William Wordsworth, “On the extinction of the Venetian Republic”)

Readers of these “Comments” last week noticed of course that there was no room for the promised analysis of three comparisons made by the Superior General (SG for short) of the Society of St Pius X in support of the Society’s position that Catholics may accept to be inoculated with the Covid “vaccine” or jab. A criticism of these comparisons follows below, not for the pleasure of criticising the Society, God forbid, but because it is in today’s all-engulfing confusion so important to think as clearly as one can. Truth alone can be a solid basis for sane action.

Answering questions after his lecture on “The Mission of the SSPX” at the Society’s Press Conference for Catholic Tradition held in the USA last December, the SG began by presenting the principle of St Thomas Aquinas (2a2ae Q.78, a4) which allows of profiting by the sins of others as long as there is no co-operation in the sin as sin. And then the SG quotes three comparisons to illustrate the application of this principle to the case of accepting a Covid inoculation tainted by the sin of abortion through its resort, for its research or testing or production, to foetal tissue obtained from abortions. Note that comparisons always illustrate, but they also “always limp” (Latin saying), because they always have a good leg, the part that illustrates, and a bad leg, a part that does not apply. How well do the SG’s comparisons apply?

First comparison: just as everybody agrees that to take a cornea from the corpse of a man murdered a few hours ago, so long as one had nothing to do with the murder, is legitimate, so everybody should agree that to take foetal tissue from a baby just aborted is legitimate, so long as one had nothing to do with the abortions involved. However, how can a single murder, completely unconnected with the taking of the corpse’s cornea, be compared with today’ s foetal industry (as it can be called), deliberately ripping God knows how many foetuses from their mothers’ wombs to be torn apart while still living, with no anaesthetic, for their variety of tissues to serve modern medicine in a variety of ways? True (good leg), I had nothing directly to do with all those abortions, nor did many of all the patients profiting from them. But when the fury of God descends upon the foetal industry, will many of us have deserved to escape it?

Second comparison: just as a Catholic organisation cannot spend for Islam money given to it for a Catholic purpose, but it can accept property of Islam given for a Catholic purpose, so a Catholic cannot accept an inoculation given for a sinister purpose but he can accept it for a decent purpose. However, the purpose of the giver is not the sole reason for accepting or refusing a gift. For instance, if I know that a gift of money comes from stolen goods, the Church may not accept it, however pious was the giver’s purpose, because the gift is tainted in itself. Now the Covid inoculation is thoroughly tainted in itself: medically it is murderous, morally it comes from the foetus industry and politically it means compliance with the New World Order and Communism. Only a quite exceptional purpose can justify accepting it, because the triple taint is obvious to anyone who spends just a few hours investigating on the Internet.

Third comparison: just as meat that has been offered to idols can be eaten afterwards (so long as there is no scandal) by Catholics, because they know that idols are nothing (I Cor. VIII), so Catholics may accept the Covid inoculation because they believe that it has no religious implications. However, States all over the world continue to impose tyrannical restrictions in order to get all their citizens inoculated, despite the catastrophic injuries and deaths caused by the inoculation. This strongly suggests that health was never their main concern. All the evidence tells that the jab was not for the “virus,” but the “virus”(still not isolated) was for the jab. The inoculation has huge religious implications, being merely part of Judeo-masonry’s great war on God. Read the end of the tenth of the 24 Protocols of the Sages of Sion.

Kyrie eleison.

Translate »

Eleison Comments

Weekly Column Delivered To Your Inbox!

Available in five languages.