Currently a trial is going on in the Vatican City that makes a mockery of justice . A foolishly idealistic former Butler of the pope was charged with leaking correspondence to wikileaks, a crime that he is probably guilty of, and is on trial in what seems like a highly medieval sort of trial (and not in a good way). By the laws of the Vatican City, his religious ‘confession’ is likely to be used against him in a court of law, the judge has barred evidence gathered by the Vatican City investigators from being used in court because it is favorable to the defendant, and the only hope of something approaching justice is the expectation of a papal pardon to absolve him of guilt after the (seemingly inevitable) conviction and free him from an Italian jail. The conviction is seen as nearly certain in part because of the embarrassment it caused to the corrupt papal establishment, apart from any question of motive. Who could accept such a procedure as legitimate, and see it as anything other than a barbaric and heathen and satanic sort of perversion of justice?
It should be noted that the Vatican City is not alone in such procedures. In fact, the nation of Thailand has nearly an identical sort of procedure of injustice when it comes to offenses against lese majeste. Once someone is denounced of that crime, and arrested, there is little justice to be found. Bail is routinely denied, trials for offending the reputation of the military or royal establishment are dragged on, guilt is based on the offense that is felt and not the offense that is meant, and confessions are regularly obtained on the expectation of a royal pardon. It is as if the injustice of such a crime even existing (especially with such draconian penalties), as well as the injustices of the justice system in trying and convicting such offenses, tampering with or denying evidence that would be favorable to the accused, and imprisoning someone for what ought not to be a crime at all are completely washed away by the simple act of a pardon from a semi-divine authority. The fact that the pardon is designed to show a certain generosity of spirit and is part of a pageant of staged reconciliation and mercy does not seem to be held against the ruler as much as the message that transparency and openness are dangerous threats to the survival of corrupt regimes that cannot be admitted to be corrupt seems to be clearly communicated to the population at large.
Most people are reasonably clever about understanding such points. In order for people in charge of corrupt authoritarian regimes to be seen as more than merely human, there must be the widespread belief in their superhuman virtue. Because we are all flawed and human, for any of us to be seen as more virtuous than the rest of humanity, the truth must be covered up and denied. The illusion of virtue and moral excellence for most leaders, especially those leaders of authoritarian satanic regimes like the Roman Catholic Church, is an illusion based on active deception, the covering up of unpleasant and inconvenient truths, and the punishment of anyone who would stand up and say to anyone that the emperor has no clothes. Since most people are far more interested in getting along than they are in standing up, and potentially suffering, for the truth, it is easy through the use of repressive punishment to communicate the point that openness is a threat to the corrupt regime and that the survival of the regime depends (in the minds of its officeholders and defenders) in persecuting those who are too open and too free with their thoughts and opinions and reasoning. Most people, in such an environment, take refuge in a hypocritical silence, keeping their head down and trying to stay out of trouble. Only the most foolishly idealistic refuse to play along.
And yet there is a delicate balance. Most authoritarian regimes are conscious of their fragility, on their dependence on a very small elite for such active support as they receive. A satanic regime must show its power and its ability to crush threats against its illusory legitimacy without provoking rebellion of a sullen and oppressed populace. Too much oppression against a populace that is feeling its strength will lead to rebellion, which is costly and destructive to defeat (and potentially ruinous to one’s own hold of unmerited power and privilege). Too little repression and a government does not feel the proper fear and respect from a populace, or feel the sufficient distance between ruler and ruled that makes power worth possessing for the authoritarian satanic regime. One of the ways this delicate balance is maintained is through the judicious use of pardons, encouraging confessions first (to admit that openness and blunt honesty is an offense against the state, thus diminishing the regard that truth is held in by the public at large), and then a pardon afterward to show that the regime is not in fact authoritarian but is governed by merciful and loving rulers who have the best interests of their people at heart. The show must go on of pretended virtue and pretended obedience, and soon the public at large understands that it is far easier to play along than to suffer for the sake of truth and justice.
Interestingly enough, the advent of wikileaks has pointed to a weakness in satanic regimes. Satan’s house has always been divided between authoritarian regimes and those who are unable to accept central authority at all. There has always been a division between the Satanic spirit of authoritarian rule and that of libertarian anarchy, both of which are opposed to the limits of a godly constitutional regime but who hate each other just as much. What wikileaks has done is threaten the silence and ignorance of a populace that encouraged blind obedience from the sheeple to their corrupt and predatory leaders. The greater knowledge of the naked state of the emperor, and of the venal corruption of officeholders, threatens that obedience, marking an attempt by the anarchic side of Satan’s house to overthrow the authoritarian leadership that has long been dominant in humanity. And that truth, that knowledge, must be kept hidden in order for insecure regimes to preserve their power, since it is based on illusion and lies to begin with. The truth will set us free, but most of us do not want to be set free if we base our happiness and authority on lies to begin with, since it will set us free from that which we hold most dear. In such an environment, anyone who believes in openness and transparency will be a threat to our own well-being. And there is nothing they can do to make us feel safe, since it is their very character and idealism that threatens us in the first place. In such a circumstance, all we can do is confess our sins to our heavenly Father, and seek His pardon.