When the Spotlight Turns: How The Kurgan’s Own Words Expose His Double Standard on Marriage and Sedevacantism
For someone who prides himself on being fearless, blunt, and unflinchingly devoted to Catholic truth, The Kurgan has a strange habit of going soft when the subject is himself.
In a now-forgotten YouTube video posted after our first written debate on SocialGalactic, The Kurgan attempted to do what he does best: insult the questioner, dodge the substance, and change the rules just enough to keep his ego intact. But in doing so, he gave us something even more valuable: a timestamped record of exactly how inconsistent, evasive, and ultimately self-serving his theology really is.
This post will walk through the key moments of that video—and show how, from the very beginning, The Kurgan has twisted Canon Law to exempt himself from the very judgments he hurls at others.
🎯 The Core Issue: Marriage and Canon Law
Let’s recall the central topic: Was The Kurgan ever validly married before his “conversion,” and if so, was his current marriage ever reviewed, annulled, or declared valid by any Church authority?
The question is simple, grounded in centuries of Catholic tradition:
“A valid natural marriage between two unbaptized persons remains binding after baptism unless proven otherwise.” (See Canons 1060 and 1085)
This means that even a non-Catholic marriage—so long as it was between a man and woman, freely entered into—is presumed valid. It must be investigated, not ignored.
But instead of addressing this, The Kurgan evaded.
📺 What He Said in the Video
In the video (archived from the transcript), The Kurgan tries to wriggle free from canon law by saying:
“I got married before I was Catholic. So… canon law doesn’t apply.”
This is false on multiple levels:
-
Canon Law does apply to anyone seeking to enter the Catholic Church and regularize their sacramental life.
-
A prior natural marriage does not disappear upon baptism or conversion. It must be reviewed—especially if the person remarries.
-
Every Catholic is required to investigate prior bonds before a new marriage. This is not a bureaucratic formality—it is an expression of the Church’s commitment to the indissolubility of marriage.
To suggest that “canon law doesn’t apply” reveals either deep ignorance or deliberate obfuscation. Either way, it’s bad theology.
🧠 Selective Application: Canon Law for Thee, but Not for Me
In this same video, The Kurgan insists:
-
Canon 188.4 proves all Novus Ordo bishops have lost their offices.
-
Pope Francis is not a pope because of "manifest heresy."
-
Every modern priest is suspect unless proven trad.
Yet somehow, when it comes to his own marital history, the law doesn’t apply. The rules don’t matter. The tribunal is irrelevant. The process is unnecessary.
This is exactly what Christ condemned in the Pharisees:
“They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves will not lift a finger to move them.” (Matthew 23:4)
🎭 From Theologian to Performer
Let’s be honest: the entire video was not a response—it was a performance. His tone switched from dismissive to defensive to mocking, all in an effort to pretend that I didn’t matter.
But if I didn’t matter, why dedicate an entire video to me?
If my question was so “ignorant,” why avoid answering it directly?
If I were the one misrepresenting Canon Law, why not cite a single source to prove it?
Because he couldn’t. And he knew it.
🤹 Logical Fallacies in Full Display
The Kurgan’s video relies heavily on these tactics:
-
Strawman: Pretends I accused him of being "damned" instead of asking a canonical question about marriage.
-
Ad Hominem: Attacks my knowledge and status instead of addressing my argument.
-
Special Pleading: Applies strict standards to others (e.g., Pope Francis) while exempting himself.
-
Appeal to Self: Asserts authority without citing any actual sources.
In short, he didn’t rebut me—he evaded me.
🔁 Pattern of Inconsistency
This wasn’t a one-time slip. It fits a growing pattern:
-
He calls Rachel Fulton Brown a heretic… until she’s on his show. Then he calls her “deeply devotional.”
-
He says Protestants are hell-bound… unless they're Vox Day.
-
He says Canon Law must be obeyed… unless it affects his own life.
This isn’t a theology. It’s a personality cult with Canon Law as a prop.
🪞Final Thought: Truth Isn’t Optional
Every Catholic, no matter how tough they talk, must submit to the truth.
The Kurgan loves to say:
“Truth doesn’t care about your feelings.”
But the real truth is:
Canon Law does not care about your YouTube subscriber count.
It applies to popes.
It applies to Protestants.
And yes—it applies to former atheists turned Catholic YouTubers with multiple marriages.
He cannot escape that.
And the more he tries to avoid it, the more he reveals that his Catholicism is not built on faith, doctrine, or tradition… but image.
Big Takeaway: The Kurgan’s early video confirms what we've seen ever since—when challenged with Catholic truth that touches his own life, he doesn't roar. He runs. His theology has no room for accountability, only applause. But the Church—thank God—is not built on bravado. It's built on Christ. And Christ doesn’t dodge questions. He answers them.
Comments
Post a Comment