Francis advances a "mercy" which leads souls to persevere in sin and so be lost

Francis is putting mercy before doctrine and encouraging delusion* as reported here.

In one of his sermons, Saint Alphonsus de Liguori warned, "'But God is merciful.'  Behold another common delusion by which the Devil encourages sinners to persevere in a life of sin!  A certain author has said that more souls have been sent to Hell by the mercy of God than by His justice.  This is indeed the case; for men are induced by the deceits of the Devil to persevere in sin, through confidence in God's mercy; and thus they are lost.

God is merciful.  Who denies it?  But, great as His mercy is, how many does He every daysend to Hell?  God is merciful, But He is also just, and is, therefore, obliged to punish those who offend Him.  And 'His mercy,' says the divine mother, extends 'to them that fear Him.' (Luke 1:50).  But with regard to those who abuse His mercy and despise Him, He exercises justice...

The Lord pardons sins, But He cannot pardon the determination to commit sin.  Saint Augustine says, that He who sins with the intention of repenting after his sins, is not a penitent but a scoffed.  Irrisor est non poenitens.  But the Apostle tells us that God will not be mocked.  'Be not deceived; God is not mocked.' (Gal 6:7).  It would be a mockery of God to insult Him as often and as much as you pleased, and afterwards to expect eternal glory." (Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Sermons For All the Sundays in the Year).

*  See here.

What can be said of a Papacy which allows financial contributions to an illegitimate political party which advances the Culture of Death?

 A report that the Vatican, under Francis, contributed financially to the Hillary Clinton campaign is sure to send shockwaves throughout the Church.

Far too many corners of the Catholic Church have become chummy with the Democratic Party which advances the Culture of Death and a sodomite agenda.  See here for example.

Judie Brown has said it well:

"..let us be clear about one basic fact: without the right to life, there is no other right that can ever be exercised. The victim of abortion dies; he or she can never make the kinds of decisions that you have made. So, fundamentally, if a political party favors the execution of the innocent before birth, nothing that party does can be valid. By abdicating the basic fact that every person's right to life must be protected, the party has said and acted in a way that exposes its commitment to murder. Abortion is murder - the Church defines it as such.

What then can be said of a Papacy which allows financial contributions to Hillary Clinton and her illegitimate political party?  Is such a Papacy legitimate?

Francis: Advancing a false irenicism which does not exclude error and falsehood..

In his Pentecost homily, Francis advanced a false irenicism which, he said, is opposed by those who "adopt rigid and airtight positions," who "become locked into their own ideas and ways of doing things..."  Such people, he asserted, "choose the part over the whole, belonging to this or that group before belonging to the Church. They become avid supporters for one side, rather than brothers and sisters in the one Spirit...Christians of the 'right' or the 'left', before being on the side of Jesus, unbending guardians of the past or the avant-garde of the future before being humble and grateful children of the Church."

Such is the false irenicism of Francis as he prepares the world for demon worship and the man-god.

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand (whom Pope Pius XII referred to as the "20th century Doctor of the Church," refutes this distorted idea of unity.  He writes, "St. Paul says there always will be heresies and he adds that God permits them to test the faithful. The disunity that is based on the incompatibility of truth and falsehood cannot and should not be avoided...To deplore disunity as such, instead of deploring heresies, instead of condemning these and calling them by their name, implies first of all that one would keep unity even at the cost of truth. But, of course, true unity presupposes unity in truth. Error, falsehood, can never be the basis for true unity. That holy, supernatural unity of which our Lord speaks in the priestly prayer ut unum sint - that all may be one - can come to pass only in the profession of divine truth, in the membership of the Mystical Body of Christ. It is a unity which includes some but, by the same token, excludes others. As Father Werenfried van Straaten [the Bacon priest, my note] reminds us, 'Jesus' prayer that all may be one'...may not be separated from His other words: 'I say unto you that whoever does not enter by the door of the sheepfold is a thief and a robber...I am the door!' The same principle is expressed in the first encyclical of Pope Pius XI: Pax Christi in regno Christi, the peace of Christ in the reign of Christ. Even on the natural level, unity that is not grounded in truth is either a very silly or a very dangerous thing. That shallow comradeship so typical of modern society, for example, in which we approach everyone regardless of his relation to God in a spirit of 'tolerance' - the spirit incarnated in the words of Frederick II of Prussia: 'Let everyone attain beatitude in his own fashion' - that is a foolish pseudo-unity lacking any common principle to truly unite men. Such 'togetherness,' however, can be worse than foolish; it can be a sinister force when it is based not on a lack of principle, but on a common error - on an idol. The togetherness found in Nazism or in Communism is an amazing thing. Devotion to the common idol goes so far that the devotees are ready to die for it. So many young Germans gave their lives in the war while screaming, 'Heil Hitler!' They had given themselves in unity, to the devil." (The Charitable Anathema, pp. 3-4).

This false irenicism will continue to play a significant role in this "pontificate" as the push for a one-world religion intensifies.

Image courtesy of Canon212.

The False Prophet advances an intellectual swindle to prepare men for the demon...

Life Site News reports:


"Pope Francis has praised the 1960s German moral theologian Bernard Häring, one of the most prominent dissenters from Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae, for his new morality which the pope said helped 'moral theology to flourish.'

'I think Bernard Häring was the first to start looking for a new way to help moral theology to flourish again,' he said in comments, published today by La Civiltà Cattolica, that were given during a dialogue with the Jesuit order which was gathered for its 36th general Congregation on October 24, 2016 in Rome.

Pope Francis gave his comments while answering a question about a morality he has often spoken about based on 'discernment.'

'Discernment is the key element: the capacity for discernment. I note the absence of discernment in the formation of priests. We run the risk of getting used to 'white or black,' to that which is legal. We are rather closed, in general, to discernment. One thing is clear: today, in a certain number of seminaries, a rigidity that is far from a discernment of situations has been introduced. And that is dangerous, because it can lead us to a conception of morality that has a casuistic sense,' he said."

In his book "Apologetics: A Philosophic Defense and Explanation of the Catholic Religion," Monsignor Paul J. Glenn, Ph.D, S.T.D., writes, "Let Catholic apologists..not surrender the cause of Christ...by a milk-and-water philosophy of tolerance. Tolerance is for external conduct; it is not for the mind; the mind cannot tolerate error for an instant." (p. 278). And this because error and truth are not "equally good." In other words, we must always strive to tolerate people [including those who disagree with us; and our worst enemies], but we cannot tolerate error. Differing opinions are not equally valid.

And in his important work "The New Tower of Babel," Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains that, "Although the dethronement of truth manifests itself in the most drastic and radical way in Nazism and Bolshevism, unfortunately many symptoms of this spiritual disease are also to be found in democratic countries. For example, in discussions we sometimes hear the following argument: 'Why should your opinion be more valid than mine? We are equal and have the same rights. It is undemocratic to pretend that your opinion is preferable.' This attitude is extremely significant because it reveals the complete absence of the notion of truth, the tacit elimination of truth as the determining norm for the value of an opinion....The immanent theme of every opinion is truth; the only thing that matters here is whether or not it is in conformity with reality..This brings us to another slogan disclosing the dethronement of truth. It is the often repeated statement 'It is true for me, but it may not be true for you.' The truth of a proposition is essentially objective; a truth which as such would be valid for one person only is a contradiction in terms. A proposition is true or false, but it can never be true for one person and false for another. The statement that a certain action is morally good may be true or false; but if it is true, it can never be false for any other person.." (pp. 56-58).

Some might be tempted to believe that the rejection of error and falsehood [ and here, again, we are speaking of ideas not persons] is something "negative" and even cult-like. But such is simply not the case. Again, Dr. Hildebrand explains: "Perhaps never before has there been as much intellectual fraud as there is today. In the mass media - and even in discussions on university campuses - this intellectual fraud appears chiefly as the manipulation of slogans designed to bluff the hearer or reader, and prevent him from thinking clearly. For a typical example, let us consider how the terms positive and negative are now most often used to discredit the refutation of pernicious errors and to give credit to the most shallow speculations. The intellectual swindlers who play such an important role in public discussions will often denominate as 'positive' propositions and attitudes they favor. They thereby seek to forestall questions of truth and value by enveloping their prejudices in a vague suggestion of 'creativity,' 'originality,' 'openness,' 'unaggressiveness.' This is the device of the cuttlefish. The moment one tries to grasp it, it emits a murky substance to confuse and deceive.

In reality, the popular slogan usages of positive and negative is a distortion of the genuine meanings of the terms. In proper usage they can refer to existence and nonexistence or to value and disvalue. They can refer to desirability and undesirability, or to answers to questions and demands, or to results of tests and inquiries. But when these terms are applied to attitudes of mind or to theses - by way of suggesting an evaluation - an intellectual fraud is committed; for they are then being used to evoke vague associations that distract from the question that alone matters - namely: Is this attitude objectively called for? Or: Is this thesis true?...It is the nature of truth to exclude every contradiction of itself. Thus, the rejection of errors and falsehoods can never be separated from the affirmation of truth. The one implies the other...

To give the impression that affirmations are 'positive' and denials 'negative' is to misrepresent completely the nature of judgments and propositions. This abuse of the language transforms the terms positive and negative into deceptive slogans and thus amounts to an intellectual swindle..." (The Charitable Anathema, pp. 45-47).

This is the intellectual swindle of the Masonic False Prophet in Rome, who accuses faithful Catholics of "rigidity" and of seeing only "black and white" rather than right and wrong; this to prepare men to worship the man-god (John 5:43).

Background on Bernard Haring here.

The Masonic Francis advances a pacifist "Gospel": Proximate preparation for Antichrist

Francis, the Masonic infiltrator foretold by Nubius, is now openly calling for a Luciferic one-world order while advancing a false pacifist "Gospel" of peace.

Advancing a pacifist "gospel," the Masonic Destroyer asserted that, "There is no god of war."

Really?

Exodus 15: 3-8:

"The Lord is a warrior, Lord is his name! Pharaoh’s chariots and army he hurled into the sea; the elite of his officers were drowned in the Red Sea. The flood waters covered them, they sank into the depths like a stone. Your right hand, O Lord, magnificent in power, your right hand, O Lord, shattered the enemy. In your great majesty you overthrew your adversaries; you loosed your wrath to consume them like stubble. At the blast of your nostrils the waters piled up, the flowing waters stood like a mound, the flood waters foamed in the midst of the sea."

Isaiah 42:13:

The Lord goes forth like a warrior,
like a man of war he stirs up his fury;
He shouts out his battle cry,
against his enemies he shows his might."

Deuteronomy 33:27:

The God of old is a refuge;
a support are the arms of the Everlasting. He drove the enemy out of your way and he said, “Destroy!”

In Matthew 10: 34-36, Jesus explains that He will be a cause of division, because not everyone is open to Him Who is Truth:

“Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. For I have come to set a man ‘against his father, a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one’s enemies will be those of his household.’"

"And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. But the one who restrains is to do so only for the present, until he is removed from the scene. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord (Jesus) will kill with the breath of his mouth and render powerless by the manifestation of his coming, the one whose coming springs from the power of Satan in every mighty deed and in signs and wonders that lie, and in every wicked deceit for those who are perishing because they have not accepted the love of truth so that they may be saved. Therefore, God is sending them a deceiving power so that they may believe the lie, that all who have not believed the truth but have approved wrongdoing may be condemned." (2 Thessalonians 2: 6-12).


This scriptural passage is most important. For here Paul emphasizes that the power of the Antichrist is one of seduction. Antichrist is a seducer who seeks to draw people away from the truth. He will work from within religion to seduce people to abandon traditional Christianity and to worship him. How effective will he be? Father Livio Fanzaga, commenting on The Antichrist by Vladimir Soloviev, writes, "So great is the Antichrist's power of seduction over believers - and they never realize it - that he will openly pose as the savior and restorer of religion and universal peace. He will deceive many."


But a tiny remnant will remain faithful. As Pope Paul VI said, "It is enough if only a tiny flock, no matter how small, survives." These words are sobering and should speak loudly to us. Father Fanzaga continues, "In Soloviev, the remnant is defined by recognition of Jesus Christ, 'Himself and all that comes from Him. This is their total horizon and the inexhaustible meaning of life. The tiny flock is not made up of the avant guard intelligentsia - the intellectuals and the theologians have joined the emperor. Neither are they defined in terms of a moral code. Rather they are those who refuse to serve two masters.' I tend to regard them as ordinary people, the humble and those who remain faithful." (The Wrath of God, p. 33).


Pope Benedict XVI, as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, in an essay entitled, "A Final Reflection: Soloviev's vision of eschatological unity," reminds us that: "..the Antichrist has his followers, and always even among those occupying the highest spiritual offices.....Therefore, we should already, and always, be motivated by concern lest, with big Christian words and wrapped in a cloak of Christianity, we become servants of the Antichrist, who wants to set up his kingdom in this world and to render the future kingdom of Christ redundant."

The Antichrist will tell us that Jesus has failed to put an end to violence but that he alone can promise "universal peace."

Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death.

Father Livio Fanzaga, writing about the Antichrist, says that, "Catholicism alone will resist him. How then do we destroy this superstition which alone obstructs the world's self-revelation? How do we destroy this superstition which divides mankind and which prevents man from being truly brotherly and free? The true Antichrist is revealed in the replies to these questions. Here is perceived his profound being as the man of iniquity. He will not tolerate the idea of men who adore any god other than himself. His intolerance obliges him to make an exception to his pacifism and his philosophy of non-violence. He is the greatest pacifist in the history of the human race, but because peace and justice really reign on earth he will make an exception to kill and destroy the great superstition of Catholicism, once and for all time..." (Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 124).

The False Prophet is doing his work.  Just as the Baptist paved the way for the God-Man Christ Jesus, so the Masonic False Prophet is paving the way for the man-god (John 5:43).

The hidden hand* of Luciferic ecclesiastical masonry has revealed itself.

*  See here

Pope Francis advances a counterfeit charity based on a "live and let live" philosophy

"For generations now, we have denied the food of revealed truth to our
children; and we have permitted the moral polluters to dump their garbage
into our culture with abandon. Why then, are we surprised that ours
has become a stunted and sick society?" - Patrick J. Buchanan

The times are growing very dark.  Everywhere signs are emerging which point to the appearance of the Man of Sin.  A Brazilian heavy metal band is announcing the Age of Antichrist (see here).  We have a Pontiff who preaches a "live and let live" philosophy (see here) which is nothing less than a counterfeit charity.

As Joseph Pronechen explains here, "Live and let live. Be nice. Be nonjudgmental. We must be more tolerant. So the sayings go.

'America, it is said, is suffering from intolerance,' wrote Servant of God Archbishop Fulton Sheen in his prophetic 1931 essay 'A Plea for Intolerance....It is not. It is suffering from tolerance: tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos. Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broad-minded.'

But shouldn’t we be tolerant? Isn’t that charitable?

'Real love involves real hatred,' countered Archbishop Sheen. 'Whoever has lost the power of moral indignation and the urge to drive the buyers and sellers from the temples has also lost a living, fervent love of truth. Charity, then, is not a mild philosophy of live and let live.'

Adds Father Andrew Apostoli of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, EWTN host and vice postulator of Archbishop Sheen’s cause, 'You can’t tolerate evil teachings and distortions of values against God’s laws and natural law to be accepted by society.'

It’s a daily challenge for many when confronted with today’s morally bankrupt political correctness masquerading as real tolerance.


True Tolerance
So how is a Catholic to walk the narrow road of true Christian tolerance with genuine love of neighbor and not stumble along the wide road of politically correct tolerance?
First, 'Love is not tolerance,' Archbishop Sheen wrote. 'Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it. It is not broad-minded about sin.'

Then the archbishop made an important distinction. 'Tolerance applies to the erring, intolerance to the error,' he noted. 'Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles. About these things we must be intolerant.'

We condemn the sin, but not the sinner, as Father Apostoli puts it: “That’s the kind of distinction Bishop Sheen is making. We have to be tolerant toward the person who many be weak, confused, mistaken in good faith or may even be deliberately promoting distortions.”
____________________________________________________________________________

In his book "Apologetics: A Philosophic Defense and Explanation of the Catholic Religion," Monsignor Paul J. Glenn, Ph.D, S.T.D., writes, "Let Catholic apologists..not surrender the cause of Christ...by a milk-and-water philosophy of tolerance. Tolerance is for external conduct; it is not for the mind; the mind cannot tolerate error for an instant." (p. 278). And this because error and truth are not "equally good." In other words, we must always strive to tolerate people [including those who disagree with us; and our worst enemies], but we cannot tolerate error. Differing opinions are not equally valid.

And in his important work "The New Tower of Babel," Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains that, "Although the dethronement of truth manifests itself in the most drastic and radical way in Nazism and Bolshevism, unfortunately many symptoms of this spiritual disease are also to be found in democratic countries. For example, in discussions we sometimes hear the following argument: 'Why should your opinion be more valid than mine? We are equal and have the same rights. It is undemocratic to pretend that your opinion is preferable.' This attitude is extremely significant because it reveals the complete absence of the notion of truth, the tacit elimination of truth as the determining norm for the value of an opinion....The immanent theme of every opinion is truth; the only thing that matters here is whether or not it is in conformity with reality..This brings us to another slogan disclosing the dethronement of truth. It is the often repeated statement 'It is true for me, but it may not be true for you.' The truth of a proposition is essentially objective; a truth which as such would be valid for one person only is a contradiction in terms. A proposition is true or false, but it can never be true for one person and false for another. The statement that a certain action is morally good may be true or false; but if it is true, it can never be false for any other person.." (pp. 56-58).

Some might be tempted to believe that the rejection of error and falsehood [ and here, again, we are speaking of ideas not persons] is something "negative" and even cult-like. But such is simply not the case. Again, Dr. Hildebrand explains: "Perhaps never before has there been as much intellectual fraud as there is today. In the mass media - and even in discussions on university campuses - this intellectual fraud appears chiefly as the manipulation of slogans designed to bluff the hearer or reader, and prevent him from thinking clearly. For a typical example, let us consider how the terms positive and negative are now most often used to discredit the refutation of pernicious errors and to give credit to the most shallow speculations. The intellectual swindlers who play such an important role in public discussions will often denominate as 'positive' propositions and attitudes they favor. They thereby seek to forestall questions of truth and value by enveloping their prejudices in a vague suggestion of 'creativity,' 'originality,' 'openness,' 'unaggressiveness.' This is the device of the cuttlefish. The moment one tries to grasp it, it emits a murky substance to confuse and deceive.
In reality, the popular slogan usages of positive and negative is a distortion of the genuine meanings of the terms. In proper usage they can refer to existence and nonexistence or to value and disvalue. They can refer to desirability and undesirability, or to answers to questions and demands, or to results of tests and inquiries. But when these terms are applied to attitudes of mind or to theses - by way of suggesting an evaluation - an intellectual fraud is committed; for they are then being used to evoke vague associations that distract from the question that alone matters - namely: Is this attitude objectively called for? Or: Is this thesis true?...It is the nature of truth to exclude every contradiction of itself. Thus, the rejection of errors and falsehoods can never be separated from the affirmation of truth. The one implies the other...

To give the impression that affirmations are 'positive' and denials 'negative' is to misrepresent completely the nature of judgments and propositions. This abuse of the language transforms the terms positive and negative into deceptive slogans and thus amounts to an intellectual swindle..." (The Charitable Anathema, pp. 45-47).

We live in evil times.  And at a time when the Church needs sound moral and intellectual guidance, we have a shepherd who appears to subscribe to an Epicurean philosophy.

Strange days.  Evil days.  The diabolical disorientation grows.  The Age of Antichrist nears.