Francis the Liberal-Part V

Can it be permissible to attack Francis the liberal as this writer has so vigorously done? After all, is he not supposed to be the vicar of Christ? Is it charitable to insult the man who is supposed to be the visible head of Christ’s Church by accusing him of the “gravest sins known in the Christian law”?

Per usual, Fr. Felix Sarda Y Salvany provides us with the answers in his book, Liberalism is a Sin. “…very often it is [proper to make an attack upon the persons of those who uphold error], and not only proper,” he writes, “but at times even indispensable and meritorious before God and men.”

Francis the liberal upholds and even embraces error, so it follows that he must be attacked in this regard. Francis has waged a war against the truth, and it is our indispensable duty to crush his proud rebellion.

Does such strong language appear uncharitable? Perhaps a proper definition is in order. “Charity is a supernatural virtue which induces us to love God above all things and our neighbors as ourselves for the love of God…Charity is primarily the love of God, secondarily the love of our neighbor for God’s sake. To sacrifice the first is to abandon the latter. Therefore, to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a true act of charity. Not to offend our neighbor for the love of God is a sin.”

Francis the liberal would have us reverse that order by placing our neighbor first and God second. But we cannot fall into his liberal death traps. If we have charity, if we love God, we must offend Francis for the love of God. We must speak out against his errors, and we must defend our neighbor from his cunning and deceitful lies.

“A disease is inseparable from the persons of the diseased,” writes Fr. Felix. Make no mistake about it, Francis the liberal is a diseased man. Worse still, he attempts to spread his disease the world over. Against such evil, we must fight. How? “When it strikes, let the sword of the Catholic polemist wound, and when it wounds, wound mortally. This is the only real and efficacious means of waging war.”

We are undoubtedly fighting a war, and our enemy is at the door. He’s infiltrated Christ’s Church, and he’s corrupted its leader. Liberalism is the devil’s most effective tool. Never before in the history of mankind has he experienced such success. But it doesn’t have to be this way. The enemy is strong, but we can be stronger. At our disposal are all the weapons we need in order to completely annihilate Satan’s liberal forces.

Catholicity is the only antidote to the evil that is liberalism. Will we embrace it? Francis the liberal tries his very best to prevent that from happening, but who is he? Nothing but a tool-a pawn of Satan. Let us treat him as such and defeat his lies. Francis the liberal has chosen his side, now let us choose ours. This is war.


7 thoughts on “Francis the Liberal-Part V

  1. You are so right. Fighting the good fight means speaking out when necessary. According to Church teaching, one of the “Nine Ways of being an accessory to another’s sin” is by “Silence”, and there has been too much silence already.

    Fortunately, you (and we fellow faithful Catholics) are not alone; we have brave and higher voices speaking out for Truth. The four Cardinals with the Dubia are pointing out the error of Francis with “Amoris Laetitia”. We just need to wait for the next step.

  2. I think the following is a propos to the conversation:

    Mgr. Fulton J. Sheen
    Communism and the Conscience of the West (1948)

    β€œ[Satan] will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the [Catholic] Church. . . . It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content.”
    The Antichrist will not be so called; otherwise he would have no followers. He will not wear red tights, nor vomit sulphur, nor carry a trident nor wave an arrowed tail as Mephistopheles in Faust. This masquerade has helped the Devil convince men that he does not exist. When no man recognizes, the more power he exercises. God has defined Himself as β€œI am Who am,” and the Devil as β€œI am who am not.”

    Nowhere in Sacred Scripture do we find warrant for the popular myth of the Devil as a buffoon who is dressed like the first β€œred.” Rather is he described as an angel fallen from heaven, as β€œthe Prince of this world,” whose business it is to tell us that there is no other world. His logic is simple: if there is no heaven there is no hell; if there is no hell, then there is no sin; if there is no sin, then there is no judge, and if there is no judgment then evil is good and good is evil. But above all these descriptions, Our Lord tells us that he will be so much like Himself that he would deceive even the elect β€” and certainly no devil ever seen in picture books could deceive even the elect. How will he come in this new age to win followers to his religion?

    The pre-Communist Russian belief is that he will come disguised as the Great Humanitarian; he will talk peace, prosperity and plenty not as means to lead us to God, but as ends in themselves. . . .

    . . . The third temptation in which Satan asked Christ to adore him and all the kingdoms of the world would be His, will become the temptation to have a new religion without a Cross, a liturgy without a world to come, a religion to destroy a religion, or a politics which is a religion β€” one that renders unto Caesar even the things that are God’s.

    In the midst of all his seeming love for humanity and his glib talk of freedom and equality, he will have one great secret which he will tell to no one: he will not believe in God. Because his religion will be brotherhood without the fatherhood of God, he will deceive even the elect. He will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ. . . .

    . . . But the twentieth century will join the counterchurch because it claims to be infallible when its visible head speaks ex cathedra from Moscow on the subject of economics and politics, and as chief shepherd of world communism.
    Source: Fulton J. Sheen, Communism and the Conscience of the West (Bobbs-Merril Company, Indianapolis, 1948), pp. 22-25.

    If only Sheen were a companion of Archbishop Lefebvre in the 70’s.

    1. I’ve often wondered, since Rome is to be the seat of the antichrist, could he be a pope of the Novus Ordo?

      Your words above are striking in that they perfectly describe our own time. Pope St. Pius X wondered if the antichrist was already in the world some hundred years ago. Were he alive today, his words may have been a lot more bold…

      1. I share your wonder about the AntiChrist being a Pope of the NO. I don’t think Jorge is the one. Jorge is the totally logical outcome of the totally illogical NO. He’s too obvious a deformer. He’s so preposterously anti Catholic, even the so called conservative crowd see him for what he is.

        The AntiChrist will, as Sheen implies, appear to be so Catholic as to fool even the elect. Jorge is merely a fool– what the communists called a useful idiot. Although I do pray for his and all nonCatholics’ conversion.

        Writers like you and pre VII Fulton Sheen, who have a knack for communicating logic in very human and relatable terms (add another hidden talent made manifest by fatherhood), are the instruments God uses to reach those of us who are like hard ground yearning for just the right tiller, so the Sower can sow His seed.

        I’m praying you continue to develop your talent. I’m home sick with the flu and have devoured not only your book, but most of the posts on your blog. “I love you, Child” made me very emotional, and I ended up just gazing at His Sacred Heart and praying the Glorious Mysteries.

      2. Thanks for the kind words, although I think it quite hyperbolic to mention me in the same breath as Sheen.

        I agree Jorge is merely a fool, although a powerful fool. He is certainly a tool of Satan and leads countless souls away from Christ. Your attitude is correct — we must pray for him and all other non-Catholics to find their way to the truth.

  3. Frankly, accept the compliment as it is justified. Hillaire Belloc wrote in 1938 that “the modern mind is as averse to precision in ideas as it is enamored of precision in measurement.” These days Catholic writers who can communicate logic in simple, human and relatable terms are rare. It’s a gift. He gave it to you. And those of us who are fortunate enough to have as a Pastor the man you count as a friend are more able to recognize it. I’ll miss The previous host on WCB Ohio, but you’re a fine replacement and complement to Father. Looking forward to more episodes!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s