While flying from Cuba to the US, on Sept. 22, 2015, he said:
"A cardinal friend of mine told me that a very concerned woman, very Catholic, went to him. A bit rigid, but Catholic. And she asked him if it was true that in the Bible, they spoke of an antichrist...But why is she asking me this question, this cardinal asked me? “Because I’m sure that Pope Francis is the anti-pope,” she said.
And why does she ask this, why does she have this idea? “It’s because he doesn’t wear red shoes.” The reason for thinking if one is communist or isn’t communist.I’m sure that I haven't said anything more than what’s written in the social doctrine of the Church. ....here 108 specific examples - and counting ) and, lastly, because the Creed is recited by many heretics and schismatics.
Even if he had proposed to recite the "Profession of Faith and Oath of Fidelity", we would have to ask ourselves why would the antichrist refuse to recite a few paragraphs if that would help him fulfill his mission? I mean, he is the antichrist ! His conscience will not bother him if he tells a few lies ... Even prelates and theologians promise to "hold fast to the deposit of faith in its entirety" and then do the opposite (e.g. #Synod14 and #Synod15) and they are much, much lower in the antichristian hierarchy...
So, is the Pope Francis THE antichrist ?
While reading Cd. Manning's book (see previous post), I came across what Manning describe's as the spirit of the antichrist:
He will be the "the lawless [or licentious] one the, one who is without law, who is not subject to the law of God or of man whose only law is his own will to whom the license of his own will is the sole and only rule which he knows or obeys" (p. 37)This, I'm sorry to say, made me think of our Pope.
He will "introduce disorder, sedition, tumult and revolution both in the temporal and spiritual order of the world ..." (p. 37).
His trademark is confusion.
Oh, you disagree ? So, please explain to me what does the Pope teach concerning the following issues:
- Can an incontinent divorced "remarried" catholic go to communion?
- Are homosexual acts objectively mortal sins?
- Will God forgive all sins and sinners?
- [Bonus question] Can we judge?
It's fair to say that heresy was already present and thriving before the present pontificate, but it was kept within certain limits. Now it occupies center stage and the clarity of Truth was relegated to the peripheries ...
So, yes, he seems to be to be under the influence of something similar to the spirit of the antichrist.
Second, it can be argued that this pontificate is enabling the revolt that will precede the second coming.
This revolt is marked by schism, heresy and the denial of the incarnation. The last few Popes were a bit passive concerning heresy and schism, failing to adequately discipline and correct heretics and schismatics, but Francis has actively tolerated, enabled and promoted them (who are the ghost-writers of the coming Apostolic Exhortation?). He also seems to a have high regard for unbelievers whom he never calls to conversion.
But, in spite of all he has done and encouraged, Pope Bergoglio fails to comply with the first mark of the antichrist.
Although he seems to have a great esteem for jews - something that contrasts starkly with his lack of basic respect for catholics (see Pope Francis little Book of Insults) -, he himself is not jewish.
So... Pope Francis cannot be THE antichrist because he is not a jew !
But, could he be A antichrist, one of the forerunners of the man of perdition ?
Well, from our previous discussion he could be one of the lesser figures that, from the beginning of the Church, have pre-figured the man of perdition.
He does seem to be playing for the opposite team. He has scored an impressive amount of own goals, injured our most valuable players, antagonized the team's most loyal supporters, brought in new players from the lower leagues (some of them were brought in from retirement) and failed to fulfill the team owner's command to "strenghten the brethren" (Lk 22:32). He also proudly displays his ignorance of the game and never read the rule book. [UPDATE] He even re-wrote some sections of the rule book in order to allow what until then was a red-card offense, while at the same time pharisaically declaring that he was defending the game...
This would also explain his popularity among the antichrist's chearleaders, which directly contradicts the prophecy of Jesus (and Cd. Manning's) concerning the persecution of the Church. Cd. Manning explains the persecution of the Church in the midst of a "universal toleration" in the followong way:
"because the Church of God is inflexible in the mission committed to it. The Catholic Church will never compromise a doctrine; it will never allow two doctrines to be taught within its pale;... is bound by the Divine law to suffer martyrdom rather than. compromise a doctrine ...; and more than this, it is not only bound to offer a passive disobedience, which may be done in a corner, and therefore not detected, and because not detected not punished; but the Catholic Church cannot be silent; it cannot hold its peace ; it cannot cease to preach the doctrines of Revelation... ".
Is this Francis's Church?[/UPDATE]
To conclude, he could be one of the forerunners if it were not for the fact that, well, he is the Pope (duh). And the Pope is (at least) part of the "hindrance which retards his manifestation", even if he is doing a lousy job of it.
Conclusion: (1) he is not A antichrist; (2) we are stuck with him until his contract expires or he retires.
What is Pope Francis, then ?
Cd. Manning's book helps us to form a theory - actually, two - of what Pope Francis might be.
We know that the "hindrance or barrier" which retards the manifestation of antichrist "is weakening every day". On the the intellectual sphere "Catholic truth" was replaced by the "substance of rationalism" and,consequently, "society is now founded upon errors", which translate in the public sphere into:
- a materialistic theory of civilization "which finds its supreme perfection in mere material prosperity; admitting within its sphere persons of every caste, or colour of belief, upon the principle that politics have nothing to do with the world to come" , that "the government of nations is simply for their temporal well-being.... that is to say, for the cultivation of the natural order alone";
- a perfect toleration that recognizes no distinctions of truth or falsehood between religions, despises all positive truth, and grows an intense hatred of what is called dogmatism.
My first "theory" is then the following:
The head of the Pope was struck. Universities, seminaries, the media, entertainment, culture were permeated by the antichristian spirit and Bergoglio's head was fed, not with "the substance of Catholic truth", but with all the philosophical errors that killed christian society. The Pope's head has been "poisoned", "all that [he] holds as incontrovertible is false". When he listens to his conscience, when he prays, he either just hears the echo of the modern lies or truth filtered though a thick layer of philosophical error. He is not a "son of the Church". He is a son of this materialistic, antichristian world.
Worst still, he judges doctrinal truths from the throne of his false "incontrovertible truths" (it should be the other way around).
That is why we can find so many of the events that will precede the persecution in the Pope's words and actions: the "materialistic theory of civilization", perfect toleration, an intense hatred of what is called dogmatism, the persecution of the truth , the exclusion of religion from public acts and education, ....
This dovetails nicely with my previous post on Pope Bergoglio's Regnocentrism. It also allows for invincible ignorance and/or good intentions.
The second "theory" is more straightforward. Holy Scripture teaches that in the end “Some of the learned shall fall", partly by fear, partly by deception, partly by cowardice; partly because they cannot stand for unpopular truth in the face of popular falsehood; partly because the overruling contemptuous public opinion so subdues and frightens Catholics, that they dare not avow their principles, and, at last, dare not hold them.
Pope Francis and those around him sometimes seem to be playing the part of the fallen learned ones.
Either way, he is a very bad Pope, arguably the worst Pope ever. The destroyer of what little was left, the persecutor (and prosecutor) of the remnant.