Where is the link? A Pitiful Blindness Unmasked

 

The modernist Imitator of Leo promoting the exact Masonic principle condemned by Pope Leo XIII: “respect for all religions”; this link a pitiably blind victim of the modernist imposture is unable to see… 

Prologue: 

I made the following post:

The incumbent modernist-in-chief, Robert Prevost, with the stage name #LeoXIV  says:

"I think we have to work together to look for greater unity, respect for all people and all religions."  

Meanwhile, 

“Respect for all religions" was denounced by Pope Leo XIII in his 1892 encyclical Custodi di Quella Fede against Freemasonry in these words:

 “Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to Masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, RESPECT FOR ALL RELIGIONS, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God” (n. 15; emphasis added).

#copied

@highlight 

Think on it!

While a number of comments showed that the message of the post was appreciated, a certain commenter wrote:

“Did you even read what you quoted. Is FREEMASONRY a religion or a cult? 

I have always told you and those who follow you that you will never stop deceiving them until they see themselves in hell. 

The Pope you quoted was talking about FREEMASONRY. This present Pope is simply talking about other religions. How are they linked biko”

Who does not see in this comment  a combination of the different levels of pitiful ignorance often manifest in  the many  who pose as defenders of the modernist impostor religion occupying Catholic buildings together with the hierarchy responsible for it: doctrinal, historical, and more subtle, linguistic -the inability to comprehend a given text before jumping into a frenzy in attack? 

Assailed by an impatient species of ignorance, many of the pitiful victims of modernist imposture are by default ill-disposed to be helped to recognize the modernist apostasy and the deceit that has enveloped them. 

For the edification of men of goodwill we continue here to unmask the obvious link which ignorance attempts to obscure.

1. Catholic Doctrine: Why “Respect for All Religions” Is Condemned

Pope Leo XIII condemned Freemasonry not because it is uniquely evil as an organization, but because of its principles—and the chief error he repeatedly identified was:

Religious indifferentism: the idea that all religions are equally respectable or pathways to God.

This is explicit in Humanum Genus and again in Custodi di Quella Fede, where Leo XIII denounces the Masonic claim that:

• All religions deserve equal respect
  
  
• One religion is as good as another
  
  
• The State or the individual need not recognize the Catholic Church as the true religion
  
  

Pre-Modernist council Catholicism teaches that the Church has a divine mandate to reject all false religions and seek their conversion.

So when the commenter says:

The Pope you quoted was talking about FREMASONRY. This present Pope is simply talking about other religions “

We must reply:

Leo XIII condemned the principle of treating all religions as deserving respect.”

It is irrelevant whether the source of the principle is Freemasonry, Modernism, or the devil himself.

The doctrine is condemned no matter who teaches it.

2. Logical Error #1: Category Confusion

The commenter commits a basic logical fallacy:

He treats the object (Freemasonry) as the reason for the condemnation, rather than the doctrine it teaches.

But Leo XIII explicitly states he condemns:

• the naturalistic principles of Masonry
  
  
• the doctrinal errors
  
  
• their teaching on religion, not simply the organization

Therefore, the condemnation applies to anyone who adopts the same principles.

It is like saying:

• “The Church condemned Arianism because it was Arianism, not because it denied the divinity of Christ.”

This is absurd on its face.

The Church condemns errors, not merely labels.

3. Logical Error #2: Ignorance of Catholic Theology of Religion

The commenter assumes a modernist framework:

• That the Church “respects” all religions
  
  
• That “respect” refers to their doctrines
  
  
• That treating false religions positively is acceptable
  
  

But pre-Vatican II theology is unambiguous:

The Church respects persons, not false religions.

False religions are errors to be corrected, not dignified.

Pius XI (Mortalium Animos), Pius IX (Syllabus of Errors), and Leo XIII all teach:

• It is forbidden to praise, esteem, or legitimize false religions as if they contained true worship of God.
  
  
• Religious indifferentism is a grave sin.
  
  

Thus, when the papal impostor says “respect all religions,” a traditional Catholic hears:

• A direct endorsement of a condemned principle
  
  
• An echo of Masonic indifferentism
  
  
• A repudiation of the Church’s duty to evangelize

So the commenter demonstrating ignorance is failing to understand immemorial Catholic teaching. 

4. Logical Error #3: Failure to See the Connection Between Principles and Consequences

The commenter says:

“How are they linked Biko?”

Uncompromising Catholic answers: 

“They are linked because both statements promote the same doctrinal error: that false religions possess dignity and should be respected.”

It doesn’t matter whether the source of the statement is:

• A lodge
  
  
• A false pope
  
  
• A false prophet
  
  
• A pagan
  
  
• A modernist theologian
  
  

If the doctrine is the same, the condemnation applies.

This is basic Catholic logic, rooted in Thomistic principles:

Error has no rights. Truth alone is owed respect.

To “respect” a false religion is to respect an error—incompatible with pre-Vatican II Catholicism.

5. Logical Error #4: Misunderstanding the Word “Respect”

Traditional Catholic moral and doctrinal theology uses “respect” in a strict sense.

• Persons deserve respect because they are made in the image of God.
  
  
• False religions, by contrast, insult the true God and mislead souls.
  
  

Thus, saying “respect false religions” is, to one who is not only Catholic in name, blasphemous.

The commenter takes a modernist sense of “respect,” meaning:

• “Be nice to everybody”
  
  
• “Don’t judge”
  
  
• “All religions have good things”

This is the exact indifferentism condemned repeatedly by the Magisterium.

Therefore, his error is not only logical but doctrinal.

6. Who Truly Risks Being Deceived?

Now, when a modernist enthusiast and accuser cries,

"I have always told you and those who follow you that you will never stop deceiving them until they see themselves in hell." 

the charge reveals more about the accuser than the accused.

You see?  It is not fidelity to the unchanging doctrine of Christ that endangers a soul, but the refusal to hear it. 

• The one who dismisses truth without understanding, 
• who protects error with indignation, 
• and who attacks the messenger rather than the message, places himself in the gravest peril. 

Those who cling to the perennial teaching of the Church seek salvation; those who reject that teaching in favor of innovations and contradictions risk the blindness that leads to ruin. The question, then, is not who warns, but who listens—for only the lover of truth is safe from deception.

7. Summing up

What does the diagnosis of  this Novus Ordo commenter reveal? 

• Doctrinal ignorance

He does not know Catholic teaching on false religions.

• Logical confusion

He fails to distinguish between condemning a principle vs. condemning an organization.

• Modernist assumptions

He unknowingly adopts modernist Vatican II’s language rather than the Catholic language of the past.

• Category errors

He treats “respect for all religions” as harmless when it is a formally condemned heresy.

How impatient is his ignorance and illogic! He would rather listen to the agents of modernist revolution in permanence than to uncompromising Catholic Priest just doing his job. Oh that he dares to be a lover of Truth, then would he be safe from the Modernist deception ! 

The need for clarity in the service of Truth urges us to reiterate that:

• Pope Leo XIII condemned the doctrine of respecting all religions.
  
  
• A modernist “pope” promoting the same doctrine is repeating a condemned error.
  
  
• The Novus Ordo commenter, in attacking me, a Priest just doing his job, reveals ignorance of Catholic theology and commits multiple logical fallacies.
  
  
• The conflict is not about Freemasonry vs. the papal impostor, but about a shared principle that the Church has already condemned.
  
  

It is negligible whether this particular commenter is unable to see the link still, those who have eyes that sees are able to see it. AMDG.