non veni pacem

I have been on the run all this month between graduations, work travel, etc.  I guess some stuff happened?
Two credible accounts rehashing anew the Fatima double secret non full-disclosure disclosure HERE and HERE.  If you’ve never studied this controversy, it boils down to the existence of a second text, not yet revealed, and what it might say.  The evidence for its existence is strong, but what it might say is hearsay/rumor.  Here is the thought that always comes to my mind on this subject:  If parts of the secret or its interpretation from Our Lady have been deliberately withheld by six popes since 1960, against the direct orders of Our Lady, that’s a pretty big deal. Think about it objectively. If you were pope, just how bad would the secret have to be for you to intentionally disregard a direct order from the Mother of God.  I mean, provided you actually believe in your own religion, taking that decision would be the single most terrifying act of your life, right?  It would have to be something so over the top, so unbelievable, so unthinkable, that even as I sit here pondering the question, I’m probably still shooting low.
What happens next?  The Vatican Press Office, at warp speed, issues a denial of the Hickson account HERE.   The structure of the announcement is very strange, as it’s made to appear as excerpting an interview with Benedict.  Except those quotes!  Seriously?  Could they have at least made it sound just a little like it was actually him? “Pure inventions, absolutely untrue.”  Yeah, okay.
Next it was +Ganswein out of the blue with the “expanded Petrine ministry” HERE.  What kind of move is this?  No way he comes out with this without the full blessing of Benedict, or in fact at the direction of Benedict.  So was this concept created intentionally by Benedict in the particular manner with which he resigned? It sure sounds like that’s what’s being promulgated. It’s like a computer programmer who writes a ‘back door’ into the code, so he can get back in if necessary.  If that’s the case, make popcorn.  And the concept itself, the expansion of the ministry into a duality?  Sounds a lot like the expansion of the Latin Rite into two Forms, Ordinary and Extraordinary, doesn’t it?
Then the Vatican Press Office, at warp speed, issues a retrac…..  oops. Nope. Nothing.
It can’t be said we live in uninteresting times.  If anyone should preach normalcy bias, let him be anathema.
Stay confessed.
 

Oh yes, he did.  HERE
Not ambiguous, not confusing, not mistranslated, not misunderstood, no, no, no.  As you digest this, reflect back also to all those footnotes in Chapter Eight, and admit those weren’t ambiguous either.
First, here is today’s Gospel.  It’s not an obscure reading (Mark 10:1-12).

Jesus came into the district of Judea and across the Jordan.
Again crowds gathered around him and, as was his custom,
he again taught them.
The Pharisees approached him and asked,
“Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?”
They were testing him.
He said to them in reply, “What did Moses command you?”
They replied,
“Moses permitted a husband to write a bill of divorce
and dismiss her.”
But Jesus told them,
“Because of the hardness of your hearts
he wrote you this commandment.
But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.
For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother
and be joined to his wife,
and the two shall become one flesh.
So they are no longer two but one flesh.
Therefore what God has joined together,
no human being must separate.”
In the house the disciples again questioned Jesus about this.
He said to them,
“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another
commits adultery against her;
and if she divorces her husband and marries another,
she commits adultery.”

Jesus restores the true fullness of the marriage covenant.  He’s pretty direct about it. It’s a Revealed Truth of the First Class HERE.  The same episode is recounted in Matt 19:9 and Luke 16:18.
Now here is what Francis the Destroyer had this to say about it:

“But Jesus, so merciful, He is so great, that he never, never, never, closes the door to sinners. In the world in which we live, with this culture of the provisional, this reality of sin is so strong. But Jesus, recalling Moses, tells us: “But there is hardness of heart, there is sin, something can be done: forgiveness, understanding, accompaniment, integration, discernment of these cases”…   May Jesus teach us to have at heart a great adhesion to the truth, and also at heart a great understanding and accompaniment for all our brothers who are in difficulty. And this is a gift, this is what the Holy Spirit teaches us, not these enlightened doctors, who to teach us need to reduce the fullness of God to a casuistic equation.”

As I have written over and over again, this is the diabolical inversion of truth.  There is no other way to say it.  It’s not just a twisting, a bending of the truth.  It is nothing less than stating as true, the very thing that has just been demonstrated to be NOT TRUE.
He actually admits that the truth about adultery is in fact the truth as far as adultery goes, but to stop at that is to be a narrow-minded doctor of the law.  The fullness of the Gospel requires to also acknowledge that “the reality of sin is so strong.”  In other words, again, gospel truths are merely “Ideals” that are impossible to live up to.  As Christians, we need to move beyond the law, grow in maturity, and embrace the reality of sin with accompaniment, integration, discernment, etc.  We must combine the truth of the ideals with the truth of a humanity incapable of resisting sin, thus arriving at the GREATER TRUTH.
None of this is a surprise.  All of this was laid out in the Exhortation, chapter and verse. All of this has been covered extensively, HERE HERE HERE HERE HERE and especially HERE.
The man must be deposed.
 
 
 

And so it came to pass, 13 May 2016, the Obama administration announces it will cut federal funding to schools who do not allow transgender students to use the bath/locker room of whichever gender they identify with.  We love the little children so much, it simply must be done. HERE
Today is the day we decide if we are going to take back our country.
That’s a pretty big deal, so we should probably examine some facts and try to determine exactly what’s at stake here.  Without getting into some of the more bizarre claims of the Trans movement, where there may be oh a thousand genders, let’s just stick with the simple case of “the gender I identify with is the opposite of my biological sex.”
Indoctrination of children in “gender studies” and forcing them to “choose” genders is child abuse.  Gender Dysphoria in children is not unusual, especially among girls.  Ever hear of a “tomboy”?  They’re not exactly rare.  In the vast, vast majority of cases, everything works itself out during puberty, when the sex hormones do their thing.  To force or encourage hormonal treatment of a pre-pubescent child should be a crime.
Gender Dysphoria in adults is a mental illness.  It’s a disorder.  As such, treatment is the rational course, even if the effectiveness of treatment varies.  Celebration and encouragement lead to further misery.  Ten minutes of research into life outcomes of this group will astound you.  41% attempt suicide.  The movement will try to convince you that’s all about bullying and social stigma, but it’s not.  Even those who have “fully transitioned” (in quotes because that’s not physically possible) are still overwhelmingly very sad, regretful, and yes, still very suicidal.  Please, ten minutes, do the research.  There are entire websites dedicated to this.
The irony of the bath/changing/locker room signage battle is inescapable.  The Trans movement has spent years attempting to disconnect gender from biological sex.  Yet the sign on the locker room isn’t referring to your feelings (even if those feelings are very real).  The sign is referring to your biological sex, which is a metaphysical certitude.  The X and Y don’t lie.
We’re going to hear a lot of talk about hatred and bigotry.  I want to talk about love.  Love and charity.  When you profess to love someone, or to be charitable to your fellow man, you are professing that you care for them.  These people are hurting; there is no doubt about that.  They deserve to have their human dignity upheld and respected.  Sometimes, caring means sharing hard truths for the well-being of another.  If you really do care, then it’s your duty to call it out.  Because the opposite of love isn’t hate, the opposite of love is indifference. Doing nothing, staying silent, is the opposite of love.
Let me assure you, what’s going on here with fedgov intervention has nothing to do with Trans rights.  Do you really think the political ruling class gives a shit about 0.0016 of the voting population?  No.  This is about pushing the envelope to see where the breaking point lies.  This is about testing the moral fabric of this country to see just how outrageously they can overreach until somebody decides to do something about it.  This is a weighing of the sheeple.
I hope everyone understands this: If you support biological men in girls’ locker/bath/changing rooms, you are making a conscious choice to place the feelings of a tiny minority above the physical safety of all women and children.  If that’s your opinion, just get comfortable with the fact that, in your mind, an increased level of violence against women and children in the form of rape, assault and murder by sexual predators abusing this new paradigm is simply the price of progress.
This is an appeal to every father, brother, husband.  Do you willfully submit to putting your daughters, sisters and wives at grave risk for the sake of the “feelings” of 0.0016 of the population?  Are you okay with giving the green light for every sexual predator to claim he “feels like a woman” and to freely enter, by federal law, any girls’ bathroom, changing room, or locker room he wants? If not, what are you going to do about it?  Do you even have the balls to share this post?
Here’s an idea:  Withdraw your kids from public school on Monday.  Give the schools and the states the summer to stand up to the fedgov overreach.  That action brings zero risk to you and your family, yet if done on a massive scale, could do some real good. HERE
This is a war on women and children.  Period.
Gentlemen, into the breach…

Just yesterday, I typed this:

Everything will continue to accelerate.  These people will be further emboldened with each brazen move that goes unchallenged, save for the dozen bloggers who will call it out.  They must be even more amazed than we are at the pathetic lack of response.  And we already know the next target is Infallibility, because if they crack that, it’s open season.

Okay, so I got that last part wrong.  First, we are going to ordain women to the diaconate.

“Pope Francis has announced he will create a commission to study the possibility of allowing women to serve as deacons in the Catholic church, signaling an historic openness to the possibility of ending the global institution’s practice of an all-male clergy.”

Do you think there is a possibility that the outcome of the commission could already be predetermined?
In her twin gem postings last week, Hilary White had such an insightful comment about +Francis.  Not only was he inevitable, not only do we deserve him, but he is also exactly what we need – no, really.  He has pulled the mask off – the Great Facade is finally exposed for all to see and which no one can now deny.  Unless they intend to surrender all intellectual honesty, the Hermeneutic of Continuity crowd will now have no choice but to admit they got it wrong, as I did for so many years. The infestation has reached the point that it cannot be rooted out except by taking a flamethrower to the whole place.  Remember, it’s way bigger than just +Francis:  a majority of the bishops voted for all the nastiest bits at the synod, even if some parts did not get the 2/3rds majority.
Pope St. Pius X, pray for us.

Archbishop Forte has in fact revealed a “behind the scenes” [moment] from the Synod: “If we speak explicitly about communion for the divorced and remarried,” said Archbishop Forte, reporting a joke of Pope Francis, “you do not know what a terrible mess we will make. So we won’t speak plainly, do it in a way that the premises are there, then I will draw out the conclusions.”
“Typical of a Jesuit,” Abp Forte joked.

Yeah, we agree on that last point.
Imagine… an archbishop accuses the reigning pontiff of deception, heresy and sacrilege –  and it is meant AS A COMPLIMENT.   Do you understand how far down the rabbit hole we are?
Read the rest HERE.
The short paragraph from the archbishop, who was hand picked by +Francis as secretary of the synods, sums up everything that has happened in the past year and a half.:

1. Undermining 2000 years of constant Church teaching in the name of (false) Mercy
2. Endless pronouncements of error from +Francis without a single correction and many explicitly confirmed by other officials
3. Endless insults and condemnations of anyone who believes in the law
4. Two fake synods where the outcome was predetermined
5. Premeditated deception to draw attention away from the gravity of what is being done
6. Suppression, and in one case theft, of ideas and materials supporting Truth
7. A heretical final document not condemned by a single prelate

Everything will continue to accelerate.  These people will be further emboldened with each brazen move that goes unchallenged, save for the dozen bloggers who will call it out.  They must be even more amazed than we are at the pathetic lack of response.  And we already know the next target is Infallibility, because if they crack that, it’s open season.

The Canons And Decrees Of The Council Of Trent

SESSION THE SIXTH
13  January 1547
DECREE CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION

CHAPTER IX–Against the Vain Confidence of Heretics

But, although it be necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted, nor ever have been remitted, save freely, by the divine mercy for Christ’s sake; yet is it not to be said, that sins are forgiven, or have been forgiven, to any one who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins, and rests on that alone; since it may exist, yea, does in our time exist, among heretics and schismatics; and with great earnestness is this confidence, vain, and remote from all piety, preached up in opposition to the Catholic Church…

CHAPTER XI–On the Keeping of the Commandments, and on the Necessity and Possibility thereof.

But no one, how much soever justified, ought to think himself free from the observance of the commandments; no one ought to make use of that rash saying, prohibited by the fathers under an anathema; that the commandments of God are impossible for one that is justified to observe. For God commands not impossibilities, but, by commanding, admonishes thee both to do what thou art able, and to pray for what thou art not able, and aids thee that thou mayest be able; whose commandments are not grievous; whose yoke is sweet and whose burden light…

CHAPTER XV –That, by every Mortal Sin, Grace is lost, but not Faith

In opposition also to the cunning wits of certain men, who, by good works and fair speeches, deceive the hearts of the innocent, it is to be maintained, that the received grace of justification is lost, not only by infidelity, in which even faith itself is lost, but also by any other mortal sin soever, though faith be not lost; thereby defending the doctrine of the divine law, which excludes from the kingdom of God not only the unbelieving, but also the faithful who are fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners, and all others who commit deadly sins; from which, with the help of divine grace, they are able to refrain, and on account of which they are separated from the grace of Christ.

On Justification

CANON XII. If any one shall say, that justifying faith is nought else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified; let him be anathema.

CANON XIV. If any one shall say, that man is absolved from his sins and justified, because he assuredly believed himself to be absolved and justified… let him be anathema.

CANON XVIII. If any one shall say, that the commandments of God are, even for a man that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.

CANON XIX. If any one shall say that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments in nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.

CANON XX. If any one shall say, that a man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if, forsooth, the Gospel were a bore and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observation of the commandments; let him be anathema.

CANON XXI. If any one shall say, that Christ Jesus was given of God unto men, as a redeemer, in whom they should I trust, and not also as a legislator, whom they should obey; let him be anathema.

Time for choosing, boys and girls.  Which Church do YOU belong to?  This one here was founded by Jesus Christ.

It’s worth fighting for.

#AmorisLaetitia
We have a bishop on record for the side of truth, and his name is no surprise.  Rorate has the translation HERE.
As you read the bishop’s statement and begin to understand the dire consequences of AL, keep yourself grounded in the dogma of immutability HERE.

“For I am the Lord, and I change not” (Mal 3:6).  God does not change, so His divine will does not change, so the things which go against His divine will do not change. Nor can doctrine, which is the codification of His will. How do we know God doesn’t change? Because time is a construct.  Time was created by God, just like all the material dimensions were created by God.  God exists outside of time.  Change cannot occur without the element of linear time.

God is unchanging, and so His laws are unchanging. Period, full stop.
Now, AL does not merely (!) propose changes in discipline which imply (require) changes to doctrine. AL also refuses to establish a new universal discipline.  Instead, it delegates the decisions on God’s absolute moral law to the diocesan level, or even to every single confessional in the world.  Can this possibly be right?  Did the anglicans get it right? Did every sola scriptura proddy get it right?  Is this the breakthrough miracle of the Catholic Church finally getting it right under the leadership of Pope Saint Francis the Merciful?
Um, go back and read about the immutability thing again.
The jewel in the Bishop’s response comes after he lays out many abuses in the document paragraph by paragraph, as has been done by numerous blogs, articles, etc. But then he goes to the heart of the matter for true believers – those of us who understand that the Catholic faith is the central reality of the universe.  Meaning, if we really, truly believe what we say we believe, as in, we believe that what we believe is REALITY, which in turn means it has nothing to do with belief, but it only has to do with REALITY, well then black is black and white is white.  No matter what AL claims to change, it simply has not the power to change it.  Exposing Chapter Eight to the light of reality results in a carpet bombing of truth.

If we accept such an interpretation of the wording and spirit of AL, we must, if we want to be intellectually honest and respect the law of non-contradiction, also accept the following logical conclusions:
–          The sixth Divine Commandment, which prohibits any sexual act that does not take place within a valid marriage, would no longer be universally valid, but would admit exceptions. In the present case, this would mean that the divorced could practice the conjugal act and even be encouraged to do so to help them maintain “mutual fidelity”, cf. AL, 298. There could therefore be “fidelity” in a lifestyle that directly contradicts the express will of God. However, to encourage and legitimize acts that are and will always be, as such, contrary to the will of God, would mean to contradict Divine Revelation.
–          The words of Christ himself: “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Mt 19 :6) would no longer apply always and to all spouses, without exception.
–          It would be possible, in a special case, to receive the sacrament of Penance and Holy Communion while intending to continue one’s direct violations of God’s commandments: “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Ex 20, 14) and “What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder” (Mt 19, 6; Gen 2, 24).
–          The observance of these commandments and of the word of God would, in such a case, be a matter of theory rather than of practice, and would, therefore, lead the divorced and remarried into “deceiving themselves” (James 1: 22). It would, therefore, be possible to believe perfectly in the divine nature of the six Commandment and in the indissolubility of marriage without however acting accordingly.
–          The divine word of Christ : “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if a wife divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery” (Mark 10, 12) would no longer be universally valid, but would be subject to exceptions.
–          A permanent, deliberate and free violation of God’s sixth Commandment and of the sacredness and indissolubility of true and valid marriage (in the case of divorced and remarried couples) would no longer be always a grave sin, that is to say, a direct opposition to the will of God.
–          There could be cases of serious, permanent deliberate and free violation of one of the other commandments of God (e.g. in the case of a lifestyle of financial corruption) in which the person concerned could be granted access to the sacraments due to mitigating circumstances, without such access being made contingent upon a sincere resolution henceforth to abstain from such acts of sin and scandal.
–          The permanent and infallible teaching of the Church would no longer be universally valid, particularly the teaching confirmed by Pope John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio, n. 84 and by Pope Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis, 29, according to which the precondition for admission to the sacraments of the divorced and remarried is perfect continence.
–          The observance of the sixth commandment of God and of the indissolubility of marriage would become an ideal that is not attainable by all, but only by a kind of elite.
–          The uncompromising words of Christ commanding men to observe the commandments of God always and in all circumstances, and even to take upon themselves considerable suffering in order to do so, in other words, to accept the Cross, would no longer be valid as absolute truth: “And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be cast into hell“(Mt 5, 30).

People who believe Heaven is full and Hell is empty have no patience for this sort of thing.  They think justice is trumped by mercy, and they are trying to shove that mercy where truth won’t let it go.  Their quest to be popular amongst men puts them at odds with the gospel.  They imperil themselves and others with these lies.  Millions of souls are at risk.  It’s a pretty big deal.
+Schneider goes on at some length to point out many other problems, and some proposed solutions. He pleads for clarity, with an abundance of charity.  His comments are extensively annotated, as we’ve come to expect from him.  He quotes from FC and VS with accuracy and proper context, in contrast to the way AL uses these previous documents in devious ways.  He also points out the totally improper reference to GS, explained HERE.
The good bishop has been so complete in his demolition, all that’s needed now is for every cardinal who is actually Catholic to sign on to this.  Use the text as it is.  Change nothing.  STEP INTO THE BREACH AND SIGN IT.

#AmorisLaetitia
Thank God for men like +Slattery, +Morlino, +Sample, +Wall, +Olmstead and several other good bishops here in the U.S.  I cannot imagine what it must be like for solid bishops in these dark times. I also thank God for solid priests, which I am blessed to know several. Many, many understand the gravity of the situation, and are looking for direction.  It’s easy to get discouraged with everything that’s going on, so sometimes we need to start with a thanksgiving for the good we have.  If you are lucky enough to be in the flock of one of these men, won’t you offer a short prayer for him?
But it’s the Cardinals we need in this fight. The men who wear red, symbolizing the blood of the Lamb, the blood of the martyrs, and the possibility they might have to give their own lives in defense of the faith.  Where are those holy men who stood up and fought during the synods?  It’s been two weeks, Eminences, the dung heap is really starting to stink, and it ain’t going away on its own.
The harm +Francis is inflicting is real, and at risk are millions of souls. This isn’t a joke, and the Jimmy Akins and Mark Sheas of the world trying to play this off as no big deal are part of the problem, not part of the answer.  A few respected cardinals speaking the Truth about this wretched document sure would throw a wet towel on all the remaining Pollyannas.
The damage from this document cannot be overstated.  Encouraging invalid confessions, Communion for unrepentant mortal sinners, mortal sinners encouraged to remain in their sin, teaching that grace subsists in sin, etc, etc. It renders vast swaths of the CCC ‘obsolete’. It deviously cites past orthodox papal documents to falsely support heretical positions.  It endorses ideas that were repeatedly rejected by the synod fathers over the past two years.  When +Francis couldn’t muscle his heresy through the synods, because orthodox prelates resisted to his face, he simply backdoored it into the exhortation.
So again, where are those prelates now?  If they had the courage to resist to his face, to write the famous letter, why would they suddenly go dark now that the document is out?
Are we to suppose that this time around, as we’ve seen at other times in Church history, the laity will need to drive this reform?  Is the hierarchy just too far gone?  Perhaps. The excellent seminarians we have being ordained in solid diocese and the FSSP will take decades to make an impact once the hippies and gays die off.  We don’t have that long.
What have the cardinals to fear?  Their worldly positions?  Instead, they should fear for their own immortal souls.  I think the ones on the right side do.
So I have a confession to make.  I’m a Pollyanna too.  I think the good cardinals and good bishops are busy planning a counterattack.  I mean it.  They all were just as stunned as we were when the document was published, so there wasn’t work already underway.  It needs to be strategically devastating to the current pontificate, so it takes time to build. +Burke made a bit of a misstep out of the gate.  Good canonists are divided on the best course.  But it’s all being worked out.  I have hope, if only because I don’t want to think about the alternative.
There’s one more thing, and I keep wondering about it as the uniqueness of the situation continues to stun me. I can’t help thinking somehow this comes into play:
Have you noticed we have two popes?
Oh, and one of them wears red.

#AmorisLaetitia
The thread that runs through Chapter Eight of this wretched document is the same one that runs through the ramblings of this entire papacy.
Because remember, “Morality is always dreadfully complicated to a man who has lost all his principles” HERE.
Traditional marriage (the only kind of marriage that exists, BTW) is being trashed in a way that has that element of diabolical inversion that I speak of frequently.  I see it happening on two levels here.
First, marriage is dragged down to the pit by those who want to see irregular unions normalized.  And I haven’t even touched on the same-sex nonsense that is promulgated in here.  For now, I’m just talking about second “marriages”.  We are told of the “grace” they contain.  We are told of the “worse sin” of renouncing the union, or even, perish the thought, remaining in the union but with perfect chastity.
Second,  while at the same time dragging down traditional marriage, they also hold it up as a nearly impossible to achieve ideal, and it’s done in a way that insults the sacrament at the same time.  In calling marriage a “lifelong burden” (AL36), the mask comes off, and we see plainly that the authors are completely lost.  They are trying to blame-shift the sin of Adultery onto the sacrament of Marriage itself. The sacrament is culpable, the sinner is not.  Unbelievable.
Another axiom from Chesterton comes to mind:  “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.”
Stay with me, because this is KEY to understanding what is really going on here, and just how much poo poo we are in.  The people who wrote this garbage are so far gone, so mired in sin, so far removed from living the gospel, so far removed from even TRYING to live the gospel, that they truly think it isn’t possible.  It’s just too darn difficult, so we need to slather it with “mercy” and change God’s will.
You think I’m judging?  Then try to come up with another explanation for what’s going on here. I mean, if the beautiful concept of remaining faithfully married for a lifetime is soooo hard, that it’s only an “Ideal” that is nearly impossible to achieve, just think what other wretched filth has blackened the souls of these men.
It’s also clear that the I’m Okay You’re Okay nuReligion on display here is deeply rooted in 1968 Hippie Jesus of the Eternal Hug.  It is so shallow and “nice”, it is staggering how so many fall for it.
Step into the time machine with me for a moment.  Assuming you haven’t been 100% faithful in your commitment to TRY to live the gospel since you attained the age of reason, think back to when you actually thought you were Christian, yet you were not.  Remember?  Back when you thought you could jettison the few hard parts you didn’t like, but retain 95% of the faith, and therefore remain Christian.  Remember those days?  Remember when every discussion, whether with someone else or with yourself, would always come back to “Well, I look around at my circle of family and friends, and I’m basically a good person, and that’s what counts.”
Then something triggered you to look deeper.  You realized that being basically a good person in the eyes of society has absolutely nothing to do with it.  In fact, if you are truly trying to live in accordance with the gospel, society will see you as A TERRIBLE PERSON.  A “HYPOCRITE”.  A prude, a bigot, uneducated, unscientific.  A bitter clinger.  Well, it looks like this might not be as fun as I thought, but I’m discovering more and more undeniable Truths, and since this seems like the most real thing I’ve ever experienced, I want more.
Then you discovered the Truth about pornography, the Truth about masturbation, the Truth about divorce and remarriage (otherwise known as Adultery from 33A.D. until 8 April 2016), the necessity of frequent Confession, the beautiful Truth of the Holy Eucharist, the evil of contraception, etc etc.  It probably didn’t take long to realize you were not a Christian at all, and that becoming one was not achievable on your own.  Only through total self-emptying, totally turning your life over to Christ, can you accept these Truths and resolve to live by them.
I proclaim that the authors of this document, with +Francis at the head, have no idea what I’m talking about.  They don’t think it is possible.  That’s why the entire pogrom is about trying to square unrepentant mortal sin with the gospel.
It’s an unprecedented attack on the One True Faith, and it will not stand.

Back in December, I wrote about the Year of (false) Mercy HERE and of course it’s all coming true. Mercy does not exist outside Justice. They go together.
Just came across a superb article by Frederick W. Marks from the Jan-Feb edition of NOR HERE. He does a great job of debunking the common misconception that the God of the New Testament is the God of mercy, and as such is somehow in opposition to the God of justice in the Old Testament.  You must go over and read the whole thing ($1.95 to access the article).
A taste:

How familiar are you with these divine attributes? If you think you know the proper balance between the mercy and justice exemplified by our Lord, try your hand at the following multiple-choice test:

(1) We read in the New Testament that God will judge the world with
(a) mercy
(b) justice
(c) mercy and justice
Answer: (b) justice (Acts 17:31)
(2) When Jesus mentions mercy and justice, which comes first?
(a) mercy
(b) justice
Answer: (b) justice (Mt. 23:23)
(3) Of the seven spiritual works of mercy, which comes first?
(a) forgive all injuries
(b) admonish sinners
Answer: (b) admonish sinners (forgiveness comes sixth on the list)
(4) When Jesus pleads with His heavenly Father for the gift of unity, He addresses Him as
(a) merciful Father
(b) just Father
Answer: (b) just Father (Jn. 17:25)

The gift of divine mercy is inestimably great. Yet it comes with strings attached because justice is “the foundation” of God’s throne (Ps. 97:2). To avail ourselves of God’s great mercy, we must repent of our errors and firmly resolve to sin no more.

The article is excellent and will give you lots more scriptural ammo for the war.