A New Mercy: Mercy As “Way of Life”…

A New Mercy: Mercy As “Way of Life”…

What Religion Is This?

by Christopher A. Ferrara
November 8, 2016


Mercy, said Francis, is not God's forgiveness of sin through Baptism or the absolution of a repentant sinner in the confessional, in the manner Christ ordained when He commissioned His Church (cf. John 20:23). Rather, he opined, "the mystery of mercy is not to be celebrated in words alone, but above all by deeds, by a truly merciful way of life marked by disinterested love, fraternal service and sincere sharing."
“The mystery of mercy is not to be celebrated in words alone, but above all by deeds, by a truly merciful way of life marked by disinterested love, fraternal service and sincere sharing.”

In a brief address to an “inter-religious audience” at the Vatican on November 3, Francis spoke on “the theme of mercy,” but without a single reference to the King of Mercy, Jesus Christ, the sole merciful savior of mankind, nor any reference to the sacraments of the Church that Christ established precisely to show His mercy toward men of good will. 

Alluding vaguely to “the Christian message” while saying absolutely nothing about the grace of repentance that must precede the grace of justification and the regeneration of the soul of fallen man, Francis sketched instead a concept of mercy seemingly designed to accommodate any and all religions, so-called.

Mercy, said Francis, is not God’s forgiveness of sin through Baptism or the absolution of a repentant sinner in the confessional, in the manner Christ ordained when He commissioned His Church (cf. John 20:23). Rather, he opined, “the mystery of mercy is not to be celebrated in words alone, but above all by deeds, by a truly merciful way of life marked by disinterested love, fraternal service and sincere sharing.”

What does this have to do with Divine Mercy for the sinner who repents and turns to God, which was supposedly the theme of the Year of Mercy now concluding? The address seems instead to conflate Divine Mercy with human acts of kindness devoid of any motive of supernatural grace.

Indeed, Francis goes on to say that “The Church increasingly desires to adopt this way of life, also as part of her ‘duty to foster unity and charity’ among all men and women…” The Church is depicted as an organization that has only recently begun to discover fully what mercy means! It means, according to Francis, a “way of life” — again, without reference to Divine Mercy toward repentant sinners.

Mercy as a “way of life” — rather than a divine action toward the sinner — is something that anyone, no matter what he believes, can possess. Thus, says Francis, “[t]he religions are likewise called to this way of life, in order to be, particularly in our own day, messengers of peace and builders of communion, and to proclaim, in opposition to all those who sow conflict, division and intolerance, that ours is a time of fraternity.”

Note well: “the religions” are referenced indifferently, as if they were all on equal footing with respect to the quality of mercy, which is reduced, in essence, to social work and brotherhood.

Continuing this indifferentist, pan-religious refrain, Francis declares that “mercy” as he conceives it — quoting himself — is that quality which is “more open to dialogue, the better to know and understand one another; eliminates every form of closed-mindedness and disrespect; and drives out every form of violence and discrimination (Misericordiae Vultus, 23). This is pleasing to God and constitutes an urgent task, responding not only to today’s needs but above all to the summons to love which is the soul of all authentic religion.”

Not a word here about the supernatural grace of charity obtained and maintained through the sacraments instituted by Christ, nor the divine action involved in God’s mercy thus obtained. Rather, again, we see only an appeal to do-goodism depicted as the “soul of all authentic religion.”

As Francis further declares (once again quoting himself), “mercy” also means the practice of environmental conservation:

Mercy extends also to the world around us, to our common home, which we are called to protect and preserve from unbridled and rapacious consumption. Our commitment is needed for an education to sobriety and to respect, to a more simple and orderly way of life, in which the resources of creation are used with wisdom and moderation, with concern for humanity as a whole and coming generations, not simply the interests of our particular group and the benefits of the present moment. Today in particular, ‘the gravity of the ecological crisis demands that we all look to the common good, embarking on a path of dialogue which requires patience, self-discipline and generosity'” (Laudato Si’, 201).

So, “authentic religion” now expands to include not merely the one and only religion that God established, but also any and all religions whose adherents do good, including caring for the environment. “Mercy” thus defined would therefore be an element, according to Francis, of virtually all religions that advocate doing good:

“The theme of mercy is familiar to many religious and cultural traditions, where compassion and nonviolence are essential elements pointing to the way of life; in the words of an ancient proverb: ‘death is hard and stiff; life is soft and supple’ (Tao-Te-Ching, 76). To bow down with compassionate love before the weak and needy is part of the authentic spirit of religion, which rejects the temptation to resort to force, refuses to barter human lives and sees others as brothers and sisters, and never mere statistics. To draw near to all those living in situations that call for our concern, such as sickness, disability, poverty, injustice and the aftermath of conflicts and migrations: this is a summons rising from the heart of every genuine religious tradition. It is the echo of the divine voice heard in the conscience of every person, calling him or her to reject selfishness and to be open….”

When Francis finally gets around to mentioning Divine Mercy, he appears to make God’s forgiveness of sin available to anyone who practices mercy on a human level whether or not it involves an act of supernatural charity motivated by divine grace:

“How important this is, when we consider today’s widespread fear that it is impossible to be forgiven, rehabilitated and redeemed from our weaknesses. For us Catholics, among the most meaningful rites of the Holy Year is that of walking with humility and trust through the door – the Holy Door – to find ourselves fully reconciled by the mercy of God, who forgives our trespasses. But this demands that we too forgive those who trespass against us (cf. Mt 6:12), the brothers and sisters who have offended us. We receive God’s forgiveness in order to share it with others. Forgiveness is surely the greatest gift we can give to others, because it is the most costly. Yet at the same time, it is what makes us most like God.”

But, as the Church has always taught, in fallen man the imago Dei — the likeness to God — can be restored only by the grace of justification following the grace of repentance for sin. And the ordinary means of justification are Baptism and, after Baptism, absolution of mortal sin by way of Confession, about which Francis has nothing whatever to say to an audience desperately in need of the helps only the Church that Christ established can provide.

Thus does the Catholic faith — the one, true, divinely revealed religion — fade into insignificance in the grand scheme of “authentic religion” reduced to doing good and forgiving others without any obligation to assent to revealed truth, avail oneself of the divinely instituted sacraments, or indeed profess any particular religious belief at all. Catholics may be reconciled in their Catholic way (certainly not by merely walking through a Holy Door with humility and trust), but anyone who simply forgives, on a human level, attains the divine likeness.

Driving home the point, lest anyone miss it, Francis concludes by declaring: “May the religions be wombs of life, bearing the merciful love of God to a wounded and needy humanity; may they be doors of hope helping to penetrate the walls erected by pride and fear.” All religions “bear the merciful love of God,” no matter what errors or superstitions they involve. All that matters, according to Francis, is that their adherents show forgiveness and brotherhood toward others and care for the environment.

Referring to the recent debacle of the Pope’s visit to Sweden to “commemorate” the Protestant Rebellion launched by Luther, the respected traditional Catholic scholar Roberto de Mattei observed: “What surfaced during the ecumenical meeting between Pope Francis and the World Lutheran Federation on October 31st in Lund, seems to be a new religion.”

A new religion indeed. And certainly not the religion established by God Incarnate in the one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. But then, as Pius XI warned about those who would embrace the then-nascent “ecumenical movement” with its pan-Christian gatherings:

“Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.

As the human element of the Church has come to accept and participate not only in pan-Christian but also pan-religious spectacles, such as this address by Francis, we can consider Pius XI’s warning a prophecy fulfilled, along with the prophecy undoubtedly contained in the integral Third Secret of Fatima.   Source – fatima.org


Well, we’ve had a new Mass, new catechism, new rosary, new canon law, new morality,  blah blah, so why not a new “mercy”? 

Comments (99)

  • crofterlady

    Athanasius, you write:

    ” He is a punishment on the Church in our time.”

    Spot on. I think this pope is part of the chastisement which was promised.

    November 14, 2016 at 12:28 am
    • Gerontius

      Crofterlady and Athanasius,

      ” He is a punishment on the Church in our time.”

      Exactly! I wonder if SAINT FRANCIS was referring this pope, and I also wonder if Our Lord was giving us here a very pertinent clue, to wit “Francis”

      Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.
      (Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi [London: R. Washbourne, 1882], pp. 248-250; underlining and paragraph breaks added.)

      Act bravely, my Brethren; take courage, and trust in the Lord. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.

      The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavour to draw many into error and death.

      Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.

      There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God.

      Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.

      Those who preserve their fervour and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth. But the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head [Jesus Christ], these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish [physically] rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.

      Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor, but a destroyer.

      (Works of the Seraphic Father St. Francis Of Assisi [London: R. Washbourne, 1882], pp. 248-250; underlining and paragraph breaks added.)

      November 14, 2016 at 1:00 am
  • gabriel syme

    Rorate reports that 4 Cardinals (Burke, Caffara, Brandmuller and Meisner) have officially asked Francis to clarify Amoris Laetitia in order to prevent division in the Church.

    This was in September. They have now released news of their request, as it seems Francis chose “not to respond” to them

    A Pope has never been publicly questioned for clarification on a most sensitive matter (his own reaching office) of a more sensitive content (his own major document) by his own Cardinals at any moment since the Counter-Reformation. It is astounding: certainly unheard-of in modern times.


    Francis is a disgrace; his style of governance is bad enough – trying to allow everything via a nod and wink – but the open contempt he treats his Cardinals and the laity with is equally appalling. He must think we are stupid, that he can “run rings around us” with this kind of puerile behaviour – “I don’t remember the footnote” and now this “silent treatment” towards Cardinals who try to respectfully guide him.

    November 14, 2016 at 10:01 am
    • editor

      Gabriel Syme,

      Thank you for that information. It seems that, although the concerned Cardinals (like Cardinal Burke) appear to have gone to ground, they are still working behind the scenes. Deo gratias.

      November 14, 2016 at 10:10 am
      • gabriel syme

        I agree Editor, it is good to learn of this behind the scenes work. Having read a bit more, apparently their letter to Francis was prompted by the infamous Argentine Bishops letter, which Francis rushed to endorse, stating “there are no other interpretations”.

        I hope the Cardinals continue to try to work to frustrate Francis and are most especially working to crate a solid voting block against liberal machinations for the next conclave – so we can get a worthwhile shepherd and not some Bergoglio Mk 2.

        Sandro Magister (himself banned from the Vatican under Francis regime) seem to think that the letter will cause fireworks at the consistory to be held this month.

        In a few days, on November 19 and 20, the whole college of cardinals will meet in Rome, for the consistory convoked by Pope Francis. And inevitably the appeal of the four cardinals will become the subject of animated discussion among them.

        He also provides justification for the “going public” of the Cardinals:

        And one thinks right away of Matthew 18:16-17: “If your brother will not listen to you, take with you two or three witnesses. If then he will not listen even to them, tell it to the assembly.”

        The “witness” in this case was Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith. Because he too, in addition to the pope, had been a recipient of the letter and the questions.


        November 14, 2016 at 11:03 am
    • gabriel syme

      The original report has now been updated (link is the same as before):

      Our Roman Correspondent Fr. Pio Pace sends us the following: “Following Amoris Laetitia, the reaction of the Cardinals who had spoken against the new made-up moral doctrine at the time of the Synods had been expected.

      Here it is: four among them have chosen to make public the dubia that they had presented, formally, to the Pope a couple of months ago. It’s a true earthquake — of a moral nature.

      Four members of the Pope’s own Senate (I’ve been told indeed that those who presented, but did not wish to go public, were more numerous) present him questions on Faith and Morals, according to the procedure of the dubia, which must be answered: either positive (yes) or negative (no) — with modulations, if necessary, but must be answered.

      And the Pope made known to the Cardinals that HE WOULD NOT ANSWER THEM. In all truth, it’s this silence that makes the earth tremble.”

      So it seems that the number of Cardinals involved is in fact more than 4, but why do they hide themselves away? if they seek to avoid embarrassing Francis, then they are treating him with much more respect than he is deserving of.

      Francis isn’t fit to hold the petrine office – here he is being asked to provide guidance for the Church, to counter the confusion he himself has sown, and he is flatly refusing to do so.

      November 14, 2016 at 2:05 pm
      • Margaret Mary

        Well, behind the scenes work is better than nothing, but surely it would be better if these cardinals did not let up and spoke out all the time to counter-influence what Francis is doing?

        It’s showing contempt for his critics, that Francis won’t answer the concerned cardinals. So much for his talk of respect etc. Also for “making a mess”. If it’s not the kind of mess he approves of, LOL!

        I agree that he is not fit to hold the Petrine office.

        November 14, 2016 at 2:58 pm
      • Gerontius


        It look’s like the opposition are starting to get serious about taking action against Francis

        Here’s the latest from Fr John Hunwicke


        Readers will have read the news, at Fr Z and Rorate and Sandro Magister, about the Letter of the Four Cardinals to the Holy Father, seeking clarity on certain aspects of Amoris laetitia.

        It must be a matter of sadness to all Catholics, whatever their ‘political’ complexion, that the Roman Pontiff apparently decided not to reply to their Letter.

        It must be a matter of grief that other Cardinals and locorum Ordinarii have felt unable to join this initiative because they still have diocesan or curial responsibilities. I have heard from several sources about the atmosphere of fear that exists in Rome and elsewhere. It reminds me of the cruel attempts at intimidation which followed the publication of the Letter of the 45, of which I felt honoured to have been invited to be a signatory.

        Apparently, it is now to be the particular ministry and calling of the elderly or the retired or the sacked, because they have nothing to fear being sacked from, to speak with Parrhesia.

        Reliance upon fear is not Christ’s way to govern His Church.

        If this pontificate was not already in crisis, it most certainly is now.
        Posted by Fr John Hunwicke at 10:58 14 November 2016


        November 14, 2016 at 5:30 pm
      • Gerontius

        Mary, Destroyer of All Heresies

        Fr. Paul Scalia
        Sunday, August 14, 2016

        In Pascendi dominici gregis, Pope Pius X invokes the Blessed Virgin Mary by the title Destroyer of all heresies. He took this curious appellation for the gentle, sweet maiden of Nazareth from the Mass of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The title had particular meaning in Pascendi, which was written in 1911 against modernism, the “synthesis of all heresies.” Faced with that crisis, it was proper to appeal to the Destroyer of all heresies. The title still applies, however. Indeed, it describes something that has always been true of our Lady – and is perhaps even more urgent now.


        Monday, 14 November 2016
        BREAKING and EXPLOSIVE: Bergoglio ignores plea of Cardinals – they have now literally put him on public trial!


        A “dubia,” requires a one word answer; yes, or no. There is no theological argument, no debate. The argument is put forward with the question. It is a long-standing practice.

        The dubia was submitted two months ago, the reason the Cardinals have now released it, is because Bergoglio has ignored it.

        Well, no more. This is big. This is very, very big and without precedent.


        November 14, 2016 at 8:39 pm
      • gabriel syme


        If this pontificate was not already in crisis, it most certainly is now.

        Thank you for the link to Fr Hunwicks article, his concluding sentence (above) gives encouragement.

        It seems to me that, now this document (and lack of response) is public, Bergoglio is in difficulty.

        Don’t get me wrong, he is very single minded and arrogant and I am sure he thinks it is wholly credible for him to publicly ignore his Cardinals (so much for collegiality! ha!).

        However, the fact that he has ignored the questions (or may possibly give a heretical answer) means that this mess should be easy for any half decent future Pope to correct. And now not even the most intransigent pollyanna can continue to overlook the conduct of this Pontificate.

        November 14, 2016 at 10:50 pm
      • Gerontius

        Standby for action, we are about to launch….Cardinal Burke!

        Tue Nov 15, 2016 – 7:32 pm EST

        BREAKING: Cardinal Burke says if Pope won’t clarify ‘serious error’, Cardinals must make ‘formal act of correction’


        November 16, 2016 at 7:55 am
      • gabriel syme

        Thanks for posting that Geronitus!

        I am pleased the Cardinal has made these pronoucements openly.

        I would like to think he speaks while being aware of a good amount of (as yet not made public) support, although he does make it clear that it is the truth, and not mere numbers, which is important here.

        As a minimum, the declared Cardinals must surely be able to count on the support of the Poles, Africans and (most) North Americans.

        The great malaise in the Church seems to be in Western Europe – where many prelates are protestant in all but name – and Latin American, where many prelates are Marxists in all but name.

        November 16, 2016 at 10:37 am
  • wendy walker


    I wonder if he wrote to Killory with sympathy re losing the Election ?

    Also congratulations PAt brilliant e -mails lets hope they bear great fruit ..I have not heard back yet from Waterstones

    November 14, 2016 at 10:27 am
  • crofterlady

    Gabriel Syme, thanks for that enthralling link. We are obviously in a very, very grave situation; worse than ever in history, I think. Where will it all end, I wonder? One feels powerless as this unfolds.

    November 14, 2016 at 4:58 pm
  • gabriel syme

    This website has an interview with Cardinal Burke, regarding the document he and other Cardinals have put to Pope Francis:


    November 14, 2016 at 10:45 pm
    • editor

      Gabriel Syme,

      I read through the Catholic Action interview, which is excellent. Thank you for posting the link. I’ve extracted the following because it confirms, from Scripture, the Catholic Truth position on publicity of scandals, which we always quote to our critics, and also because it underlines the nature of this pope’s teaching method – non-Magisterial – which is at the heart of this thread:


      CA: So you are saying that you are publishing a letter that you sent to the Pope privately. This is extraordinary. Isn’t this action objectionable from a Christian point of view? Our Lord said in the Gospel of Matthew (18:15) that if we have a problem with a brother, we are supposed to talk with him privately, one-on-one, not publicly.

      In the same portion of Sacred Scripture to which you refer, Our Lord also said that, after addressing a difficulty to a brother, individually and together with others, without it being resolved, then, for the good of the Church the matter is to be presented to the whole Church. This is precisely what we are doing.

      There have been many other statements of concern regarding Amoris Laetitia, all of which have not received an official response from the Pope or his representatives. Therefore, in order to look for clarity on these matters, three other Cardinals and I used the formality of presenting fundamental questions directly to the Holy Father and to the Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. No response has been given to these questions either. Therefore, in making public our questions or dubia, we are being faithful to Christ’s mandate to first talk with a person privately, then in a small group, and finally, taking the matter to the Church as a whole.

      CA: Some Catholics may be concerned that your current publication is an act of disloyalty.

      I, together with the other three Cardinals, are striving to be loyal to the Holy Father by being loyal to Christ above all. By making public our plea for clarity of doctrine and pastoral practice, we are hoping to make this a discussion for all Catholics, especially our fellow bishops. Every baptized person should be concerned about doctrine and moral practices regarding the Holy Eucharist and Holy Matrimony, and about how we are to identify good and evil actions. These matters affect all of us.

      Rather than being a matter of disloyalty to the Pope, our action is deeply loyal to everything that the Pope represents and is obliged to defend in his official capacity. Pope Francis has called for candid speech in the Church a number of times, and has asked members of the hierarchy for openness and accountability. We are being candid, with the fullest respect for the office of the Holy Father, and exercising, according to the light of our consciences, the openness and accountability which the Church has the right to expect of us.

      This is my duty as a Cardinal of the Catholic Church. I was not created a Cardinal in order to receive an honorary position. Rather, Pope Benedict XVI made me a Cardinal to assist him and his successors in governing the Church and teaching the Faith. All Cardinals have the duty of working closely with the Pope for the good of souls, and this is precisely what I am doing by raising questions of grave importance regarding faith and morals. I would not be fulfilling my duty as a cardinal, and therefore as counselor to the Pope, if I remained silent on an issue of such serious matter.

      CA: If I may, I would like to continue this line of thought. It is unclear how your publication is being docile to the Pope’s desire for greater pastoral sensitivity and creativeness in the Church. Hasn’t the Pope indicated his position in a letter to the Argentine Bishops? Other Cardinals have said that the proper way to read Amoris Laetitia is that it allows divorced-and-remarried couples to receive communion in certain circumstances. In that light, one could argue that your document is creating more confusion.

      First, a point of clarification. The issue is not about divorced and remarried couples receiving Holy Communion. It is about sexually active but not validly married couples receiving Holy Communion. When a couple obtains a civil divorce and a canonical declaration that they were never validly married, then they are free to marry in the Church and receive Holy Communion, when they are properly disposed to receive. The Kasper proposal is to allow a person to receive Holy Communion when he or she has validly pronounced marriage vows but is no longer living with his or her spouse and now lives with another person with whom he or she is sexually active. In reality, this proposal opens the door for anyone committing any sin to receive Holy Communion without repenting of the sin.

      I would also like to point out that only the first of our questions to the Holy Father focuses on Holy Matrimony and the Holy Eucharist. Questions two, three, and four are about fundamental issues regarding the moral life: whether intrinsically evil acts exist, whether a person who habitually commits grave evil is in a state of “grave sin”, and whether a grave sin can ever become a good choice because of circumstances or intentions.

      It is true that the Holy Father wrote a letter to the Argentinian Bishops, and that some Cardinals have proposed the interpretations of Amoris Laetitia that you have mentioned. However, the Holy Father himself has not clarified some of the “knotty” issues. It would contradict the Faith if any Catholic, including the Pope, said that a person can receive Holy Communion without repenting of grave sin, or that living in a marital way with someone who is not his or her spouse is not a state of grave sin, or that there is no such thing as an act that is always and everywhere evil and can send a person to perdition. Thus, I join my brother Cardinals in making a plea for an unmistakable clarification from Pope Francis himself. His voice, the voice of the Successor of Saint Peter, can dispel any questions about the issue. END OF EXTRACTS

      November 15, 2016 at 11:52 am
      • Ben

        It is a very good interview.

        November 15, 2016 at 12:50 pm
  • gabriel syme

    Here is 1P5s take on the dubia document, the opening quotation is a wry reference to Francis’ lack of response to the Cardinals:

    The maxim is “Qui tacet consentire”: the maxim of the law is “Silence gives consent”. If therefore you wish to construe what my silence betokened, you must construe that I consented, not that I denied.

    -St. Thomas More, A Man for All Seasons


    November 14, 2016 at 11:00 pm
  • wendy walker November 18, 2016 at 2:56 pm
  • wendy walker


    For some reason the above article never copied …heres another article very shocking

    November 18, 2016 at 3:01 pm
    • Pat McKay

      Thanks, Wendy.

      How very noble of ‘Queen Nicola’ to consider inviting NI women to avail themselves of abortion ‘services’ in Scotland. Wow!

      But while so many Western ‘wimmin’ are contracepting and exercising their ‘right to choose’, it is the duty of every Muslim woman ‘to bear seven sons for Allah’. Try taking a lunch-time stroll along Luton’s George Street, you can amuse yourself playing…’spot the hijab-wearer who isn’t pregnant’… I’m not a big fan of Islam, but should say I have have no word of reproach for its pro-life ethos.

      Anyway, no need for a crystal ball to see that Britain will find herself under sharia law in the not-too-distant future. (As the U.S. President-elect pointed out, some parts of the UK are already no-go areas, where the police fear to tread). I wonder how ‘liberated’ all those rabid ‘pro-choice, feminista sistas’ think they will be THEN. The only ‘choice they will have is maybe which implement gets used for their FGM!

      This article by Jonathan Tuttle, titled ‘Thank Allah for Little Girls?’ makes for some unpleasant reading, so do brace yourselves:-


      November 22, 2016 at 11:53 am
  • wendy walker


    I provide abortions because I am a Christian ..USA

    November 18, 2016 at 3:06 pm
  • wendy walker November 19, 2016 at 1:43 pm
  • wendy walker


    The Gentleman who wrote this is not a Catholic but the Blog is shocking to read unbelievable

    November 19, 2016 at 3:08 pm
  • wendy walker



    November 21, 2016 at 11:50 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: