Leo’s Cavalry Is Not Coming to the Rescue of Believing Catholics

Both the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his very much alive successor, Robert Francis Prevost, have denounced dogmatic “rigidity” as “ideology” the former accepted and the latter accepts every leftist shibboleth about “vaccines,” mask mandates, social distancing mandates, “climate change,” and open borders with absolute dogmatic rigidity. What is more is that these false “pontiffs” and most, although not all, of their conciliar “hierarchy” have denounced anyone who questions any of the precepts advanced by globalists, statists, and other all around nogoodniks as being detached from reality when it is they, the conciliar revolutionaries themselves, who are so detached.

Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s Dilexi te, October 4, 2025, contains passages denouncing the treatment of "migrants,” who just happened to have crossed into other nations in violation of just laws to provide for an orderly migration process to protect both the immigrants and domestic public health and safety, as unjust and he has always told various American “bishops” in their ad limina apostolorum visits that they must oppose President Donald John Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration, fully ignoring the fact that illegal immigration has facilitated the global human trafficking networks and exacerbated the existing problems of exploiting children to coerce them to be used for sins against Holy Purity.

Prevost is thus oblivious as to how the current administration is cracking down on violent drug cartel members who are in the United States of America and that is also rescuing children from the clutches of these cartels’ exploitation operations:

Around the year 1212, a boy preached to children in France that they should take up the cross and follow him to the Holy Land. Thousands did. None reached Jerusalem. Most gave up before leaving Europe. Others were shipwrecked or sold into slavery in the Islamic caliphate of Tunisia.

Centuries later, the Biden administration’s facilitation of mass illegal entry by unaccompanied alien children (UACs) and releasing them into the hands of unvetted adults has caused misery on an even larger scale.

The seed was planted years earlier. As Lora Ries, a former official with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, wrote, a 2008 law called the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) created incentives to "entice parents to send their children across the border unaccompanied to receive immigration benefits and gain a foothold in the U.S. so their families could hopefully later follow."

In the early 2000s, between 4,800 and 8,200 UACs were encountered at the border per year. After the TVPRA, numbers rose, hitting 68,000 in 2014.

Under Biden, federal agencies became the last leg in an international smuggling business that brought millions of inadmissible aliens to the U.S. from around the world, including 550,000 minors. As expert witness Tara Rodas testified to the House Homeland Security Committee in November 2024, "Criminal sponsors are defrauding the U.S. government by using this government program as a logistical chain in their trafficking operation."

While illegal alien parents and labor-exploiting employers paid for UACs to get to the U.S. border, it was often our tax dollars that brought them inside the country and delivered them into the hands of barely vetted adult sponsors.

Inadmissible UACs from further than Mexico who try to enter the U.S. illegally become the responsibility of the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).

Under Biden, children were released to putative sponsors in a matter of days. Verification of the sponsors’ identities was inexcusably lax. HHS released children to sponsors with whom they had no blood relation and allowed adult sponsors to send photos of identification documents rather than come in personally. There was little follow-up to check on the children’s welfare after placement with the sponsors.

A February 2024 HHS inspector general’s report looked at 342 of 16,790 UACs they had released to parents or sponsors in March and April of 2021. In 16% of cases, there was no evidence that required sponsor safety checks had been done. Almost one in five UACs were "released to sponsors with pending FBI fingerprint or State child abuse and neglect registry checks" – and when those results came in, the files were never updated. In a third of the cases, the identification documents the sponsors submitted "contained legibility concerns" – a nice way of saying ORR couldn’t read them properly to confirm they were valid.

What if the sponsors weren’t caring for the children or were exploiting them? No one knew. ORR’s follow-up was in most cases only a phone call.

In 22% of cases HHS examined, "ORR did not conduct timely Safety and Well-Being Follow Up Calls," and in another 18% of cases they didn’t document those calls in the case files. That was in early 2021 – and the UAC numbers got worse later in the Biden years. As this chart shows, every year from 2021 – 2024 saw more than 100,000 UACs apprehended entering illegally – nearly all of whom would have been released into the U.S.

Under our immigration laws, UACs should be removed unless they are given asylum or other protection. But incredibly, ICE failed to issue Notices to Appear in immigration court to over 291,000 UACs they released between 2019 and 2024, according to the DHS Inspector General. And when they did, more than 43,000 of them never showed up for a hearing.

The New York Times reported that "[m]igrant children have ended up working dangerous industrial jobs in violation of child labor laws across the country — in slaughterhouses, factories, construction sites and elsewhere… Some have been gravely injured or killed."

Having ended Biden’s catch-and-release at the border, the Trump administration is now repairing the damage done over four years of recklessness and negligence. This means not only arresting, detaining, and deporting adult illegal aliens, but also finding thousands of UACs whom HHS has lost track of. The aim is to return as many children as possible to their parents, ideally back in their home countries. So far, the Trump administration has found 13,000 of the UACs who dropped off the radar.

Today, ORR is requiring proper identification, with fingerprints, photos, DNA samples, as well as background checks and financial records before they release children. Alien adults in the U.S. who have pending asylum claims – even bogus or fraudulent ones that will ultimately fail – can still pick up their children from ORR and keep custody pending the family’s immigration process. Many don’t, because they aren’t really relatives. Or they fear due process because they are here illegally and haven’t taken even basic steps to try and legalize their status.

Now that ORR is strictly verifying parent and sponsor identities, the average time children remain in ORR custody has grown from a few weeks to months. That is testament to how weak the vetting standards for sponsors have been for the last four years. Many teens who came to work here leaving their parents abroad are opting to go home rather than stay longer in ORR custody.

Federal law requires the government to "ensure that unaccompanied alien children in the United States are safely repatriated to their country of nationality." That should be the priority now. Then, Congress needs to close the UAC loopholes in immigration law and return custody responsibility from HHS back to DHS, so that never again will so many children be at risk of serious harm and fall through the cracks of an immigration system spread among too many federal agencies. (Border negligence: How Biden lost track of thousands of migrant children.)

Four people are facing charges in a shocking child-smuggling case out of El Paso, Texas.

The four are accused of smuggling unaccompanied children between five and 13 years old from Juárez, Mexico, into the United States, posing as the children's parents at Border Patrol checkpoints and sedating them with marijuana gummies.

Mexican nationals Susana Guadian and Daniel Guadian, their daughter, Dianne Guadian, a U.S. citizen; and Manuel Valenzuela, a legal U.S. resident living in El Paso, were charged in the Western District of Texas with conspiracy to transport aliens and bringing aliens to the U.S. for financial gain. Officials are working on extraditing the Mexican nationals to the U.S. to face their charges, according to Jason Stevens, the Special Agent in Charge of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) El Paso.

"They would have the drivers pose as their parents and provide U.S. documents, falsely claiming that the documents belong to those children that were being smuggled," Stevens said.

According to the criminal complaint, the smuggling events happened between May 1, 2024, and Oct. 18, 2024. During at least one smuggling event, one child was taken to the hospital after taking gummy candies laced with marijuana.

"We've seen everything from Benadryl to now these gummies being used to be able to sedate the children," Stevens added. "They would normally bring them in overnight between 10 a.m. and 4 or 5 a.m., when the children would be sleeping anyway. They use that to ensure that they stay sedated, and that way they're less likely to answer questions or provide anything that's going to be inconsistent or contrary to what the smuggler's saying."

The criminal complaint includes text messages to the suspect, which translate to English, "Young lady, are you working today? I have a boy 7 and 8. They are small," and another text reads, "Also Fanny, I have two little girls ages 4 and 5."

Proof-of-life pictures of some of the children were found on the suspects' phones.

Stevens says the parents trusted the smugglers to deliver their children to family members in the U.S., despite the significant risks. 

"These children are nothing more than currency to the criminals," Stevens said. "We want to ensure that we interdict this and stop this before they get here because there are instances where we find children that are in stash houses, or we get cases where we will be contacted by a local department where a family is being extorted and children are being held."

Earlier this month, Fox News got an exclusive look at the team within the Office of Refugee Resettlement which was created under the Trump administration to help find the tens of thousands of unaccompanied minors who disappeared into the system under the Biden administration.

"While we understand people wanting to come to the United States for a better way of life, there is a legal way to do it," Stevens said. "That is the way obviously that we suggest that they do that and that money be invested in that process, because when they go with a smuggling organization, they can't control any of the elements or the people that are smuggling them." (El Paso smuggling ring used marijuana gummies to sedate children, 4 charged.)

No, none of this can be allowed to pierce the alternative universe in which Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV and his fellow revolutionaries within the counterfeit church of conciliarism as he exhorts his “bishops” to oppose the Trump administration while his predecessor not only never told the American “bishops” to oppose the Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.’s administration’s fascistic anti-life, anti-family policies but went out of his perverted way to undermine “pro-life” “bishops” and to specifically indemnify the likes of Biden and Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi.

Indeed, the disdain for Donald John Trump is so pronounced in the conciliar structures that neither Pietro Parolin, the conciliar Secretary of State, nor Prevost/Leo himself even whispered the name of the forty-seventh President of the United States of American when mentioning their pleasure at the “peace” agreement between Israel and Hamas that would not have occurred without the president’s direct intervention. I mean, even Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton has praised Trump for the "peace" agreement (see Hillary Clinton heaps rare praise on President Trump for handling of Israel-Hamas peace deal: 'I really commend'), but Prevost and Parolin cannot bring themsevles to do so. 

This conciliar Manicheanism is such that everything proposed by a public official who is “pro-life” but who believes in the enforcement of just immigration laws must be “bad” and everything supported by the anti-life globalists must be “good” in se.

Similarly, the conciliar revolutionaries must go out of their way never to say anything that might offend Mohammedans, thus demonstrating their “solidarity” with like-minded globalists in the world who are busy punishing people for the crime of “Islamophobia,” including a conciliar presbyter in Spain named “Father” Custodio Ballester:

Freedom of speech and religion in Spain is in play as Father Custodio Ballester faces a possible three-year prison sentence and fines after a trial this week found him guilty of making allegedly “Islamophobic” statements in print and in an interview. 

Questioned by CNA about his upcoming sentencing, Ballester said: “The survival of freedom of expression in today’s Spain depends on the ruling in this case. Otherwise, we’ll be headed toward a new Cuban dictatorship. One where you were arrested for what you said as well as for what you thought, if it differed from what [Cuban communist dictator] Fidel Castro decided.”

Ballester and two others, fellow priest Father Jesús Calvo and journalist Armando Robles, were accused of making allegedly Islamophobic statements in complaints filed before Spain’s socialist government by the Association of Spanish Muslims Against Islamophobia. On Oct. 1, those complaints were examined for several hours at the Provincial Court of Málaga.

Ballester told CNA that his “statements have never been discriminatory or hateful,” in reference to an interview he gave in 2017 to online talk show “La Ratonera” and previous writings. 

Speaking to the media after exiting the court, the priest said he is calm, adding: “This is the final hearing, and now we are awaiting the result.”

He told CNA: “In the Spanish army’s special forces, we used to say: ‘Prepare for the worst. The easy stuff has already been planned for.’ That’s why I’m calm. If everything goes well, I’ll be even happier.”

The case against Ballester and his co-defendants has sparked considerable debate in Spain and Europe over its perceived threat to free speech and claims that hate-crime laws are selectively applied. 

In 2016, Ballester responded to a pastoral letter from Cardinal Juan José Omella Omella of Barcelona. In his answer to Omella, Ballester wrote that dialogue with Islam is “impossible,” despite the prelate’s claim that such dialogue is “necessary.”

The priest wrote: “This renewed revival of Christian-Muslim dialogue, paralyzed by the alleged ‘imprudence’ of the beloved Benedict XVI, is far from a reality. Islam does not allow for dialogue. You either believe or you are an infidel who must be subdued one way or another.”

In 2017, Ballester appeared in an online interview with Robles and Calvo in which the three discussed the threat of radical Islam to Europe. Robles owns the YouTube channel where “La Ratonera” broadcast the interview in question.

A ‘one-way crime’: They only charge Christians, never Muslims

Ballester told CNA: “The prosecution demonstrates with its actions that so-called hate crimes exist to restrict freedom of thought and expression. The Hate Law is legally a ‘blank law,’ or a blank check. Not even the prosecutors themselves know how to define ‘hate.’ They fabricate the crime in each case based on who allegedly committed it, and it’s a one-way crime. They only charge Christians, never Muslims.”

Ballester has been criticized also for his advocacy of Catholic doctrine regarding, for example, homosexuality and procured abortion. Leftist LGBTQ activists have accused him of “homophobia.” He has said that Spanish justice appears to prosecute supposed Islamophobia and homophobia with rigor but looks the other way when Christians are involved. He has also denounced the persecution of Christians in places like Nigeria, Syria, and Bangladesh. 

A public advocacy law firm, Abogados Cristianos, has gathered more than 28,000 signatures demanding Ballester’s acquittal. Outside the courtroom in Málaga on Oct. 1, dozens of the priest’s supporters could be seen holding placards demanding his acquittal. Supporters outside the courthouse collected signatures on petitions, which are circulating online. Groups such as HazteOir, the Observatory for Religious Freedom and Conscience, and the Spanish Institute for Social Policy have added their voices to the protests.

Ballester said the threat to free speech is very real. If the court does sentence him to prison, he said he will appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

“The ruling from the Málaga Provincial Court could be delayed somewhat. People are very angry about the excessive sentences being sought for ‘hate crimes,’ which are comparable to those sought for sexual assault or leaving someone paralyzed in a fight. Political pressure may delay the ruling,” he said.

The priest was philosophical with regard to a possible prison sentence, reflecting on his military training in special forces. While he never saw combat, he wrote that he experienced everything else, including “training, weapons, hand-to-hand combat, topographical surveys day and night, and obstacle courses,” which forged in him “obedience and resignation in the face of adversity, much more than in the seminary.”

The Spanish Observatory for Religious Freedom and Conscience quoted its president, María García, expressing her alarm that Ballester is facing prison “simply for warning, in the exercise of his freedom of expression and conscience, about the threat of radical jihadism. Defending religious freedom also means protecting the freedom of those, like Father Custodio, who warn of realities that have already caused deaths in our country and in Europe.” 

García recalled that in January 2023, a Muslim jihadist murdered sacristan Diego Valencia and wounded a priest at a church in southern Spain, asking: “Is the crime committed by those who denounce violence or by those who carry it out?” (Freedom of speech, religion in play as Spanish priest is prosecuted for denouncing radical Islam.)

Leo’s cavalry is not coming to the rescue of “Father” Custodio Ballester as he is as one with the Eurosocialists who must avoid all criticism of Mohammedanism even when its fully faithful adherents commit violent acts that largely go unpunished:

A day after an Islamist rampage against a British synagogue and two days after the indictment in Berlin of three suspected Hamas members for planning terror attacks in Germany, German chancellor Friedrich Merz and French president Emanuel Macron met in Saarbrücken, Germany, and warned of . . . right-wing threats to European democracies. Neither said a word about the Manchester assault or the Berlin indictment.

Instead, Merz announced to the European potentates commemorating the 35th anniversary of German reunification that “our liberal way of life is under attack, from both outside and within.” German broadcaster Deutsche Welle decoded for the clueless: Merz’s enemy “within” was the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), Germany’s voice for immigration restrictionism.

Macron connected those external and internal threats: “authoritarian countries” outside Europe are “aligned with the extreme parties” inside Europe, he said. Europe’s “extreme parties” embrace a “new nationalism,” based on “hate of the other,” according to Macron. Unless European democrats fend off the “dark Enlightenment,” the European continent would become “like many others,” filled with “conspiracy theorists, extremes, noise, and fury.”

It required no decoding to pick up the reference to the North American continent.

German president Frank-Walter Steinmeier took up the same theme: political forces looking to undermine democratic institutions and poison debate with hatred were gathering strength, especially in Germany’s East—another boilerplate reference to the AfD. “Let’s not allow our democracy to be further damaged,” said Steinmeier.

The Saarbrücken speeches illustrate a key rule of contemporary European power: wheresoever two or more members of the European elite gather together, they will denounce the “far right,” right-wing “extremists,” and “dangerous nationalists.” They will ignore Islamist violence. In Saarbrücken, Merz did not note that attacks on Jews in Germany have been spiraling upward. Merz did not mention Germany’s knifing assaults by first- and second-generation immigrants or the fact that immigrants and their progeny commit a vast disproportion of crime.

In August 2025, for example, an American was slashed in the face while trying to protect two women from nonnative attackers on a Dresden streetcar. In February 2025, a Syrian refugee stabbed a Spanish tourist at Berlin’s Holocaust Memorial so severely that the victim had to be placed in an induced coma. The refugee had been planning for weeks “to kill Jews.” In January 2025, an Afghan immigrant knifed to death a toddler and an adult in Aschaffenburg. In August 2024, an illegal Syrian fatally stabbed three people and seriously wounded ten others at a “diversity” festival in Solingen. In May 2024, an Afghan stabbed to death a police officer in Mannheim and gravely injured five other people at a rally protesting mass immigration.

At the German reunification ceremony, Macron did not mention France’s no-go zones, where state authority has broken down. He did not acknowledge France’s history of large-scale Islamist terror episodes.

Wheresoever two or more members of the European elite gather together, they will show no self-awareness that they are the ones threatening democracy with their “firewalls” against cooperation with democratically elected populists; with their ad hoc rule changes to block those democratically elected representatives from their parliamentary rights; with their attempted party bans; with their shunning, silencing, and sidelining of dissenters; with their press blackouts on coverage of populist party leaders; with their social media censorship of “hate speech,” and with their arrests of “haters.”

Germany’s AfD, France’s Rassemblement National, and Britain’s Reform U.K. have proposed no such democracy-quashing measures but seek only to exercise their political rights. Being an “enemy of democracy,” in establishment Europeanspeak, simply means opposing uncontrolled Third World immigration.

Germany’s elites and their European brethren pretend that the biggest threat to Jews in Europe comes from the right. Never mind that the AfD, the Rassemblement National, and Reform UK are the most philo-Semitic and pro-Israel parties in their respective countries.

Wheresoever two or more members of the European elite gather together, they will cloak themselves in the mantle of science and enlightened expertise. In Saarbrücken, Macron denounced the “return of the dark Enlightenment.” The “new Enlightenment,” as he put it, believes that “respect and science are stronger than hate and fury.” That is the same respect for “science,” presumably, which closed schools during the Covid epidemic—despite evidence that children faced virtually no mortal risk from the disease—established arbitrary social distancing rules, and shut down the economy without regard to costs and benefits.

The elites can hardly open their mouths without invoking diversity. In Saarbrücken, Merz insisted that Germany must be “open to the world.” British Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy couldn’t offer condolence for the Manchester victims without making reference to the Rainbow Coalition. “Our country, those of all colors, all faiths and none, stand with you,” he told mourners at a vigil. The risk that that Rainbow Coalition might break down is the biggest threat from Islamist terrorists, according to Lammy. “We cannot, must not, let them divide us—we must show them who we really are, not what they want us to become or to believe,” he said.

Actually, the Islamist agenda is oblivious to Western multiculturalism, even as that multiculturalism is the key to its power in the West.

On the evening of the Manchester attack, anti-Israel activists marched in Manchester and London, leading to 40 arrests, including six for assaulting police officers. The feckless British home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, expressed her disappointment at the demonstrations, which had ignored pleas by British leaders to give the country a chance to grieve. “Carrying on in this way does feel un-British,” Mahmood said. Mahmood is just now noticing that Britain has become decidedly un-British. Don’t expect that recognition to last.

Nigel Farrage, head of Reform UK, provided a sharper gloss: the Thursday night demonstrations were celebrations of the synagogue attack, he said.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Metropolitan Police Chief Mark Rowley promised beefed-up protection at Jewish sites over the weekend after the rampage. Physical protection is not what European Jewry and other European natives need. It is impossible to put enough police officers at every possible site of terrorist attack. The only lasting security involves reducing migrant populations through deportation and strict border control.

The obsession with the “far right” among European elites has become a psychotic delusion. AfD, Rassemblement National, and Reform U.K. voters are ordinary people, no different from their fellow citizens except in their willingness to oppose the open-borders status quo. Their leaders do not seek to destroy democracy; they only want to participate in it.

Yet populist party members are portrayed as a pathogen within the body politic. British Housing Secretary Steve Reed said on September 28 that the Labor Party is the “disinfectant that is going to clean up the pollution of the Far Right in our politics.” Such concern with purity is ironic in people who rest their moral authority on their allegedly unique opposition to fascism.

The European globalists’ refusal to work with restrictionist parties is worsening government instability and incoherence. Macron is seeking his eighth prime minister since he took office in 2017. Five of those late PMs bit the dust since 2022. Macron’s most recent one lasted just weeks. The German “firewall” against the AfD has prevented Chancellor Merz from enacting the economic reforms, including to competition-busting climate mandates, that he knows are necessary.

The people will not be disinfected out of their beliefs, however. Across Europe, populist parties are growing in strength (as demonstrated again this weekend in the Czech Republic). They are the last Europeans with the will to conserve European civilization. The establishment cartel will try to hold on as long as possible, through as many anti-democratic gambits as it can cobble together. Which side prevails in that battle will determine the future of the West. (For European Elites, It’s Still “See No Islamist Evil”.)

Thus, "Father" Custdio Ballester will receive no sympathy from the man he thinks is "Pope Leo XIV, especially since Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s exercise of religious indifferentism, Jorge and the Imam's Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, has been praised several times in the past five months by Prevost/Leo himself, and also because the mania for “interreligious dialogue” has been such that is indeed a crime against “ecumenism” to speak the truth about any false religion, including even mentioning Hillaire Belloc’s essay on the “enduring heresy of Mohammedanism”:

Mohammedanism was a heresy: that is the essential point to grasp before going any further. It began as a heresy, not as a new religion. It was not a pagan contrast with the Church; it was not an alien enemy. It was a perversion of Christian doctrine. It vitality and endurance soon gave it the appearance of a new religion, but those who were contemporary with its rise saw it for what it was not a denial, but an adaptation and a misuse, of the Christian thing. It differed from most (not from all) heresies in this, that it did not arise within the bounds of the Christian Church. The chief heresiarch, Mohammed himself, was not, like most heresiarchs, a man of Catholic birth and doctrine to begin with. He sprang from pagans. But that which he taught was in the main Catholic doctrine, oversimplified. It was the great Catholic world on the frontiers of which he lived, whose influence was all around him and whose territories he had known by travel which inspired his convictions. He came of, and mixed with, the degraded idolaters of the Arabian wilderness, the conquest of which had never seemed worth the Romans' while. . . .

But the central point where this new heresy struck home with a mortal blow against Catholic tradition was a full denial of the Incarnation.

Mohammed did not merely take the first steps toward that denial, as the Arians and their followers had done; he advanced a clear affirmation, full and complete, against the whole doctrine of an incarnate God. He taught that Our Lord was the greatest of all the prophets, but still only a prophet: a man like other men. He eliminated the Trinity altogether. With that denial of the Incarnation went the whole sacramental structure. He refused to know anything of the Eucharist, with its Real Presence; he stopped the sacrifice of the Mass, and therefore the institution of a special priesthood. In other words, he, like so many other lesser heresiarchs, founded his heresy on simplification. Catholic doctrine was true (he seemed to say), but it had become encumbered with false accretions; it had become complicated by needless man-made additions, including the idea that its founder was Divine, and the growth of a parasitical caste of priests who battened on a late, imagined, system of Sacraments which they alone could administer.

All those corrupt accretions must be swept away. There is thus a very great deal in common between the enthusiasm with which Mohammed's teaching attacked the priesthood, the Mass and the sacraments, and the enthusiasm with which Calvinism, the central motive force of the Reformation, did the same. As we all know, the new teaching relaxed the marriage laws but in practice this did not affect the mass of his followers who still remained monogamous. It made divorce as easy as possible, for the sacramental idea of marriage disappeared. It insisted upon the equality of men, and it necessarily had that further factor in which it resembled Calvinism: the sense of predestination, the sense of fate; of what the followers of John Knox were always calling "the immutable decrees of God." (The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed. Also see the appendix on Mohammedanism.)

It is no wonder that the conciliar revolutionaries have such an affinity for Mohammedanism as its blasphemous founder, the false prophet Mohammed, attacked the same things that they have: "the priesthood, the Mass and the sacraments." The conciliar “popes” have been chief among those alive today who did these things with the "same enthusiasm" as the Calvinists had done in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, driven by the "central motive force of the Reformation," a hatred of the visible, hierarchical church in favor of an amorphous mass of believers.

Mohammedanism is not worthy of any kind of respect. Neither is its blasphemous book, the Koran, which is just as offensive to God as is every single Protestant version of the Bible, each of which is filled with distortions that do not represent but indeed pervert the Sacred Word of God that was written under the direct inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost.

It is with this in mind that the open letter of Mohammedan converts to the Jorge Mario Bergoglio of a decade ago must be read as they its signers did not realize that they were dealing with an open heretic who was the head of his own false religion:

Most Holy Father, 

Many of us have tried to contact you, on many occasions and for several years, and we have never received the slightest acknowledgement of our letters or requests for meetings. You do not like to beat around the bush, and neither do we, so allow us to say frankly that we do not understand your teaching about Islam, as we read in paragraphs 252 and 253 of Evangelii Gaudium, because it does not account for the fact that Islam came AFTER Christ, and so is, and can only be, an Antichrist (see 1 Jn 2.22), and one of the most dangerous because it presents itself as the fulfillment of Revelation (of which Jesus would have been only a prophet). If Islam is a good religion in itself, as you seem to teach, why did we become Catholic? Do not your words question the soundness of the choice we made at the risk of our lives? Islam prescribes death for apostates (Quran 4.89, 8.7-11), do you know? How is it possible to compare Islamic violence with so-called Christian violence?  “What is the relationship between Christ and Satan? What union is there between light and darkness? What association between the faithful and the unfaithful?” (2 Cor 6: 14-17) In accordance with His teaching (Lk 14:26), we preferred Him, the Christ, to our own life. Are we not in a good position to talk to you about Islam?

In fact, as long as Islam wants us to be its enemy, we are, and all our protestations of friendship cannot change anything. As a proper Antichrist, Islam exists only as an enemy of all: “Between us and you there is enmity and hatred forever, until you believe in Allah alone!” (Qur’an 60.4) For the Qur’an, Christians “are only impurity” (Quran 9.28),” “the worst of Creation” (Qur’an 98.6), all condemned to Hell (Qur’an 4.48), so Allah must exterminate them (Quran 9.30). We must not be deceived by the Quranic verses deemed tolerant, because they have all been repealed by the verse of the Sword (Quran 9.5). Where the Gospel proclaims the good news of Jesus’ death and resurrection for the salvation of all, and the fulfillment of the Covenant initiated with the Hebrews, Allah has nothing to offer but war and murder of the “infidels” in exchange for his paradise: “They fight on the way of Allah, they kill and are killed.” (Quran 9:11) We do not confuse Islam with Muslims, but if for you “dialogue” means the voice of peace, for Islam it’s only another way to make war. Also, as it was in the face of Nazism and communism, naiveté in the face of Islam is suicidal and very dangerous. How can you speak of peace and endorse Islam, as you seem to do:  “To wring from our hearts the disease that plagues our lives (…) Let those who are Christians do it with the Bible and those who are Muslims do it with the Quran. “(Rome, January 20, 2014)? That the Pope seems to propose the Quran as a way of salvation, is that not cause for worry? Should we return to Islam?

We beg you not to seek in Islam an ally in your fight against the powers that want to dominate and enslave the world, since they share the same totalitarian logic based on the rejection of the kingship of Christ (Lk 4.7). We know that the Beast of the Apocalypse, seeking to devour the Woman and her Child, has many heads. Allah defends such alliances by the way (Quran 5.51)! Moreover, the prophets have always reproached Israel for its willingness to ally with foreign powers, to the detriment of the complete confidence they should’ve had in God. Certainly, the temptation is strong to think that speaking in an Islamophilic tone will prevent more suffering for Christians in those countries that have become Muslim, but apart from the fact that Jesus has never indicated any other way than that of the Cross, so that we must find our joy therein and not flee with all the damned, we do not doubt that only the proclamation of the Truth brings with it not only salvation, but freedom as well (John 8.32). Our duty is to bear witness to the truth “in season and out of season” (2 Timothy 4.2), and our glory is to be able to say with St. Paul: “I did not want to know anything among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.” (1 Corinthians 2.2)

As to Your Holiness’s stance on Islam: even as President Erdogan, among others, asks his countrymen not to integrate into their host countries, and while Saudi Arabia and all the petrol monarchies do not welcome any refugee, expressions (among others) of the project of conquest and Islamization of Europe, officially proclaimed by the OIC and other Islamic organizations for decades; you, Most Holy Father, preach the welcoming of migrants regardless of the fact that they are Muslims, something forbidden by Apostolic command: “If anyone comes to you but refuses this Gospel, do not receive him among you nor greet him. Whoever greets him participates in his evil works.” (2 John 1.10-11); “If anyone preaches to you a different Gospel, let him be accursed!” (Galatians 1.8-9)

Just as “For I was hungry, and you gave me no food.” (Mt 25:42) cannot mean that Jesus would have liked to be a parasite, so “I was a stranger and you welcomed Me”cannot mean “I was an invader and you welcomed Me”, but rather “I needed your hospitality for a while, and you granted it to me”. The word ξένος (xenos) in the New Testament does not only have the meaning of stranger but of guest as well (Rm 16.23; 1 Co 16.5-6, Col 4.10; 3 Jn 1.5). And when YHWH in the Old Testament commands to treat foreigners well because the Hebrews have themselves been foreigners in Egypt, it is on the condition that the foreigner assimilates so well to the chosen people that he accepts their religion and practices their cult… Never is there mention of welcoming a foreigner who would keep his religion and its customs! Also, we do not understand that you are pleading for Muslims to practice their religion in Europe. The meaning of Scripture should not be supplied by the proponents of globalism, but in fidelity to Tradition. The Good Shepherd hunts the wolf, He does not let it enter the sheepfold.

The pro-Islam speech of Your Holiness leads us to deplore the fact that Muslims are not invited to leave Islam, and that many ex-Muslims, such as Magdi Allam, are even leaving the Church, disgusted by her cowardice, wounded by equivocal gestures, confused by the lack of evangelization, scandalized by the praise given to Islam … Thus ignorant souls are misled, and Christians are not preparing for a confrontation with Islam, to which St. John Paul II has called them (Ecclesia in Europa, No. 57). We are under the impression that you do not take your brother Bishop Nona Amel,  Chaldean-Catholic Archbishop of Mosul in exile, seriously, when he tells us: “Our present sufferings are the prelude to those that you, Europeans and Western Christians, will suffer in the near future. I have lost my diocese. The headquarters of my archdiocese and my apostolate have been occupied by radical Islamists who want us to convert or die. (…) You are welcoming into your country an ever increasing number of Muslims. You are in danger as well. You must make strong and courageous decisions (…). You think that all men are equal, but Islam does not say that all men are equal. (…) If you do not understand this very quickly, you will become the victims of the enemy that you have invited into your home.” (August 9, 2014) “. This is a matter of life and death, and any complacency towards Islam is treasonous. We do not wish the West to continue with Islamization, nor that your actions contribute to it. Where then would we go to seek refuge?

Allow us to ask Your Holiness to quickly convene a synod on the dangers of Islam. What remains of the Church where Islam has installed itself? If she still has civil rights, it is in dhimmitude, on the condition that she does not evangelize, thus denying her very essence. In the interest of justice and truth, the Church must bring to light why the arguments put forward by Islam to blaspheme the Christian faith are false. If the Church had the courage to do that, we do not doubt that millions, Muslims as well as other men and women seeking the true God, would convert. As you said: “He who does not pray to Christ, prays to the Devil.” (14.03.13) If people knew they were going to Hell, they would give their lives to Christ. (cf. Quran 3.55)

With the deepest love for Christ who, through you, leads His Church, we, converts from Islam, supported by many of our brothers in the Faith, especially the Christians of the East, and by our friends, ask Your Holiness to confirm our conversion to Jesus Christ, true God and true man, the only Savior, with a frank and right discourse on Islam, and, assuring you of our prayers in the heart of the Immaculate, we ask your apostolic blessing.

List of names of signatories and their email (certainly not all ex-Muslims will sign this Letter for fear of possible reprisals). (Open Letter to "Pope Francis".)

This was a very courageous statement. Unfortunately, however, those who drafted it did not realize that the leaders of the counterfeit church of conciliarism consider conversion to the Catholic Faith to be a personal choice of individuals who discern that it is “right” for them to do so, not because they believe that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ commanded the Apostles to seek the conversion of all men to the true Faith until He comes in glory at the end of time.

How do I know this?

Well, consider the case of Magdi Allam, who was received into what he thought was the Catholic Church by none other than “Pope Benedict XVI” at the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo’s putative Easter Vigil Mass on Saturday, March 22, 2008:

VATICAN CITY (RNS) A high-profile Italian Muslim who converted to Catholicism and was baptized by Pope Benedict XVI announced on Monday (March 25) that he will leave the church to protest its soft stance against Islam.

Egyptian-born Magdi Cristiano Allam, 61, a prominent journalist and outspoken critic of Islam, publicly entered the Catholic Church on March 22, 2008 during an Easter Vigil service, receiving baptism directly from Benedict.

After his conversion, Allam founded a small right-wing political party that lost badly in Italy’s general elections last April.

Writing on Monday in the right-wing daily Il Giornale, Allam explained that he considers his conversion to Catholicism finished “in combination with the end of (Benedict’s) pontificate.”

“The ‘papolatry’ that has inflamed the euphoria for Francis I and has quickly archived Benedict XVI was the last straw in an overall framework of uncertainty and doubts about the Church,” he wrote.

On Friday, Francis pledged to “intensify dialogue among the various religions,” particularly Islam.

Allam, who has called Islam an “intrinsically violent ideology,” said his main reason for leaving the church was its perceived “religious relativism, in particular the legitimization of Islam as a true religion.”

“Europe will end up being subjugated to Islam,” he warned in Il Giornale, unless it “finds the courage to denounce Islam as incompatible with our civilization and fundamental human rights,” and to “banish the Quran for inciting hatred, violence and death towards non-Muslims.” Europeans also need to “condemn Sharia as a crime against humanity” and to “stop the spread of mosques.”

Allam said he would remain a Christian but that he didn’t “believe in the church anymore.”

Allam’s surprise conversion was orchestrated by Archbishop Rino Fisichella, currently head of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization, who “personally accompanied” the Muslim intellectual’s approach to the Catholic faith.

At the time, the Vatican’s chief spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, stressed that the conversion was the result of Allam’s “personal journey” and was not intended as a direct message to Muslims.

A leading Muslim intellectual involved in interfaith dialogue with the Vatican, Aref Ali Nayed, criticized the public conversion ceremony as a “triumphalist way to score points,” and said it raised “serious doubts” about the Catholic Church’s policy toward Islam. (Magdi Allam, Muslim Convert, Leaves Catholic Church, Says It’s Too Weak Against Islam.)

Even Magdi Cristiano Allam’s conversion on March 22, 2008, to what he thought was Catholicism was termed by Ratzinger/Benedict’s spokesflack, “Father” Federico Lombardi, as a “personal journey” rather than a rejection of a completely false, blasphemous religion, Mohammedanism.

It was less than seven months after what appeared to be the completion of his “personal journey” that Magdi Allam wrote his own open letter, which was addressed to the man who received him into what he, Allam, believed to be the Catholic Church, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI:

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Muslim-born journalist baptized by Pope Benedict XVI at Easter asked the pope to tell his top aide for relations with Muslims that Islam is not an intrinsically good religion and that Islamic terrorism is not the result of a minority gone astray.

As the Vatican was preparing to host the first meeting of the Catholic-Muslim Forum Nov. 4-6, Magdi Allam, a longtime critic of the Muslim faith of his parents, issued an open letter to Pope Benedict that included criticism of Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue.

In the letter, posted on his Web site Oct. 20, Allam said he wanted to tell the pope of his concern for "the serious religious and ethical straying that has infiltrated and spread within the heart of the church."

He told the pope that it "is vital for the common good of the Catholic Church, the general interest of Christianity and of Western civilization itself" that the pope make a pronouncement in "a clear and binding way" on the question of whether Islam is a valid religion.

The Catholic Church's dialogue with Islam is based on the Second Vatican Council's Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions ("Nostra Aetate"), which urged esteem for Muslims because "they adore the one God," strive to follow his will, recognize Jesus as a prophet, honor his mother, Mary, "value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting."

The council called on Catholics and Muslims "to work sincerely for mutual understanding" and for social justice, moral values, peace and freedom.

Allam told Pope Benedict he specifically objected to Cardinal Tauran telling a conference in August that Islam itself promotes peace but that "'some believers' have 'betrayed their faith,'" using it as a pretext for violence.

"The objective reality, I tell you with all sincerity and animated by a constructive intent, is exactly the opposite of what Cardinal Tauran imagines," Allam told the pope. "Islamic extremism and terrorism are the mature fruit" of following "the sayings of the Quran and the thought and action of Mohammed."

Allam said he was writing with the "deference of a sincere believer" in Christianity and as a "strenuous protagonist, witness and builder of Christian civilization."

After Pope Benedict baptized Allam March 22 during the Easter Vigil and Allam used his newspaper column and interviews to condemn Islam, the Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, said that when the Catholic Church welcomes a new member it does not mean it accepts his opinions on every subject.

Baptism is a recognition that the person entering the church "has freely and sincerely accepted the Christian faith in its fundamental articles" as expressed in the creed, Father Lombardi had said.

"Of course, believers are free to maintain their own ideas on a vast range of questions and problems on which legitimate pluralism exists among Christians," he said. (Maggdi Allam Writes Open Letter to "Pope Benedict" )

"Of course, believers are free to maintain their own ideas on a vast range of questions and problems on which legitimate pluralism exists among Christians"?

As was the case with each of six predecessors, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is steeped in apostasy. He has never had any understanding as to the simple fact that God hates false religions. He does not accept the truth that each false religion is from the devil and was condemned by King David himself in Psalm 95, verse 5:

For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils: but the Lord made the heavens. 

The conciliar “popes” have professed that "peace" is the result of the "coexistence" of false religions with the true religion. The conciliar “popes” and their “bishops” have professed heresy in this regard, and they have made a mockery of the teaching that the Prince of Peace Himself has given to Holy Mother Church to proclaim Him and His true religion alone as the only path to peace in human souls and thus of an authentic peace in the world. The conciliar authorities stand condemned by numerous papal teachings, including the following:

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. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

The same applies to the notion of Fraternity which they found on the love of common interest or, beyond all philosophies and religions, on the mere notion of humanity, thus embracing with an equal love and tolerance all human beings and their miseries, whether these are intellectual, moral, or physical and temporal. But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting.

Indeed, we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness. . . .

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.  (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

It is Catholicism or the abyss.

Behold the abyss.

Moreover, false religions of their nature can never be instruments of “peace” as they have been raised up by the adversary to do violence, both rhetorically and literally, against the Sacred Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its infallible explication and eternal safekeeping.

Mohammedanism is violent of its very nature, something that can never be stressed enough in the face of the conciliar “popes” repeated and fully delusional beliefs to the contrary notwithstanding.

Just as the conciliar official reject any criticism of “vaccines,” “public health” mandates, climate change, or open borders, so, too, they reject the actual facts about Mohammedanism’s inherently violent nature:

It was in Medina that Muhammad attained power and transformed Islam from a relatively benign form of monotheism into an militant expansionary political ideology that persists to this day. In Medina we see a very different Muhammad and a very different concept of Islam and a very different Allah. Here Muhammad gradually became radicalized in accordance with the commands of God and became a political ruler and military commander. The Allah of Medina guided his prophet to become a warlord, seeking military conquests. In Medina, Muhammad used the threat of the sword to compel people to embrace Islam. Gone was message of verse 2:256: Let There Be In Compulsion In Religion. It was replaced by such teachings as 9:5, 9:29:

(1) Fight the unbelievers until religion is for Allah only:

"And fight them until there is no more fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshiping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah alone (in the whole world). But if they cease (worshiping others besides Allah) then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do." (Sura 8.39).

(2) No more choice in religion

·         As for him who opposes the messenger, after the guidance has been pointed out to him, and follows other than the believers' way, we will direct him in the direction he has chosen, and commit him to Hell; what a miserable destiny! [4:115]

·         Then should they turn back (meaning: apostized), seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and do not take from them any companion or supporter (Quran, Chapter 4: 89)

(3) No more patience with unbelievers. Now must curse them:

·         [22.72] When Our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them, thou wilt notice a denial on the faces of the Unbelievers! they nearly attack with violence those who rehearse Our Signs to them. Say, "Shall I tell you of something (far) worse than these Signs? It is the Fire (of Hell)! Allah has promised it to the Unbelievers! and evil is that destination!"

·         [33:57] Surely, those who oppose GOD and His messenger, GOD afflicts them with a curse in this life, and in the Hereafter; He has prepared for them a shameful retribution.

(4) Tolerance no more; coerce the kafirs:

·         "In order that Allah may separate the pure from the impure, put all the impure ones [i.e. non-Muslims] one on top of another in a heap and cast them into hell. They will have been the ones to have lost." (Sura 8.37)

·         Certainly! Allâh will admit those who believe (in the Oneness of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism) and do righteous good deeds, to Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise), while those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as cattle eat, and the Fire will be their abode. 47:12

(5) No more pacifism. Time to terrorize, torture, murder:

The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom (5:33)

"Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!' That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah." (Sura 8.12-13)

(6) No tolerance for critics. Just kill them:

9.061 Among them are men who molest the Prophet and say, "He is (all) ear." Say, "He listens to what is best for you: he believes in Allah, has faith in the Believers, and is a Mercy to those of you who believe." But those who molest the Messenger will have a grievous penalty. (In the link 'leaving Islam' you will find many events where Muhammad had numerous critics murdered )

(7) Do not associate even with your parents and siblings if they reject Islam:

9.023 O ye who believe! take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love infidelity above Faith: if any of you do so, they do wrong

(8) Time to cursed who reject Islam for eternity

·         9:73 O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end.

·         22:19 These twain (the believers and the disbelievers) are two opponents who contend concerning their Lord. But as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads [103, Medina ]

·         22:20 Whereby that which is in their bellies, and their skins too, will be melted; [103, Medina ]

·         22:21 And for them are hooked rods of iron. [103, Medina ]

·         22:22 Whenever, in their anguish, they would go forth from thence they are driven back therein and (it is said unto them): Taste the doom of burning.

Muhammad's 13 years of preaching in Mecca was out and out a failure, mastering only 100-dd followers. Had he continued walking the same path in Medina, Islam would have died a natural death, probably in his life-time itself. But the militant radicalization of Muhammad that changed Islam into a plundering Mafia enterprise, offering its prospective followers a share of the loot and captured women, as well as forcing those who would reject Islam to embrace it on the pain of death, that Islam became a lasting and expanding successful religious enterprise as it continues today.

In Medina Muhammad re-invented Allah and turned Him into a criminal Godfather Whom Muhammad would use to hand over earthly political power to him, and utilize His supposed teachings as religious and legal justification for his evil criminality. That is how Islam turned itself into a successful cult.

Abrogation: The complete and ultimate radicalization of Islam and its followers

Most Muslims are like ordinary people, and the Mecca part of the Quranic revelations could offer them a peace basis of religious life. But Allah did not leave that option open to them. The radical Muhammad of Medina faced a huge problem with the initial non-militant teachings of the Quran. Had his followers appealed to those nonviolent teachings of the Quran, his desire for plunder, power and dominion could not be realized. And Allah, ever ready to satisfy Muhammad's every desire, came to his rescue by abrogating the entire Mecca teachings of the Quran:

·         Quran 2:106. “Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We {Allah} abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things?

·         Quran 16:101 “And when We change (one) communication for (another) communication, and Allah knows best what He reveals.”

This abrogation doctrine nullifies the earlier teachings, namely the pacifist Meccan revelations by the radicalized and militant later revelations of Medina, which turns Islam into an absolutely radical and militant religious faith. It gave Muslims no option to appeal to the apparently peaceful verses revealed in Mecca. For a detailed listing of the verses of the Quran that were canceled by the doctrine of abrogation, go to http://www.islamreform.net/new-page-27.htm.

Through the process of aborgation, 71 Suras of the Quran out of 114 in total, i.e. 62.28% of the suras of the Quran, have become null and void (Abu Ja'afar al Nakhass' al Nasikh wal Mansukh'). Therefore, only 43 later Surahs revealed in Medina stand valid. And this valid part of Islam teaches Muslims only deceit, torture, murder, assassination, massacre, genocide, pillage, robbery, enslavement and rape as divinely sanction halal (legal) acts that would earn Muslims a ticket to Islamic paradise, as long as those are perpetrated upon kafirs.

In sum, Muhammad initiated Islam as a relatively benign and nonviolent religious faith, but as he grew in power, he radicalized it into an evil ideology whose sole purpose is to conquer the world for Allah. The Quran became a declaration of war against the kafirs. This war is permanent until ALL kafirs have converted to Islam, or are in dhimmitude (institutionalized discrimination akin to second class slavery status) or have been murdered.

From a humble preacher, Muhammad, after turning into a radical, went on order more than 60 raids and invasion, some involving massacres, and he personally participated in 27 of those. The worst sufferer of Muhammad's militant radicalization was the Jews of the Arab Peninsula, who suffered whole-sale exile, execution and enslavement. Some of the most chilling utterances of Muhammad concerning the Jews are:

...the Apostle of Allah said, “Kill any Jew that falls into your power.” (Ibn Ishaq, Life of Muhammad, p. 553)

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.” (Bukhari 4:52:176)

And the radicalization of Muhammad saw its climax in the Massacre of Banu Quraiza, where he ordered the beheading of 600 to 900 men, and personally initiated the slaughter by beheading 2 Jewish leaders. To read about this very great Banu Quraiza tragedy, go to: http://www.islamreform.net/new-page-209.htm

Therefore, the so-called self-radicalization of Muslims is nothing but their following the teachings and commands of the holy Quran and emulating the examples of Prophet Muhammad, the only perfect man ever to appear on the earth.  (Mohammed,  the First Radical Muslim.)

The truth remains that violence is how Mohammedanism was spread throughout the Arabian Peninsula and then sought obtained a stronghold in Cordoba, Spain, while continuing attempt to seize France and Italy and even Austria as late as September 12, 1683. How ironic it is that the post-Catholic Europeans who control most of the formerly Catholic kingdoms of Europe have permitted the Mohammedans to win by their policies of “open borders” and “tolerance” what they had lost in military battles such as at the Battle of Tours, October 10, 732, the Battle of Lepanto, October 7, 1571, and, as just mentioned, the Battle at the Gates of Vienna on September 12, 1683. Alas, this is what the Eurocrats have desired in order to strip away all vestiges of Christianity from European life, and they are doing this with the full support of many within the conciliar structures themselves.

Leo’s cavalry only rides to the rescue of falsehoods that have their origin with Antichrist and their end in hell itself.

We pray and weep as we make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our own many sins.

We must, however, remember that there is nothing serendipitous about Mohammedanism, which is unleashing a new wave of violence against Christians throughout the Mohammedan world as they inundate European countries and begin to institutionalize themselves here in the United States of America. We must oppose this false religion, whose adherents are in the very grip of the devil by means of Original Sin, and we must oppose the false, naturalistic, religiously indifferentist, anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian principles of Modernity with which the conciliarists have made their "reconciliation" that teach us that we should call Mohammedan violence by its proper name and identify it as part and parcel of its very founding, history and tenets, no matter whose “hidden hand” may exploit Mohammedan hatred for Christianity and for Christians.

We have been given Our Lady's Rosary to help us in this time of apostasy and betrayal, in this time of chastisement. Let us use this instrument, well as we seek to deny ourselves more and more so that our hearts will yearn only for the things of Heaven and that we will be more and more able to view the world exclusively through the eyes of the true Faith as we, unworthy though we may be, plant a few seeds for the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Mary our Immaculate Queen!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our deaths.

All to thee, Blessed Mother. All to thy Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, we love you. Save souls!

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Teresa of Avila, pray for us.

Jacinta and Francisco Marto,  and Lucia dos Santos, pray for us.

Appendix A

Mohammedan Attacks on Europe in the First Millennium

(As extracted from an article published on December 24, 2015)

A book that was published thirteen years ago, The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, which was edited by Andrew G. Bostom, M.D., provided documentation, drawn from primary Mohammedan documents and historical accounts of actual events, as to how Mohammedanism has been a religion of bloodshed and the persecution of “infidels” from the time that Mohammed arrived in Medina in the year 622 A.D., thereby embarking upon the first “Jihad” against non-Moslems:

September 622 [A.D.] marks a defining event in Islam—the hijra. Muhammed and a coterie of followers persecuted by fellow Banu Qurayza tribesmen fled from Mecca to Yathrib, later known as Medina. The Muslim sources described Yathrib as having been a Jewish city founded by a Palestinian diaspora population that had survived the revolt against the Romans. The Jews of the north Arabian peninsula were highly productive oasis farmers. These Jews were eventually joined by itinerant Arab tribes from southern Arabia who settled adjacent to them and transitioned to a sedentary existence.

Following Muhammad’s arrival, he reordered Medinian society. The Jewish tribes were isolated, some were then expelled, and the remainder attacked and exterminated. Muhammad distributed among his followers as “booty” the vanquished Jews property—plantations, fields, and houses—using this “booty” to established a well-equipped cavalry corps. For examine within a year after the massacre (in 627) of the Jewish tribe, the Banu Qurayza, Muhammad, according to a summary of sacralized Muslim sources, waited for some act of aggression on the parts of the Jews of Khaybar, whose fertile lands and villages he had destined for his followers to furnish an excuse for an attack.

But no such opportunity offering, he resolved in the autumn of the year (i.e., 628) on a sudden and unprovoked invasion of their territory. Ali (later, the fourth “Rightly Guided Caliph,” especially revered by Shi’ite Muslims) asked Muhammad why the Jews of Khaybar were being attacked, since they were peaceful farmers, tending their oasis, and was told by Muhammad he must compel them to submit to Islamic laws. The renowned twentieth-century scholar of Islam David Margoliouth observed aptly:

Now the fact that a community was idolatrous, or Jewish, or anything but Mohammedan, warranted a murderous attack upon it.

Muhammad’s subsequent interactions with the Christians of northern Africa followed a similar pattern, noted by the scholar of Islam’s origins Richard Bell. The “relationship” with the Christians ended as that with the Jews (ended)—in war,” because Islam as presented by Muhammad was a divine truth, and unless Christians accepted this formulation, which acceped this formulation, which included Muhammad’s authority, “conflict was inevitable, and there could have been no real peace while he [Muhammad] lived.”

The modern Muslim scholar Ali Dashti’s biography Muhammad 23 Years” A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad has also chronicled Muhammad’s “changed course” at Medina, where the Muslim prophet begins to “issue orders for war” in multiple and repeated Koranic revelations (sura [chapter] 9 being composed almost entirely of such war proclamations—permanent injunctions against pagans, Jews, and Christians). Prior to enumerating the numerous assassinations Muhammad ordered, Ali Dashti observes:

Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and [tax] revenue. . . The Prophet’s steps in the decade after hejra [emigration from Mecca to Medina] were directed to the end of establishing and consolidating a religion-based state. Some of the deeds done on his command [were] killings of prisoners and political assassinations.

Thus Muhammad himself waged a series of pro-jihad campaigns to subdue the Jews, Christians, and pagans of Arabia. As numerous modern-day pronouncements by leading Muslim theologians confirm (see, for example, Yusuf Al-Qaradawi’s “The Prophet Muhammad as a Jihad Model”), Muhammadan jurisconsults and theologians from eighth to ninth centuries onward, based on their interpretation of Koranic verses, and long chapters in the “hadith,” or acts and sayings of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, especially those recorded by al-Bukhari (d. 869) and Muslim (d. 874).

Ibn Kaldun (d. 1406), jurist, renowned philosopher, historian and sociologist, summarized these consensus opinions form five centuries of prior Muslim jurisprudence with regard to the uniquely Islamic institution of Jihad:

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. . . . The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. . . . Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

Classical Islam jurists such as Ibn Khaldum also formulated the concepts of Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb (Arabic for “The House of Islam and the House of War”). Armand Abel, the leading twentieth-century expert on the Muslim conception of Dar al Harb, summarizes as it follows:

Together with the duty of the “war in the way of God” (or jihad), this universalistic aspiration would lead the Moslems to see the world as being divided fundamentally into two parts. On the one hand there was that part of the world where Islam prevailed, where salvation had been announced, where the religion that ought to reign was practiced; this was Dar al Islam. On the other hand, there was the part which still awaited the establishment of the saving religion and which constituted, by definition, the object of the holy war. This was the Dar al Harb. The latter, in the view of Moslem jurists, was not populated by people who had a natural right not to practice Islam, but rather by people destined to become Moslems who, through impiousness, refused to accept this great benefit. Since they were destined sooner or later to be converted at the approach of the victorious armies of the Prophet’s successor, or else killed for their rebelliousness, they were the rebel subjects of the Caliph. Their kings were nothing but odious tyrants who, by opposing the progress of the saving religion together with their armies, were following a Satanic inspiration and rising up against the designs of Providence. And so no respite should be granted them, no truce; perpetual war should their lot, waged in the course of the winter and summer ghazu [razzias]. If the sovereign of the country thus attacked desired peace, it was possible for him, just like for any tributary or community, to pay the tribute for himself and for his subjects. Thus the [Byzantine] Empress Irene [d. 803] “purchased peace at the price of her humiliation,” according to the formula stated in the dhimma contract itself, by paying 70,000 pounds in gold annually to the Caliph of Baghdad. Many other princes agreed in this way to come tributaries—often after long struggles—and to see their dominions pass from the status of dar al Harb to that of dar al Sulh. In this way, those of their subjects who lived within the boundaries of the territory ruled by the Caliphate were spared the uncertainty of being exposed arbitrarily, without any guarantee, to the military operations of the summer ghazu and the winter ghazu: indeed, anything within the reach of the Moslem armies as they advanced, being property of impious men and rebels, were mercilessly consigned to the lot specified in the Koranic verse about the sword, and their women and children were treated like things. (Andrew G. Bostom, M.D., “Prefect to the Paperback Edition,” The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 2008, pp. ii-iv.)

Bostom went on to describe how non-Muslims are viewed by faithful, believing Mohammedans:

As described by the great twentieth-century scholar of Islamic law Joseph Schaact, 

A non-Muslim who is not protected by a treaty is called harbi, “in a state of war,” “enemy alien; his life and property are completely unprotected by law. (Andrew G. Bostom, M.D., “Prefect to the Paperback Edition,” The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 2008, p. v.)

Far from being a “religion of peace,” Mohammedanism is by its very demonic nature a religion of war and aggression against all “infidels.”

It is nevertheless the case that the past two presidents of the United States of America, George Walker Bush and Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, have referred to this false, blasphemous religion as a “religion of peace,” and Jorge Mario Bergoglio has gone so far as to ignore all Mohammedan attempts to invade France, Italy, and Austria or their persecution of Catholics in Mohammedan-dominated nations, both in the Iberian Peninsula before they were expelled by Ferdinand and Isabella in 1492 and contemporaneously throughout the world. The truth is otherwise:

While descending the slopes of the Pyrenees the Arabs also overran Aquitaine. In 732, having conquered Duke Eudes, they entered Bordeaux, where they burned down all the churches, and advanced as far as the gates of Poitiers, setting fire to the Basilica of Saint Hillary Outside the Walls. Then they set out for the capital of Gaulish Christendom, that is, Tours, their objective being both spiritual and material to strike a blow against the prestige of Saint Martin and to lay hold of the riches of the shrine. Bu they did not reach their goal: one Saturday in October [October 10, 732], the Frankish commander Charles Martel stopped them not far from Poitiers.

Besides, they found the Mediterranean regions more attractive. Around 734 or 735, they stormed and took Arles and Avignon. From the coast of Provence and Italy, their sailors preceded the cavalry or substituted for them. In 846 they disembarked at the mouth of the Tiber, seized Ostia, went up the river, refrained from attacking the wall of Rome, but pillaged the basilicas of Saints Peter and Paul, which at that time were both outside the walls. This alarm prompted, as a countermeasure, the construction of a new Roman enclosure encompassing Saint Peter’s and rejoining the old one at the Castel Santagnelo, the old mausoleum of the Emperor Hadrian. In 849 the Muslims attempted a new landing at Ostia; then, every year from around 857 on, they threatened the Roman seaboard. (Andrew G. Bostom, M.D., “Prefect to the Paperback Edition,” The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 2008, p. 421.)

The conciliar “popes” are completely ignorant of the facts presented in the book edited by Dr. Andrew G. Bostom, including the Mohammedan sack of the Basilicas of Saints Peter and Paul in the year 846 A.D., or the constant terrorism to which Catholics in France, Italy and elsewhere were subject until the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571, and the Battle at the Gates of Vienna a little less than one hundred twelve years later, that is, on September 12, 1683:

In order to get rid of them, Pope John VIII decided in 878 to promise them an annual payment of several thousand gold pieces; but this tribute of the Holy See to Islam seems to have been paid for only two years; and from time to time until the beginning of the tenth century, the Muslims reappeared at the mouth of the Tiber or along the coast nearby.

Marseilles, for its part, was also hit; in 838 the Arabs landed there and devastated it; Saint Victor’s Abbey, outside the walls was destroyed, and many inhabitants of the city were carried off in captivity; ten years later a new raid occurred, the Old Port was again sacked. And this perhaps was repeated more around the year 920.

The whole Italian peninsula was similarly exposed: around 840 Muslim ships followed the Adriatic coasts as far as the Dalmatian archipelago and the mouth of the Po River. Then returning south, they dared to attack a city, Ancona, some two hundred kilometers northwest of Rome; a sort of commando dashed ashore; the city was devastated and set on fire.

During this conquest of Sicily, when they took Syracuse in 878, after a deadly attack, they were exasperated by the resistance that they met with. When they rushed into the city, they found along their way the Church of the Holy Savior, filled with women and children, and they massacred them all. Then, spreading out through the city, they continued the slaughter and the pillage, had the treasure of the cathedral handed over to them; they also took many prisoners and gathered separately those who were armed. One week later all of the captives who had dared to fight against them were butchered (four thousand in number, according to the chronicle of Bayyan).

In 934 or 935, they landed at the other end of Italy, at Genoa, killed “all the men they found there, and then left again, loading onto their ships “the treasures of the city and of its churches.” A few years later they settled for a time, it seems, in Nice, Frejus, Toulon.

One could list many other similar facts. Generally speaking, in these Arab raids carried out by cavalcade or after a landing, the churches were especially targeted, because the assailants knew that they would find there articles used in worship that were made of gold or silver, sometimes studded with precious stones, as well as costly fabrics. And because the churches were considered to be an offense God, the One God, given that they were consecrated to the “polytheistic” belief in the Trinity, they were burned down. The bells were the object of particular animosity, because they dared to amplify the call to infidel prayer by resounding through the skies, toward heaven; therefore they were always broken. (Andrew G. Bostom, M.D., “Prefect to the Paperback Edition,” The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 2008, p. 421-422.)

The likes of the globalists and the conciliarists would have us believe that Mohammedans who blow up churches, desecrate Christian shrines, and who kidnap, assault, torture and massacre innocent human beings are “perverting” a “religion of peace.” This is a lie from men who are steeped in delusions, which they keep reassuring themselves over and over again as they call for “dialogue” and “encounter” as “respect” is shown to a false, blasphemous religion that is based on a rejection of the doctrine of the Most Holy Trinity.

Similarly, most of those who comprise the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “right” believe that the members of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and other Mohammedans who commit acts of terrorism are part of what they call “Radical Islam” in order to distinguish them from practitioners of a supposed “peaceful,” “mainstream” Mohamedanism.

There is no such thing as “peaceful” Mohammedanism.

While there may be individual Mohammedans in Western countries who have become acclimated to, if not coopted by, prevailing cultural trends, such as they are, our stores and avenues of commerce are filled with Mohammedan women wearing burkas that are signs of their absolute commitment to the Mohammedan way of life. More and more, of course, we read of demands for Sharia law to be observed in Western countries.

As has been discussed on this site many times before, Western Europe is entirely dependent upon an immigrant work force as a result of its collective suicide pact with the devil by means of contraception and abortion, thus providing the scions of Judeo-Masonry there to use the influx of Mohammedans as a means to eradicate all remaining vestiges in Christendom there, up to and including all public references to the Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in the name of “toleration,” “diversity,” and multiculturalism.

The conciliar revolutionaries have worked overtime to facilitate the current influx of Mohammedans into Europe, playing their own role as the facilitators of the Talmudists’ long-sought goals of helping to create a counter-church that would appear to most people as the Catholic Church in order to silence believing Catholics as they enabled them, the Talmudists, in their efforts to make the Western world a “Christ-free” zone.

The irony is indeed very stark: There was no room in the inn for the Baby Jesus when He was born in Bethlehem, and He has been expelled from the room that He had held for nearly two millennia in once proudly Catholic Europe. There is no place for Christ the King either in the hearts of men. His Holy Name cannot be expressed publicly for fear of “offending” those who reject His Sacred Divinity, resulting in legislation being passed that is inimical to the common temporal good, which must be pursued in light of man’s Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven.

No matter who may be “pulling the strings” with respect to this or that terrorist attack, those prone to dismiss the role played by Mohammedans, whether acting individually or at the behest of the same sinister forces that welcomed their ancestors into the Iberian Peninsula, in the creation of chaos in the United States of America and elsewhere in the world are fooling themselves. Mohammedanism cannot be redeemed as a “religion of peace” any more than can Talmudism. Both are false religions of violence and bloodshed as they are based upon a rejection of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s Sacred Divinity and of the Sacred Deposit of Faith that He has entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

Mohammedanism has never been nor will ever be a “religion of peace.”

There is only one solution to the Mohammedan threat just as there is only one solution to the threat posed by Talmudic Judaism and its related allies in Masonic lodges: Catholicism. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has sent His Most Blessed Mother to earth to implore us to pray her Most Holy Rosary for world peace and to pray for the conversion of sinners, starting with ourselves as we seek to make reparation to God through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart for our sins. Catholicism, not any false religion or any form of naturalism, including the falsehood that is "conservatism," is the solution. Nothing else.

Appendix B

“Prayers”/Statements of John Paul II and Benedict XVI That Omit the Holy Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ

Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II’s “Prayer” in India, February 1, 1986:

O Lord and God of all, you have willed that all your children, united by the Spirit, should live and grow together in mutual acceptance, harmony and peace. We grieve in our hearts that our human selfishness and greed have prevented your plan from being realised in our times.

We recognise that Peace is a gift from you. We also know that our collaboration as your instruments requires a wise stewardship of the earth’s resources for the true progress of all peoples. It calls for a deep respect and reverence for life and a keen appreciation of the human dignity and sacredness of conscience of every person, and a constant struggle against all forms of discrimination in law or in fact.

We commit ourselves, together with all our brothers and sisters, to cultivating a deeper awareness of your presence and action in history, to a more effective practice of truthfulness and responsibility, the ceaseless pursuit of freedom from all oppressive structures, fellowship across all barriers and justice and fullness of life for all.

Gathered in India’s Capital at this Memorial to the Father of the Nation – an outstanding and courageous witness to truth, love and non-violence – we invoke your blessings on the leaders of this country and of all nations, on the followers of all religious traditions and of all people of good will. Enable us, Lord, to live and grow as active partners with you and with one another in the common task of building a culture without violence, a world community that places its security not in the manufacture of ever more deadly weapons but in mutual trust and practical concern for a better future for all your children within a worldwide civilisation of truth, love and peace. Prayer for peace at the conlcusion of the visit to Raj Ghat in Delhi (February 1, 1986)

Wojtyla/John Paul II’s Statement in Sudan, February 10, 1993:

Dear Friends,

I have looked forward to this meeting with you, the leaders of the various religions professed by the people of the Sudan. My Pastoral Visit to the Catholic Church in this Nation gives me the opportunity to extend the hand of friendship to you, and to express the hope that all the citizens of the Sudan, irrespective of differences between them, will live in harmony and in mutual cooperation for the common good.

Religion permeates all aspects of life in society, and citizens need to accept one another, with all their differences of language, customs, culture and belief, if civic harmony is to be maintained. Religious leaders play an important role in fostering that harmony.

Here in the Sudan I cannot fail to emphasize once more the Catholic Church’s high regard for the followers of Islam. Sudanese Catholics recognize that their Muslim neighbours prize the moral life, and worship the One God, Almighty and Merciful–especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. They appreciate the fact that you revere Jesus and his Mother Mary (Cf. Nostra Aetate, 3). They acknowledge that there are very solid reasons for greater mutual understanding, and they are eager to work with you in order to restore peace and prosperity to the Nation. I hope that this meeting will contribute to a new era of constructive dialogue and goodwill.

I would also like to offer a special greeting to my Christian brothers from other Churches and Ecclesial Communities: "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit" (Phil. 4: 23). As you are well aware, the Catholic Church is deeply committed to the search for ecumenical understanding, in the perspective of fulfilling the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, "that they may be one" (Jn. 17: 21). I am happy to know that here in the Sudan good ecumenical relations exist and that there are many instances of cooperation. I am confident that the Lord will bless your efforts to proceed further along that path.

To all of you, respected religious leaders of the Sudan, I express once more my esteem, and I repeat that the Catholic Church is irrevocably committed to ecumenical and interreligious dialogue. May God inspire thoughts of peace in the hearts of all believers.

Baraka Allah as–Sudan!
(God bless the Sudan!) ( Meeting with the leaders of other religions in the Apostolic Nunciature of Khartoum (February 10, 1993)

Wojtyla/John Paul in Sri Lanka, January 10, 1995:

1. I am very pleased to have this opportunity during my visit to Sri Lanka to meet representatives of the various religions which have lived together in harmony for a very long time on this Island: especially Buddhism, present for over two thousand years, Hinduism, also of very long standing, along with Islam and Christianity. This simultaneous presence of great religious traditions is a source of enrichment for Sri Lankan society. At the same time it is a challenge to believers and especially to religious leaders, to ensure that religion itself always remains a force for harmony and peace. On the occasion of my Pastoral Visit to the Catholics of Sri Lanka, I wish to reaffirm the Church’s, and my own, deep and abiding respect for the spiritual and cultural values of which you are the guardians.

Especially since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has been fully committed to pursuing the path of dialogue and cooperation with the members of other religions. Interreligious dialogue is a precious means by which the followers of the various religions discover shared points of contact in the spiritual life, while acknowledging the differences which exist between them. The Church respects the freedom of individuals to seek the truth and to embrace it according to the dictates of conscience, and in this light she firmly rejects proselytism and the use of unethical means to gain conversions.

2. The Catholic community hopes that through a continuing "dialogue of life" all believers will co–operate willingly in order to defend and promote moral values, social justice, liberty and peace. Like many modern societies, Sri Lanka is facing the spiritual threat represented by the growth of a materialistic outlook, which is more concerned with "having" than with "being". Experience makes it clear that mere technological progress does not satisfy man’s inner yearning for truth and communion. Deeper spiritual needs have to be met if individuals, families, and society itself are not to fall into a serious crisis of values. There is ample room for co–operation among the followers of the various religions in meeting this serious challenge.

For this reason, I appeal to you and encourage you, as the religious leaders of the Sri Lankan people, to consider the concerns which unite believers, rather than the things which divide them. The safeguarding of Sri Lanka’s spiritual heritage calls for strenuous efforts on the part of everyone to proclaim before the world the sacredness of human life, to defend the inalienable dignity and rights of every individual, to strengthen the family as the primary unit of society and the place where children learn humanity, generosity and love, and to encourage respect for the natural environment. Interreligious co–operation is also a powerful force for promoting ethically upright socio–economic and political standards. Democracy itself benefits greatly from the religiously motivated commitment of believers to the common good.

3. Perhaps nothing represents a greater threat to the spiritual fabric of Sri Lankan society than the continuing ethnic conflict. The religious resources of the entire nation must converge to bring an end to this tragic situation. I recently had occasion to say to an international group of religious leaders: "violence in any form is opposed not only to the respect which we owe to every fellow human being; it is opposed also to the true essence of religion. Whatever the conflicts of the past and even of the present, it is our common task and common duty to make better known the relation between religion and peace" (John Paul II, Address for the Opening of the Sixth World Assembly of the World Conference on Religion and Peace, 2) . The only struggle worthy of man is "the struggle against his own disordered passions, against every type of hatred and violence; in short against everything that is the exact opposite of peace and reconciliation" (John Paul II, Message for the World Day of Peace 1992, 7).

4. Very dear esteemed friends: I am certain that the principles of mercy and non–violence present in your traditions will be a source of inspiration to Sri Lankans in their efforts to build a peace which will be lasting because it is built upon justice and respect for every human being. I express once more my confidence that your country’s long tradition of religious harmony will grow ever stronger, for the peace and well–being of individuals, for the good of Sri Lanka and of all Asia.

[At the end of the meeting the Holy Father added the following words:]

And now I offer you a gift memorable of these days and of the meeting. I am very grateful for your presence and very grateful for this meeting with you that we are together... not against, but together!

Not to be together is dangerous. It is necessary to be together, to dialogue. I am very grateful for that. I see in your presence the signs of the goodwill and of the future, the good future, for Sri Lanka and for the whole world. And so I can return to Rome, more hopeful. Thank you. (Meeting with representatives of other religions (January 21, 1995)

This is essentially what Jorge Mario Bergoglio said throughout his recently concluded trip to Iraq.

Just boilerplate conciliarism, and the sort of apostasy for which Sant Agnes, on whose feast day “Pope John Paul II” made those remarks in Sri Lanka, chose to die rather than give even the appearance of believing.

Conciliarism is not and can never be Catholicism.

Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict’s “Prayer” at Ground Zero, New York, New York, Sunday, April 20, 2008:

As the hour is late, I am only going to provide one of the many examples of Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s boilerplate conciliarism speeches/prayers/letters. The one below was uttered on Sunday, April 20, 2008, at the former site of the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, New York.

O God of love, compassion, and healing, look on us, people of many different faiths and traditions, who gather today at this site, the scene of incredible violence and pain.

We ask you in your goodness to give eternal light and peace to all who died here— the heroic first-responders: our fire fighters, police officers, emergency service workers, and Port Authority personnel, along with all the innocent men and women who were victims of this tragedy simply because their work or service brought them here on September 11, 2001.

We ask you, in your compassion to bring healing to those who, because of their presence here that day, suffer from injuries and illness. Heal, too, the pain of still-grieving families and all who lost loved ones in this tragedy. Give them strength to continue their lives with courage and hope.

We are mindful as well of those who suffered death, injury, and loss on the same day at the Pentagon and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Our hearts are one with theirs as our prayer embraces their pain and suffering.

God of peace, bring your peace to our violent world: peace in the hearts of all men and women and peace among the nations of the earth. Turn to your way of love those whose hearts and minds are consumed with hatred.

God of understanding, overwhelmed by the magnitude of this tragedy, we seek your light and guidance as we confront such terrible events. Grant that those whose lives were spared may live so that the lives lost here may not have been lost in vain. Comfort and console us, strengthen us in hope, and give us the wisdom and courage to work tirelessly for a world where true peace and love reign among nations and in the hearts of all. (Prayer Service at Ground Zero, Sunday, April 20, 2008, text from the conciliar Vatican website .) 

Any self-respecting Grand Master of a Masonic lodge could utter the words that will be "prayed" by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on Sunday, April 20, 2008, at the site of the former twin towers of the World Trade Center, a place that has been called since Tuesday, September 11, 2001, as "Ground Zero."

Any self-respecting Talmudic rabbi could utter the words that will be "prayed" by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on Sunday, April 20, 2008, at the site of the former twin towers of the World Trade Center, a place that has been called since Tuesday, September 11, 2001, as "Ground Zero."

Any self-respecting Mohammedan imam could utter the words that will be "prayed" by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on Sunday, April 20, 2008, at the site of the former twin towers of the World Trade Center, a place that has been called since Tuesday, September 11, 2001, as "Ground Zero."

Any self-respecting Mormon or Seventh Day Adventist or Jehovah's Witness could utter the words that will be "prayed" by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on Sunday, April 20, 2008, at the site of the former twin towers of the World Trade Center, a place that has been called since Tuesday, September 11, 2001, as "Ground Zero."

Almost any self-respecting Protestant minister, especially those of the "mainstream" Protestant sects (Anglicanism, Presbyterianism, Methodism, Lutheranism, United Church of Christ) could utter the words that will be "prayed" by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on Sunday, April 20, 2008, at the site of the former twin towers of the World Trade Center, a place that has been called since Tuesday, September 11, 2001, as "Ground Zero," admitting that a few Protestant ministers of the evangelical/fundamentalist variety would be more inclined to what Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI will not do in this prayer to be offered on April 20, 2008: mention the Holy Name of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

No, there is no room for Christ the King at "Ground Zero" during the visit of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI to the site where the former twin towers collapsed on September 11, 2001. This is quite appropriate. There was no room for Christ the King at Saint Patrick's Cathedral in the Borough of Manhattan of the City of New York, New York, on Wednesday, September 11, 2002, in the "homily" delivered by Edward "Cardinal" Egan (see No Room for Christ at Saint Patrick's Cathedral, written three and one-half years before I began writing about sedevacantism).

MADRID (LifeSiteNews) — Spain has demanded registries of doctors who refuse to commit abortions, prompting pro-life professionals to denounce the move as an attempt to create as a “blacklist.”

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez recently wrote to regional presidents of areas governed by conservatives “urging them to launch a registry of conscientious objectors to abortion,” OSV News reported.

The push follows a regulation requiring all of Spain’s public hospitals to commit abortions and seeks to facilitate access to abortion in areas where it is difficult to find doctors willing to commit the baby-killing procedure.

For example, in La Rioja, long governed by conservatives, most of the doctors in public hospitals have refused to commit abortions due to conscientious objections. “The problem we had was that all health care staff previously objected to abortions, including in private clinics,” Izaskun Fernández Núñez, the president of the group Progressive Women of La Rioja, told Euronews in 2023.

In Castile and León, five out of nine provinces “hadn’t reported a single abortion since 2010” at the time of the 2023 report.

“Women can’t do it in their province even if they paid, even if they went private … not even that option exists,” Nina Infante Castrillo, the vice president of the Feminist Forum of Castile and León, said.

These difficulties have led to government-mandated registry requirements that conscientious objectors are logged in all autonomous communities, with a deadline of three months.

“Why don’t they create a list of doctors who want to perform abortions and euthanasia, which would be the most practical option? These registers of objectors they want to create are blacklists to professionally exclude doctors who want to exercise their right to conscientious objection,” said Eva Martín, president of ANDOC, as cited by Alpha y Omega.

Abortion rates are reportedly rising again in Spain to near their all-time high in 2011. A total of 103,097 abortions were committed there in 2023, a 4.8 percent increase from 2022, and an 8.7 percent increase from 2014, according to Health Ministry data.

Abortion has been legal in Spain with various restrictions since 1985, and the abortion rate more than doubled from 54,000 in 1998 to 112,000 in 2007. In 2010, socialist José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero’s government further loosened abortion restrictions to allow the lethal practice through the 14th week of pregnancy, with legal extensions until 22 weeks under the conditions of supposed risk to the mother’s health or signs of “serious disabilities” of the unborn baby. (Spanish government demands registry of doctors who object to committing abortion.)