As is explained in part one of a two-part video that is uploading as this brief article is being written, very little time is available, at least at this point, to attend in an rapid-fire manner to the fast-breaking events that occur each day within the confines of the Never-Never Land known as the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Although more will be written later tonight to preface the videos after they have finished uploading, the work that I am doing at present precludes me from writing anything more extensive than is provided in this commentary on the latest musings of the Islamophile known as Theodore Edgar "Cardinal" arick, formerly an auxiliary "bishop" in the Archdioese of New York, formerly the founding "bishop" of the Diocese of Metuchen, New Jersey, formerly the "archbishop" of the Archdiocese of Newark, New Jersey, and the current conciliar "archbishop-emeritus" of the Archdiocese of Washington, District of Columbia.
It was in the Spring Semester of 1988 that a student of mine in an American Government course at Saint John's University in Jamaica, Queens, New York, came up to me after one of the first classes to introduce himself as a "nephew" of "Archbishop" McCarrick. I recounted this to a presbyter-friend of mine who had been with me as a seminarian at Holy Apostles Seminary during the 1983-1984 academic year, the late Reverend Michael Scott, who died on January 9, 2011, at the age of fifty-three. "Oh," Mike said to me, "one of Teddy's 'nephews.' We all know about those." McCarrick actually got in trouble in the early-1990s when he gave a talk to some Catholic women by commenting on the sort of "day-glow" attire wore by the young men he took on trips. The then "papal" nuncio, Pio "Cardinal" Laghi, gave Teddy a slap on the wrists just prior to his, Laghi's, leaving for Rome to serve as the prefect of the conciliar Congregation of Education in 1990. Ever the supporter of the lavender agender, Teddy McCarrick went to great lengths in 2002, the year in which the American conciliar "hierarchy's" shameful record of recruiting, promoting and protecting known practitioners of perversity became more generally known than it had been prior to that time despite the efforts of The Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., The Wanderer and even National Catholic Reporter to provide documentary evidence of the scandals, to state he did not believe that those with clear homosexual tendencies should be excluded from the conciliar presbyterate.
McCarrick was adamantly opposed to denying what puports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic liturgical service to Catholics in public life who support the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn in their mothers' wombs and/or support the promotion of perversity under cover of the civil law. He even went so far on January 20, 1998, to host a prayer service for the Presbyterian pro-abortion Governor of New Jeresey, at the time, Christine Todd Whitman, prior to his inaguaration for a second term as the Garden State's governor (see No Big Deal, which was publishedin 1998 in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos). And it was was just prior to his retirement as the conciliar "archbishop" of Washington, District of Columbia, on June 7, 2006, that Teddy McCarrick gave an interview to Cable News Network's Wolf Blitzer wherein he expressed support for "civil unions" for those engaged in acts of moral perversity in violation of the binding precepts of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments:
BLITZER: Another very sensitive issue that's being dealt with in the Senate right now involves a constitutional ban on same sex marriage. Senator Ted Kennedy said this yesterday. He said, "A vote for this amendment is a vote for bigotry, pure and simple." You disagree with him, don't you?
MCCARRICK: On this one, I do. Ted and I have -- do have differences from time to time. And this is a real big one. It seems to me that we really have to continue to define marriage as we've defined marriage for thousands of years as a union between a man and a woman.
Now, I think the legislation as it is proposed would not throw out the possibility of a civil union. And I think we can -- we can live with that if this is what -- if this is what the Constitution will provide for. But to say that you can take this concept of marriage, this word of marriage and use it in ways that it has never been used before, as far as I know, in the history of the world, I think that makes no sense.
BLITZER: So just explain. You think that you could live with -- you could support civil unions between gays and lesbians, but you wouldn't like them to get formally married, is that right?
MCCARRICK: Yes. I think -- I think basically the ideal would be that everybody was -- was able to enter a union with a man and a woman and bring children into the world and have the wonderful relationship of man and wife that is so mutually supportive and is really so much part of our society and what keeps our society together. That's the ideal.
If you can't meet that ideal, if there are people who for one reason or another just cannot do that or feel they cannot do that, then in order to protect their right to take care of each other, in order to take care of their right to have visitation in a hospital or something like that, I think that you could allow, not the ideal, but you could allow for that for a civil union.
But if you begin to fool around with the whole -- the whole nature of marriage, then you're doing something which effects the whole culture and denigrates what is so important for us. Marriage is the basic foundation of our family structure. And if we lose that, then I think we become a society that's in real trouble. (McCarrick on Civil Unions, June 7, 2006.)
Although McCarrick was forced to issue one of those clarifications for which the conciliar revolutionaries, including that "restorer of tradition," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI (see, for example, If Them, Why Not Others?, Let the Olympic Games of Absurdity Begin!, Razing The Last Bastions, Nothing New Under Benedict's Sun, Words and Actions Without Consequences and Making a Mockery of Catholicism) five days after he blabbed away to Wolf Biltzer ninety-nine months ago now, he was at it again in the immediate aftermath of Jorge Mario Bergoglio's "election" eighteen months ago now (it seems more like eighteen years!), teaming up with his equally lavender-friendly successor, Donald "Cardinal" Wuerl, to support "civil unions" once again. This time, however, no "clarification" was issued as Jorge Mario Bergoglio supports the same thing:
Still, Dolan has always been viewed as a more pastoral figure than many hard-line American prelates. He has tried to steer the hierarchy on a politically realistic course, even when he's eagerly taken on the White House on issues such as the Obamacare mandate for employers to provide free contraceptive insurance coverage.
Christopher Hale, co-founder of the Millennial blog for young Catholics and an adviser for President Obama's re-election campaign, said he's had constructive exchanges with Dolan, and said Dolan's office had responded positively to Hale's March 26 Washington Post column that urged the very kind of pastoral shift on gays that Dolan seemed to adopt.
Hale also cited a Religion News Service column by Michael O'Loughlin calling for a shift in emphasis that he said Dolan's office also appreciated. "I know he listens," Hale said of Dolan. "I know he has his finger to the wind on this issue" of the church's attitude towards gays and lesbians.
Other leaders apparently do as well.
Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, and his predecessor, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, were also on Sunday morning news shows addressing the issue of gay rights and stressing that the Catholic Church needed to be welcoming. As McCarrick put it, the church could be open to civil unions as an alternative to gay marriage.
Interestingly, it's the same approach Francis tried to take in Argentina, voicing support among Argentine bishops for civil unions against a national bid to allow gay marriage. He ultimately lost both battles.
Church officials insist that the Catholic bishops have always taken a "hate the sin, love the sinner" approach, and that the positive comments by Dolan and other churchmen are nothing new.
"A disagreement on the definition of marriage is a serious disagreement. It is not, however, separation from the love of God," Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokeswoman for the USCCB, wrote in a blog post.
Yet that's not the message many bishops had been sending. During the 2012 presidential campaign, a number of bishops said that those who support civil marriage for gays should be barred from Communion, and Dolan and other bishops cast the battle over gay marriage, and against Obama, in almost apocalyptic terms.
Other church leaders used especially harsh language to describe gays and lesbians, and some barred children from attending Catholic schools because their parents are gay. Many also equated support for civil marriage for gays with support for abortion, an action that is grounds for automatic excommunication.
As Dolan himself conceded on Easter, though, the bishops "try our darnedest to make sure we're not an anti-anybody," but up to now "we haven't been too good at that."
While gay rights activists in the Catholic Church welcomed the change of tone as "nothing short of an Easter miracle," in the words of Francis DeBernardo of New Ways Ministry, church leaders also stress that they aren't softening their opposition to same-sex marriage.
At most, it appears that some leaders could be open to favoring civil unions or some alternative to gay marriage — an option that may not even be on the table anymore. Another strategy: shifting the focus from blistering opposition to gays and lesbians to ensuring that religious freedom and conscience rights are respected in future gay rights laws.
That itself could be significant, though it's not clear whether that will be enough to alter the dynamic that has built up in recent years. To be sure, the hierarchy will also face strong calls from its right flank to take a more vocal stand against gay rights.
"Why aren't their (Catholic) bishops appearing on the tube with David Gregory and Piers Morgan to defend the institution of marriage as a union of one man and one woman?" Michael Reagan wrote in a March 28 column at the conservative news site, Townhall.com.
"Like the bank executives that are too chicken to stand up to the federal bullies in Washington, and like the energy company bosses in California who won't stand up to the Green Socialists in Sacramento, the churches cower in fear," Reagan wrote.
Dolan didn't give up the doctrinal ship in his recent appearance on This Week with George Stephanopoulos. He spoke to gay men and lesbians saying, in part, "... we want your happiness... and you're entitled to friendship.' But the church does not see them as entitled to married love.
And Wuerl brought that point home in his Fox News Sunday appearance. He told Chris Wallace:
"The only thing I worry about is someone saying to me, 'You, because you believe that sex is intended for marriage and because you believe that marriage is indissoluble and because you believe that marriage is between a man and a woman that somehow you don't belong here, that somehow this is bigotry or this is hate speech.' That's what I worry about. There has to be room enough in a society as large, as free as pluralistic as America to make space for all of us." (Is Conciliar shift on practioners of moral perversity substance or style? See also Giving Unto Caesar What Belongs To God Alone.)
It is not the purpose of this commentary to belabor points made so many times before about "civil unions." It is my purpose, though, to demonstrate that Theodore Edgar McCarrick is, as a true son of the conciliar revolution and completely faithful sidekick even in retirement of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, is as bereft of the Catholic Faith as the Argentine Apostate, which is why he, McCarrick, can blaspheme God just as easily as have each of the conciliar "popes," including "Saint John Paul II" (hey, his "feast day" is coming up on October 22, 2014!) and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and, of course, Bergoglio himself:
Catholic Cardinal Theodore McCarrick offered Islamic religious phrases and insisted that Islam shares foundational rules with Christianity, during a Sept. 10 press conference in D.C.
“In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate,” McCarrick said as he introduced himself to the audience at a meeting arranged by the Muslim Public Affairs Council. That praise of the Islamic deity is an important phrase in Islam, is found more than 100 times in the Koran, and is akin to the Catholic prayer, ”In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”
McCarrick next claimed that “Catholic social teaching is based on the dignity of the human person… [and] as you study the holy Koran, as you study Islam, basically, this is what Muhammad the prophet, peace be upon him, has been teaching.”
McCarrick was 71 when 19 Muslims brought Islam to the public eye by murdering 3,000 Americans on 9/11. He is one of the 213 Cardinals of the Catholic church, but is too old to vote in church debates.
“Either the cardinal has studied the whole thing and does not know what he’s talking about, or he is making a somewhat misleading statement,” said Michael Meunier, head of the U.S. Copts Association. “The practice of the Muslim majority people that adhere to the Koran… have proven that [claim of equivalence] is not correct,” he told The Daily Caller during a Sept. 11 trip to Jordan.
“Has Cardinal McCarrick converted to Islam?” asked a scornful critic, Robert Spencer, the best-selling author of many books on Islam.
“‘Peace be upon him’ is a phrase Muslims utter after they say the name of [their reputed] prophet… [so] probably he is unaware of the unintended Islamic confession of faith he has just made,”said Spencer, who runs the Jihadwatch.org website.
McCarrick is wrong to say “that Islam teaches the dignity of every human person,“ Spencer said. “Actually it teaches a sharp dichotomy between the Muslims, [who are called] ‘the best of people’ and the unbelievers [are called] ‘the most vile of created beings,’” Spencer told TheDC.
“The Koran also says: ‘Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are merciful to one another, harsh to the unbelievers,’” Spencer said.
The same warning came from Archbishop Amel Nona, who was head of Chaldean Catholic Archeparch of Mosul in Iraq. In a August comment made to Europeans, he said that “You think all men are equal, but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal [and] your values are not their values.”
“If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the [immigrant] enemy you have welcomed in your home,” said Nona, who is now exiled — along with surviving Chaldean Catholics — in the Kurdish city of Erbil.
Islamic societies have routinely persecuted non-Muslims, including Christian Armenians in Turkey and Christian Copts in Egypt, said Taniel Koushakjian, a spokesman for the Armenian National Committee of America.
During the First World War, more that 1.5 million Armenians were deliberately killed by Turkey’s Islamic government, he said.
In Egypt, Copts “seem to bear the brunt of the persecution… [which] comes from the religious divide [and] is an interpretation of the theology in which people who are not of the same [Islamic] belief are cast out as infidels, as unrighteous,” he said.
The Islamic Society of North America says Islam “recognize[s] plurality in human societies, including religious plurality.” The section of the Koran that endorses plurality, it is claimed, include verses 10:19, 11:118 and 11.19.
“Mankind was not but one community [united in religion], but [then] they differed. And if not for a word that preceded from your Lord, it would have been judged between them [immediately] concerning that over which they differ,” says verse 10:19, which ISNA says shows Islam’s tolerance for other religions.
The Koran has some welcoming messages, but they’re from Islam’s early period, Meunier said. “When Islam became strong and had a strong army, the tougher verses came down from heaven — apparently — and according to Islamic teaching, those later verses abrogate the earlier verses [so] moderate Muslims have an uphill battle saying Islam is tolerant.”
“We have to encourage moderate Muslims to present a more moderate version of Islam and the Koran,” but they’re outgunned by Saudi clerics who have used petrodollars to make Islam tougher and less tolerant, he said.
But the Saudi clerics “won’t do it [because] they don’t believe in it,” he added.
For Muslims, the Koran is the unimpeachable transcript of commands from Allah, the single and all-powerful deity. Muslims believe that the Koran was dictated by an angel to Islam’s final prophet, Mohammad, 1,400 years ago. This rigidity sharply constrains Muslims’ use of alternative ideas, including elements of Christianity, or secular ethics and philosophy.
The Koran also include many passage urging the use of violence. “The penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land,” says Verse 33 of the Koran’s fifth book.
In contrast, the Christian Bible, including the almost-2,000 year-old New Testament, is based on the statements of witnesses. For example, Matthew the disciple provide the main account of the Beatitudes sermon, which includes the famous lines, “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall be shown mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called the sons of God.”
The Christians’ reliance on witnesses allowed perpetual debate over the meaning and purpose of words from the twinned deity of Jesus and God, and it also allowed a Christian search for evidence of God via the “natural sciences,” that gradually created modern science. Christianity also endorsed separate roles for church and state, where Islam assumes that states’ laws comply with Koranic rules.
McCarrick, however, blended the two distinct religions in his comments at the press club.
“We are together on this against evil, we are against killing, we are against destruction… God bless you in this work you do,” McCarrick said to the Muslim speakers, which included representatives from one group — the Islamic Society of North America — that was implicated in a conspiracy to smuggle funds to the Hamas terror group that recently launched another bombardment of thousands of rockets at Israeli Jews.
“We believe that Islam is a religion which helps people, not kills them… the Muslim community has always taught this,” McCarrick said.
“I’m privileged to be able to lend my voice to the voice of many of my friends here,” he said about the Sept. 10 meeting, which was designed to help U.S.-based Islamic groups avoid the public disgust with The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.
Since early this year, the Islamic State group has killed and murdered thousands of Iraqis that don’t accept rule by the brutal Salafi variant of Islam. The victims include Shia Muslims, Christians and adherents of the pre-Christian Yazidi religion. Tens of thousands of non-Muslims have also been driven from their homes and fields.
McCarrick, however, downplayed ISIS’s attack on Christians in Iraq, and expressed more concerns for Muslim victims of ISIS attacks. “The truth of the matter is in these terrible massacres of the Islamic state, most of the victims have been Muslims, most of them have not been Christians,” he told his Sept. 10 audience.
“Many Christians, obviously, have suffered, so I am here to say that we stand with our brothers and sisters in the Muslim community, who here in the United States have been giving leadership in a very strong way,” he declared.
“They are proud to be Americans… they love America,” he said, without retuning to discuss the fate of his fellow Christians under Muslim rule.
Spencer urged McCarrick to challenge his Muslim hosts. “Cardinal McCarrick, rather than indulge in this fond and ignorant wishful thinking, would have done better to have challenged his Muslim friends to match their lofty words with real action to combat the Islamic State and other Muslim persecutors of Christians,” Spencer said.
McCarrick should have “asked them to institute programs in mosques and Islamic schools to teach against the literal meaning of the verses I quoted above and others like them, so that they no longer incite Muslims to violence,” in the U.S. or abroad, Spencer said. (Mufti Teddy Embraces Mohammdanism.)
Apart from the patent apostasy represented by McCarrick's Islamophlic remarks, the former "archbishop" of Washington, District of Columbia, and "uncle" to an endless array of "nephews" over the years demonstrated himself to be a complete fool when stating that more Mohammedans than Christians have been killed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. More Mohammedans have been killed because there are more of them in Iraq and Syria than Christians, whose numbers as a proportion of the population in these two countries, have been decimated as a result of the complete and total fidelity of ISIS to the blasphemous Koran from which Mufit Teddy read yesterday, September 11, 2014, the Feast of Saints Protus and Hyacinth.
Alas, my friends, this is nothing new for "Uncle" or Mufti Teddy McCarrick. Nothing new at all, which is why it is helpful to have something of a memory of past events. Here is what Teddy McCarrick said in the presence of Jordanian King Abdullah on September 13, 2005, nine years ago now, at The Catholic University of America in Washington, District of Columbia:
Your Majesty,
A few months ago, when I was privileged to pray for you on another occasion in this capital city, I asked Allah, the compassionate and merciful Lord of all the world, to bless you and to help you make your country a bridge across which all nations might walk in unity, fellowship and love. As I listened to your words today, I believe my prayer is being answered.
Indeed, the Amman Message of November of last year is a blueprint and a challenge not only to the great world of Islam, but to the whole human race. Your thoughtful leadership is a stirring invitation to all of us, especially to the people of the Book, the family of Abraham, who share so much and who are called to be brothers and sisters in God’s one human family.
You have taken to heart the words of Pope Benedict XVI when he addressed the Muslim leaders gathered with him in Germany last month and invited them all to join him in eliminating from all hearts any trace of rancor, in resisting every form of intolerance and in opposing every manifestation of violence. As you quoted in your splendid talk to us today, Pope Benedict called his listeners, in this way, to turn back the way of cruel fanaticism that endangers the lives of so many people and hinders progress for world peace.
Your Majesty’s call and that of the Holy Father are in so many ways the same. May Allah, the merciful and compassionate, continue to guide your steps along this noble path. May He guide and protect you, your family and your beloved country and may peace and justice come to all lands and all peoples through your efforts, your vision and your courage.
In the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate God, we pray. Amen.
The original link for the text above, which was posted on the website of The Catholic University of America's Public Affairs website, disappeared within twenty-four hours of news about this act of apostasy became public. I have the text in Thou Shalt Not Have Strange Gods Before Me, which was published about eight months or so before I began to write about the plausbility of sedevacantism, and it can be found as well on the Free Republic website, McCarrick's Remarks to Abdullah II of Jordan, and on something called "Sermon Index," McCarrick Publicly Prays To Allah. Both sites have links to the aforementioned Public Affairs website of The Catholic University of America. Those links, however, did not work within a short period of time after the remark were posted. A story on the Catholic World News website about this act of apostasy was also taken down. There will be "taking down" "Uncle Teddy's" latest foray into his fantasy land of Islamophilia as not act of apostasy and no amount of blasphemy can arouse the anger of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who is himself a complete Islamophile.
Then again, as I noted in those videos that are being uploaded at this time, there is no space betweeen Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Joseph Alois Ratzinger:
November 30, 2005: Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI entered into the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey, taking off his shoes so as to symbolize that he was in a "holy place" and then turned in the direction of Mecca at the behest of his Mohammedan "host," who instructed him to assume the Mohammedan prayer position as they "prayed" together. God is offended by honor being given to such a false religion as the souls of His faithful Catholics are scandalized and bewildered and confused as a consequence.
Ratzinger at the Blue Mosque
May 8-15, 2009: Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI visits Jordan and Israel, making the following incredible statements while there:
Places of worship, like this splendid Al-Hussein Bin Talal mosque named after the revered late King, stand out like jewels across the earth’s surface. From the ancient to the modern, the magnificent to the humble, they all point to the divine, to the Transcendent One, to the Almighty. And through the centuries these sanctuaries have drawn men and women into their sacred space to pause, to pray, to acknowledge the presence of the Almighty, and to recognize that we are all his creatures. (Speech to Muslim religious leaders, members of the Diplomatic Corps and Rectors of universities in Jordan in front of the mosque al-Hussein bin Talal in Amman)
Ratzinger/Benedict at the Mosque Al-Hussein bin Talal, Amman, Jordan, Saturday, May 9, 2009.
I cordially thank the Grand Mufti, Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, together with the Director of the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, Sheikh Mohammed Azzam al-Khatib al-Tamimi, and the Head of the Awquaf Council, Sheikh Abdel Azim Salhab, for the welcome they have extended to me on your behalf. I am deeply grateful for the invitation to visit this sacred place, and I willingly pay my respects to you and the leaders of the Islamic community in Jerusalem. (Courtesy visit to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the Mount of the Temple, since when is a place of false worship "sacred" to the true God of Divine Revelation?)
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI entering the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, Wednesday, May 12, 2009. Note that the false "pontiff" has taken off his shoes once again.
Saints gave up their lives rather than to give even the appearance of such apostasy.
God of all the ages, on my visit to Jerusalem, the “City of Peace”, spiritual home to Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, I bring before you the joys, the hopes and the aspirations, the trials, the suffering and the pain of all your people throughout the world.
God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, hear the cry of the afflicted, the fearful, the bereft; send your peace upon this Holy Land, upon the Middle East, upon the entire human family; stir the hearts of all who call upon your name, to walk humbly in the path of justice and compassion.
“The Lord is good to those who wait for him, to the soul that seeks him” (Lam 3:25)! (Prayer at the Western Wall, May 12, 2009; one will note, of course, that there is not one reference to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.)
What's that about a picture being worth a thousand words?
The appendix below reprises information of what it is be faithful to the blasphemous Koran, and the members of ISIS are being completely faithful to their false religion as they kill Catholics and other Christians while the likes Mufti Teddy and Soccer Mom Jorge speak of "dialogue" and heap praise on a religion founded in bloodshed and has spread in like manner for the past fourteen hundred years. Then again, leaders of one false religion, conciliarism, have great respect for the "doctrines" of other false religions. It's just a matter of "professional courtesy."
May we have recourse to the Holy Name of Mary, which we invoke with love one hundred fifty-three times when we pray the three sets of her Most Holy Rosary, whose power was invoked by Pope Saint Pius V to defeat the Mohammedan Turks in the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571, and which was prayed by the Catholic forces under the command of King John Sobieski of Poland on this very day three hundred thirty-one years ago as he defeat the Mohammedan Turks in the Battle of the Gates of Vienna.
Tomorrow, September 13, 2014, is the ninety-seventh anniversary of Our Lady's fifth and next-to-last apparition in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos. Our Lady remind the three young shepherd children to keep praying their Rosaries:
"Continue to pray the Rosary in order to obtain the end of the war. In October Our Lord will come, as well as Our Lady of Dolours and Our Lady of Carmel. Saint Joseph will appear with the Child Jesus to bless the world. God is pleased with your sacrifices. He does not want you to sleep with the rope on, but only to wear it during the daytime."
Lucia then began to put forward the petitions for cures, to be told: "Yes, I will cure some, but not others. In October I will perform a miracle so that all may believe." (Our Lady's Words at Fatima.)
Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart will triumph over the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Joseph Alois Ratzinger and Theodore Edgar McCarrick et al. All we have to do is suffer the chastisements of the moment in reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves through the same Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
It is just up to us to cooperate with graces that Our Lady sends to us to do so.
Vivat Christus Rex!
Ave Maria!
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us, especially on your feast day today!
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Appendix A
Mohammed, the First "Radical" Mohammedan
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 teachin