Doubly Betrayed by Jorge and His False Church

One of the most tragic aspects of the conciliar revolution is that countless millions of believing Catholics who have suffered much to remain faithful to what they think is the Catholic Church have lived long enough to become victims of treacherous acts of betrayal by men who they have accepted as true “popes” and “bishops.” The long-suffering Catholics of the underground church in Red China are, obviously, the most prominent victims of such acts of betrayal.

Joseph “Cardinal” Zen, the retired conciliar “bishop” of Hong Kong, has been sounding the alarm about this betrayal for most of the past twenty years. He has written open letter after open letter to document the harassment, persecution, arrest, imprisonment and torture of scores upon scores of underground priests by the Red Chinese authorities. His open letters have been ignored by the conciliar authorities precisely because they want underground Catholics in Red China to put aside their “differences” and be reconciled to the “official church,” the rump church, which is the entity that has the “blessing” of “Pope Francis” and Pietro “Cardinal” Parolin.

“Cardinal” Zen’s latest open letter is heartrending, doubly so when one considers that this courageous Catholic priest believes that he is dealing with a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter and the authority of the Catholic Church:

Dear Friends in the Media,

Since AsiaNews has revealed some recent facts in the Church in mainland China, of legitimate bishops being asked by the “Holy See” to resign and make place for illegitimate, even explicitly excommunicated, “bishops”, many different versions of the facts and interpretations are creating confusion among the people. Many, knowing of my recent trip to Rome, are asking me for some clarification.

Back in October, when Bishop Zhuang received the first communication from the Holy See and asked me for help, I send someone to bring his letter to the Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, with, enclosed, a copy for the Holy Father. I don’t know if that enclosed copy reached the desk of the Holy Father.

Fortunately, Archbishop Savio Hon Tai Fai was still in Rome and could meet the Pope in a fare-well visit. In that occasion, he brought the two cases of Shantou and Mindong to the knowledge of the Holy Father. The Holy Father was surprised and promised to look into the matter.

Given the words of the Holy Father to Archbishop Savio Hon, the new facts in December were all the more a shocking surprise to me. When the old distressed Bishop Zhuang asked me to bring to the Holy Father his answer to the message conveyed to him by the “Vatican Delegation” in Beijing, I simply could not say “No”. But what could I do to make sure that his letter reach the Holy Father, while not even I can be sure that my own many letters did reach him.

To make sure that our voice reached the Holy Father, I took the sudden decision of going to Rome. I left Hong Kong the night of 9th January, arriving in Rome the early morning of 10th January, just in time (actually, a bit late) to join the Wednesday Public Audience. At the end of the audience, we Cardinals and Bishops are admitted to the “bacia mano” and I had the chance to put into the hands of the Holy Father the envelop, saying that I was coming to Rome for the only purpose of bringing to him a letter of Bishop Zhuang, hoping he can find time to read it (in the envelop there was the original letter of the Bishop in Chinese with my translation into Italian and a letter of mine).

For obvious reasons, I hoped my appearance at the audience would not be too much noticed, but my late arrival in the hall made it particularly noticeable. Anyway, now everybody can see the whole proceeding from the Vatican TV (by the way, the audience was held in Paul VI Hall, not in St. Peter’s Square and I was a little late to the audience, but did not have to “wait in a queue, in a cold weather”, as some media erroneously reported).

When in Rome, I met Fr. Bernard Cervellera of AsiaNews. We exchanged our information, but I told him not to write anything. He complied. Now that someone else broke the news, I can agree to confirm it. Yes, as far as I know, things happened just as they are related in AsiaNews (the AsiaNews report “believes” that the Bishop leading the Vatican Delegation was Msgr. Celli. I do not know in what official capacity he was there, but it is most likely that he was the one there in Beijing).

In this crucial moment and given the confusion in the media, I, knowing directly the situation of Shantou and indirectly that of Mindong, feel duty-bound to share my knowledge of the facts, so that the people sincerely concerned with the good of the Church may know the truth to which they are entitled. I am well aware that in doing so I may talk about things which, technically, are qualified as “confidential”. But my conscience tells me that in this case the “right to truth” should override any such “duty of confidentiality”.

With such conviction, I am going to share with you also the following:
In the afternoon of that day, 10th January, I received a phone-call from Santa Marta telling me that the Holy Father would receive me in private audience in the evening of Friday 12th January (though the report appeared only on 14th January in the Holy See bulletin). That was the last day of my 85 years of life, what a gift from Heaven! (Note that it was the vigil of the Holy Father’s departure for Chile and Peru, so the Holy Father must have been very busy).

On that evening the conversation lasted about half an hour. I was rather disorderly in my talking, but I think I succeeded to convey to the Holy Father the worries of his faithful children in China.

The most important question I put to the Holy Father (which was also in the letter) was whether he had had time “to look into the matter” (as he promised Archbishop Savio Hon). In spite of the danger of being accused of breach of confidentiality, I decide to tell you what His Holiness said: “Yes, I told them (his collaborators in the Holy See) not to create another Mindszenty case”! I was there in the presence of the Holy Father representing my suffering brothers in China. His words should be rightly understood as of consolation and encouragement more for them than for me.

I think it was most meaningful and appropriate for the Holy Father to make this historical reference to Card. Josef Mindszenty, one of the heroes of our faith. (Card. Josef Mindszenty was the Archbishop of Budapest, Cardinal Primate of Hungary under Communist persecution. He suffered much in several years in prison. During the short-lived revolution of 1956, he was freed from prison by the insurgents and, before the Red Army crashed the revolution, took refuge in the American Embassy. Under the pressure of the Government he was ordered by the Holy See to leave his country and immediately a successor was named to the likings of the Communist Government). ("Cardinal Zen" Open Letter on Vatican Sellout of the Underground Church in Red China.)

Interjection Number One:

I do not think that “Cardinal” Zen’s benign interpretation of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s reference to the case of the late Josef Cardinal Mindszenty as the false “pontiff” desires not to have another martyr around which faithful Catholics in Red China and anti-Communists worldwide can rally and support.

On the contrary, I submit that the conciliar authorities have seen the late Bishop Ignatius Kung Pin Mei as the same kind of obstacle to rapprochement with the Chicoms as the late Cardinal Midszenty represented to Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria/Paul VI’s and Jean “Cardinal” Villot’s Ostpolitik policy of rapprochement with Communist regimes worldwide, especially in East and Central Europe behind the Iron Curtain. Bishop Kung’s death on March 11, 2000, signaled the start of a process that “Cardinal” Zen has seen unfold with his own eyes.

Bishop Ignatius Kung Pin Mei was the Bishop of Shanghai, China from July 15, 1950, to the time of his death on March 11, 2000. Bishop Kung, who was elevated to the conciliar "college of cardinals" in pectore by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II in 1979, a nomination that was not made public until 1991, was arrested by the Red Chinese murderous monsters on September 8, 1955, the Feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and later sentenced to life imprisonment, although he was released in 1986 and later served two years of house arrest until he was permitted to leave his homeland. Here is an excerpt of his official biography as found at the Cardinal Kung Foundation website:

Bishop Kung had been Bishop of Shanghai and Apostolic Administrator of two other dioceses for only five years before he was arrested by the Chinese government. In just 5 short years, Bishop Kung became one of the most feared enemies of the Chinese Communists - a man who commanded both the attention and devotion of the country's then three million Roman Catholics and the highest respect of his brother bishops in China, and inspired thousands to offer their lives up to God. In defiance of the communist created and sanctioned Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, Bishop Kung personally supervised the Legion of Mary, a religious organization of the laity dedicated to the veneration of the Blessed Mother Mary. As the result, many members of the Legion of Mary chose to risk arrest in the name of their God, of their Church and of their bishop. Hundreds of Legion of Mary members, including many students, were arrested and sentenced to 10, 15, or 20 years or more of hard labor.

In the midst of persecutions, Bishop Kung declared 1952 the Marian Year in Shanghai. During that year, there was to be uninterrupted 24 hours-daily recitation of the rosary in front of a statue of Our Lady of Fatima, which toured all the parishes of Shanghai. The Holy Statue finally arrived at Christ the King Church where a major arrest of the priests had just taken place only a month ago. Bishop Kung visited that church and personally led the rosary while hundreds of the armed police looked on. At the end of the rosary, leading the congregation, Bishop Kung prayed: "Holy Mother, we do not ask you for a miracle. We do not beg you to stop the persecutions. But we beg you to support us who are very weak."

Knowing that he and his priests would soon be arrested, Bishop Kung trained hundreds of catechists to pass on the Roman Catholic faith in the diocese to future generations.

The heroic efforts of these catechists, their martyrdom and that of many faithful and clergy contributed to the vibrant underground Roman Catholic Church in China today. Bishop Kung's place in the hearts of his parishioners was very well summed up by the Shanghai youth group in a 1953 New Year youth rally when they said: "Bishop Kung, in darkness, you light up our path. You guide us on our treacherous journey. You sustain our faith and the traditions of the Church. You are the foundation rock of our Church in Shanghai."

On September 8, 1955, the press around the world reported in shock the overnight arrest of Bishop Kung along with more than 200 priests and Church leaders in Shanghai. Months after his arrest, he was taken out to a mob "struggle session" in the old Dog Racing stadium in Shanghai. Thousands were ordered to attend and to hear the Bishop's public confession of his "crimes." With his hands tied behind his back, wearing a Chinese pajama suit, the 5-foot tall bishop was pushed forward to the microphone to confess. To the shock of the security police, they heard a righteous loud cry of "Long live Christ the King, Long live the Pope" from the Bishop. The crowd responded immediately, "Long live Christ the King, Long live Bishop Kung". Bishop Kung was quickly dragged away to the police car and disappeared from the world until he was brought to trial in 1960. Bishop Kung was sentenced to life imprisonment.

The night before he was brought to trial, the Chief Prosecutor asked once again for his cooperation to lead the independent church movement and to establish the Chinese Patriotic Association. His answer was: "I am a Roman Catholic Bishop. If I denounce the Holy Father, not only would I not be a Bishop, I would not even be a Catholic. You can cut off my head, but you can never take away my duties."

Bishop Kung vanished behind bars for thirty years. During those thirty years, he spent many long periods in isolation. Numerous requests to visit Bishop Kung in prison by international religious and human rights organizations and senior foreign government officials were rejected. He was not permitted to receive visitors, including his relatives, letters, or money to buy essentials, which are rights of other prisoners.

The efforts for his release by his family, led by his nephew, Joseph Kung, by human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, Red Cross, and the United States Government, never ceased. In 1985, he was released from jail to serve another term of 10 years of house arrest under the custody of those Patriotic Association bishops who betrayed him and betrayed the Pope and who usurped his diocese. In an article immediately after his release from jail, the New York Times said that the ambiguous wording of the Chinese news agency suggested that the authorities, not the bishop, might have relented. After two and one-half years of house arrest, he was officially released. However, his charge of being a counterrevolutionary was never exonerated. In 1988, his nephew, Joseph Kung, went to China twice and obtained permission to escort him to America for receiving proper medical care.

Shortly before Bishop Kung was released from jail, he was permitted to join a banquet organized by the Shanghai government to welcome His eminence Cardinal Jaime Sin, Archbishop of Manila, Philippines on a friendship visit. This was the first time that Bishop Kung had met a visiting bishop from the universal Church since his imprisonment. Cardinal Sin and Bishop Kung were seated on opposite ends of the table separated by more that 20 Communists, and had no chance to exchange words privately. During the dinner, Cardinal Sin suggested that each person should sing a song to celebrate. When the time came for Bishop Kung to sing, in the presence of the Chinese government officials and the Patriotic Association bishops, he looked directly at Cardinal Sin and sang "Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam" (You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church), a song of faith proclaiming the supreme authority of the Pope. Bishop Kung conveyed to Cardinal Sin that in all his years of captivity he remained faithful to God, to his Church and to the Pope.

After the banquet, Aloysius Jin, the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association's Bishop of Shanghai, rebuked Cardinal Kung, "What are you trying to do? Showing your position?" Cardinal Kung quietly answered, "It is not necessary to show my position. My position has never changed."

Cardinal Sin immediately carried Cardinal Kung's message to the Holy Father and announced to the world: this man of God never faltered in his love for his Church or his people despite unimaginable suffering, isolation and pain. (Biography of Cardinal Kung.)

Bishop Kung's nephew, Joseph Kung, who is now eighty-five years of age, was kind enough to have invited us to a luncheon at his house in Stamford, Connecticut, in June of 2003, I believe, and he showed us the room where his courageous uncle had died. Joseph also showed us a diary in which Bishop Kung wrote the Ordinary of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition while in prison in Red China. His jailers kept taking away the book from him, but Bishop Kung always seemed to find the paper that he needed to write the Ordinary of the Mass in exquisite handwriting. Bishop Kung won this contest of wills as he was aided by Our Lady's intercession in his behalf. The jailers finally relented and let him continue his work without any further efforts to confiscate it. Bishop Kung was dedicated to the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is always mocking, including in a children's book in 2016 (see Jorge's Wall of Unbelief.)

Now, leaving aside the fact that Jaimie Sin was no "cardinal," Bishop Ignatius Kung suffered for his fealty to the Throne of Saint Peter. He had no way of knowing that a revolution that had much in common with Marxism had created a counter church with false liturgical rites as he was imprisoned, and he was so grateful to the third in the current line of antipopes that he never understood what had happened while he was held incommunicado for over thirty years. Bishop Kung, however, was courageous in his steadfast defense of the Catholic Faith and of Papal Primacy in the face of vicious Communist persecution against him. He lived for Christ the King just as much as had Padre Miguel Agustin Pro, S.J., and the Cristeros in Mexico (as well as the Spanish Cristeros who died at the hands of Communists, many of whom had the support of American celebrities, including author Ernest Hemmingway, between 1936 and 1939). He did not accord the schismatic and heretical rump church created by the Red Chinese government, the so-called Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, as having any legitimacy whatsoever. He was a true son of Holy Mother Church who always denounced falsehood when he saw it, never failing to call it by its proper name.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, however, has never met a Communist or a Communist regime that he has not attempted to coddle, if not actually praise, and thus it is that he is about the accord de jure recognition to the "Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association" as he shows his utter disregard for the suffering of so many countless Chinese Catholics who believed in all sincerity that they were suffering for the Catholic Church and that they were loyal to the papacy. What matters to Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a false sense of "peace" that is premised upon appeasing enemies of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as he, in essence, tells believing Catholics who have suffered so much over the course of nearly seven decades: "Get over it. Get used to the new reality. I stand with the Patriotic Association, not with you."

“Cardinal” Zen is very well-meaning and he is very courageous, but he does not recognize that the problem he is facing is a false “pope” and a false church that means to be reconciled with every error under the sun. His benign interpretation of Bergoglio’s reference to Cardinal Midszenty cannot be “reconciled,” shall we say, with the facts of the situation in Red China.

We return now to “Cardinal” Zen’s open letter:

With this revelation, I hope I have satisfied the legitimate “right to know” of the media and of my brothers in China.

The important thing for us now is to pray for the Holy Father, very fittingly by singing the traditional song “Oremus”: "Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Francisco, Dominus conservet eum et vivificet eum et beatum faciat eum in terra et non tradat eum in animam inimicorum eius."

Some explanations may still be in order.

Please, notice that the problem is not the resignation of the legitimate Bishops, but the request to make place for the illegitimate and even excommunicated ones. Many old underground Bishops, though the retirement age law has never been enforced in China, have insistently asked for a successor, but have never received any answer from the Holy See. Some others, who have a successor already named, may be even already in possession of the Bulla signed by the Holy Father, were ordered not to proceed with the ordination for fear of offending the Government. ("Cardinal Zen" Open Letter on Vatican Sellout of the Underground Church in Red China.)

Brief Interjection:

Pope Pius XI specifically forbade any cooperation between Catholics and Communism, including Communist governments, a prohibition that was reaffirmed by the Holy Office in the very year the Chicoms ousted President Chiang Kai-shek, 1949:

See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the triumph of Communism in their own country, will be the first to fall victims of their error. And the greater the antiquity and grandeur of the Christian civilization in the regions where Communism successfully penetrates, so much more devastating will be the hatred displayed by the godless. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)

This Sacred Supreme Congregation has been asked:  

1. whether it is lawful to join Communist Parties or to favour them;
2. whether it is lawful to publish, disseminate, or read books, periodicals, newspapers or leaflets which support the teaching or action of Communists, or to write in them;
3. whether the faithful who knowingly and freely perform the acts specified in questions 1 and 2 may be admitted to the Sacraments;
4. whether the faithful who profess the materialistic and anti-Christian doctrine of the Communists, and particularly those who defend or propagate this doctrine, contract ipso facto excommunication specially reserved to the Apostolic See as apostates from the Catholic faith.

The Most Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers entrusted with the supervision of matters concerning the safeguarding of Faith and morals, having previously heard the opinion of the Reverend Lords Consultors, decreed in the plenary session held on Tuesday (instead of Wednesday), June 28, 1949, that the answers should be as follows:

To 1. in the negative: because Communism is materialistic and anti-Christian; and the leaders of the Communists, although they sometimes profess in words that they do not oppose religion, do in fact show themselves, both in their teaching and in their actions, to be the enemies of God, of the true religion and of the Church of Christ; to 2. in the negative: they are prohibited ipso iure (cf. Can. 1399 of the Codex Iuris Canonici); to 3. in the negative, in accordance with the ordinary principles concerning the refusal of the Sacraments to those who are not disposed; to 4. in the affirmative.

And the following Thursday, on the 30th day of the same month and year, Our Most Holy Lord Pius XII, Pope by the Divine Providence, in the ordinary audience, granted to the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Assessor of the Sacred Office, approved of the decision of the Most Eminent Fathers which had been reported to Him, and ordered the same to be promulgated officially in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis.

Given at Rome, on July 1st, 1949. (As found at Decree Against Communism.)

Back to “Cardinal” Zen’s open letter:

2. I have talked mainly of the two cases of Shantou and Mindong. I do not have any other information except the copy of a letter written by an outstanding Catholic lady, a retired University professor well-acquainted with affairs of the Church in China, in which she warns Msgr. Celli against pushing for the legitimization of “bishop” Lei Shi Ying in Sichuan.

3. I acknowledge myself as a pessimist regarding the present situation of the Church in China, but my pessimism has a foundation in my long direct experience of the Church in China. From 1989 to 1996 I used to spend six months a year teaching in the various Seminaries of the official Catholic community. I had direct experience of the slavery and humiliation to which those our brother Bishops are subjected. And from the recent information, there is no reason to change that pessimistic view. The Communist Government is making new harsher regulations limiting religious freedom. They are now strictly enforcing regulations which up to now were practically only on paper (from the 1st of February 2018 attendance to Mass in the underground will no longer be tolerated).

4. Some say that all the efforts to reach an agreement is to avoid the ecclesial schism. How ridiculous! The schism is there, in the Independent Church! The Popes avoided using the word “schism” because they knew that many in the official Catholic community were there not by their own free will, but under heavy pressure. The proposed “unification” would force everybody into that community. The Vatican would be giving the blessing on the new strengthened schismatic Church, taking away the bad conscience from all those who are already willing renegades and those others who would readily join them.("Cardinal Zen" Open Letter on Vatican Sellout of the Underground Church in Red China.)

Brief Interjection:

“Cardinal” Zen does not realize that Jorge Mario Bergoglio that he used Amoris Laetitia, for example, precisely to remove the bad consciences of aduterers, fornicators and sodomites. The Argentine Apostate has shown himself to be a friend and an apologist for Marxists and Marxist regimes. His initiatives to complete the sellout of underground Catholics in Red China are premised upon his belief that it was wrong of Pope Pius XII not to have cooperated with Mao Tse-Tung following the Communist takeover of China on October 1, 1949, and the subsequent establishment of the rump church five years later.

Back to “Cardinal” Zen’s open letter:

5. Is it not good to try to find mutual ground to bridge the decades-long divide between the Vatican and China? But can there be anything really “mutual” with a totalitarian regime? Either you surrender or you accept persecution, but remaining faithful to yourself (can you imagine an agreement between St. Joseph and King Herod?)

6. So, do I think that the Vatican is selling out the Catholic Church in China? Yes, definitely, if they go in the direction which is obvious from all what they are doing in recent years and months. ("Cardinal Zen" Open Letter on Vatican Sellout of the Underground Church in Red China.)

Brief Interjection:

The Catholic Church would never sell out the suffering Catholics in Red China.

Our last true pope thus far did not do so. Indeed, he sternly reprimanded the Chicoms for creating their rump church with which the conciliar sect is so intention on effecting a formal “reconciliation”:

5. But, alas, after a few years the sky was overcast by storm clouds. On your Christian communities, many of which had been flourishing from times long past, there fell sad and sorrowful times. Missionaries, among whom were many archbishops and bishops noted for their apostolic zeal, and Our own Internuncio were driven from China, while bishops, priests, and religious men and women, together with many of the faithful, were cast into prison or incurred every kind of restraint and suffering.

6. On that occasion We raised Our voice in sorrow, and, in Our Encyclical of January 18, 1952, Cupimus imprimis,[3] rebuked the unjust attack. In that letter, for the sake of truth and conscious of Our duty, We declared that the Catholic Church is a stranger to no people on earth, much less hostile to any. With a mother's anxiety, she embraces all peoples in impartial charity. She seeks no earthly advantage but employs what powers she possesses to attract the souls of all men to seek what is eternal. We also stated that missionaries promote the interest of no particular nation; they come from every quarter of the earth and are united by a single love, God, and thus they seek and hope for nothing else save the spread of God's kingdom. Thus, it is clear that their work is neither without purpose nor harmful, but beneficent and necessary since it aids Chinese priests in their Christian apostolate.

7. And some two years later, October 7, 1954, another Encyclical Letter was addressed to you, beginning Ad Sinarum gentem,[4] in which We refuted accusations made against Catholics in China. We openly declared that Catholics yielded to none (nor could they do so) in their true loyalty and love of their native country. Seeing also that there was being spread among you the doctrine of the so-called "three autonomies," We warned - by virtue of that universal teaching authority which We exercise by divine command - that this same doctrine as understood by its authors, whether in theory or in its consequences, cannot receive the approval of a Catholic, since it turns minds away from the essential unity of the Church.

8. In these days, however, We have to draw attention to the fact that the Church in your lands in recent years has been brought to still worse straits. In the midst of so many great sorrows it brings Us great comfort to note that in the daily attacks which you have met neither unflinching faith nor the most ardent love of the Divine Redeemer and of His Church has been wanting. You have borne witness to this faith and love in innumerable ways, of which only a small part is known to men, but for all of which you will someday receive an eternal reward from God.

9. Nevertheless We regard it as Our duty to declare openly, with a heart filled to its depths with sorrow and anxiety, that affairs in China are, by deceit and cunning endeavor, changing so much for the worse that the false doctrine already condemned by Us seems to be approaching its final stages and to be causing its most serious damage.

10. For by particularly subtle activity an association has been created among you to which has been attached the title of "patriotic," and Catholics are being forced by every means to take part in it. This association - as has often been proclaimed - was formed ostensibly to join the clergy and the faithful in love of their religion and their country, with these objectives in view: that they might foster patriotic sentiments; that they might advance the cause of international peace; that they might accept that species of socialism which has been introduced among you and, having accepted it, support and spread it; that, finally, they might actively cooperate with civil authorities in defending what they describe as political and religious freedom. And yet - despite these sweeping generalizations about defense of peace and the fatherland, which can certainly deceive the unsuspecting - it is perfectly clear that this association is simply an attempt to execute certain well defined and ruinous policies.

11. For under an appearance of patriotism, which in reality is just a fraud, this association aims primarily at making Catholics gradually embrace the tenets of atheistic materialism, by which God Himself is denied and religious principles are rejected.

12. Under the guise of defending peace the same association receives and spreads false rumors and accusations by which many of the clergy, including venerable bishops and even the Holy See itself, are claimed to admit to and promote schemes for earthly domination or to give ready and willing consent to exploitation of the people, as if they, with preconceived opinions, are acting with hostile intent against the Chinese nation.

13. While they declare that it is essential that every kind of freedom exist in religious matters and that this makes mutual relations between the ecclesiastical and civil powers easier, this association in reality aims at setting aside and neglecting the rights of the Church and effecting its complete subjection to civil authorities.

14. Hence all its members are forced to approve those unjust prescriptions by which missionaries are cast into exile, and by which bishops, priests, religious men, nuns, and the faithful in considerable numbers are thrust into prison; to consent to those measures by which the jurisdiction of many legitimate pastors is persistently obstructed; to defend wicked principles totally opposed to the unity, universality, and hierarchical constitution of the Church; to admit those first steps by which the clergy and faithful are undermined in the obedience due to legitimate bishops; and to separate Catholic communities from the Apostolic See.

15. In order to spread these wicked principles more efficiently and to fix them in everyone's mind, this association - which, as We have said, boasts of its patriotism - uses a variety of means including violence and oppression, numerous lengthy publications, and group meetings and congresses.

16. In these meetings, the unwilling are forced to take part by incitement, threats, and deceit. If any bold spirit strives to defend truth, his voice is easily smothered and overcome and he is branded with a mark of infamy as an enemy of his native land and of the new society.

17. There should also be noted those courses of instruction by which pupils are forced to imbibe and embrace this false doctrine. Priests, religious men and women, ecclesiastical students, and faithful of all ages are forced to attend these courses. An almost endless series of lectures and discussions, lasting for weeks and months, so weaken and benumb the strength of mind and will that by a kind of psychic coercion an assent is extracted which contains almost no human element, an assent which is not freely asked for as should be the case.

18. In addition to these there are the methods by which minds are upset - by every device, in private and in public, by traps, deceits, grave fear, by so-called forced confessions, by custody in a place where citizens are forcibly "reeducated," and those "Peoples' Courts" to which even venerable bishops are ignominiously dragged for trial.

19. Against methods of acting such as these, which violate the principal rights of the human person and trample on the sacred liberty of the sons of God, all Christians from every part of the world, indeed all men of good sense cannot refrain from raising their voices with Us in real horror and from uttering a protest deploring the deranged conscience of their fellow men. (Pope Pius XII, Ad Apostolorum Principis, June 29, 1958.)

There can be no clearer proof of the contrast between the words of a true pope, who was unafraid to condemn the brutal persecution of faithful Catholics in Red China and to term the so-called Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association to be what it is, a fraud, and the words of and actions of false “popes,” men who are always willing to find nuance whenever it can advance the cause of doctrinal, liturgical, moral and political evils.

The final two points made by “Cardinal” Zen are hereby presented:

7. Some expert on the Catholic Church in China is saying that it is not logical to suppose a harsher religious policy from Xi Jinping. However, we are not talking about logical thinking, but the obvious and crude reality.

8. Am I the major obstacle in the process of reaching a deal between the Vatican and China? If that is a bad deal, I would be more than happy to be the obstacle.

Hong Kong, January 29, 2018 ("Cardinal Zen" Open Letter on Vatican Sellout of the Underground Church in Red China.)

The conciliar “popes” have never let any kind of obvious and crude reality get in the way of their desire to celebrate their “official reconciliation” with the principles of the New World Order that has come into existence in the past few centuries, especially after “the new era” that then Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger” himself noted in Principles of Catholic Theology:

Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p. 382.)

What happened in 1789?

Wasn't there some kind of anti-Theistic revolution in France, the elder daughter of the Church? What did Pope Leo XIII write about such reconciling with the principles of the revolution?

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 sellout of the underground Catholics that is being completed at present by Pietro the Red Parolin and Jorge the Red Bergoglio did not happen overnight.

As was evidenced in 2005 by the appointment of three Communist bishops to the upcoming Synod of Bishops in Rome, the conciliar Vatican has had a de facto policy treating some of the “bishops” and “priests” of the schismatic church as though they were Catholics in good standing despite the lack of any formal, public act of reconciliation with the conciliar Vatican.

Furthermore, Joseph Kung issued an open letter of his own on March 28, 2000, asking the Holy See why seminarians associated with the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association had been permitted to study in American seminaries before being “ordained” by their schismatic “bishops.” Kung, who is the nephew of the late Bishop Ignatius Gong Pin-mei Kung, received no response from the Holy See. It was almost as though the Holy See was waiting for Cardinal Kung to die before embarking on its attempt to create de facto the appearance of a complete reconciliation between the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association and a supposed Vicar of Christ.

What was occurring sub rosa between the officials of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and the repressive thugs of the Red Chines government for more than two decades became quite public when Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI issued his June 30, 2007, letter to Catholics in Red China.

True to his subjectivist self, the chief apostle of the “new ecclesiology” used the situation in Red China to “perfect” a “communion” among the “particular churches” in China without requiring members of the rump church to renounce their errors publicly and while strongly “encouraging” those who had suffered in the underground Church to cooperate with the Communist officials there so that the “suffering” of the past can be overcome by means of the aforementioned “spiritual reconciliation,” which must necessarily precede the “difficulties” of differences of Faith:

Addressing the whole Church in his Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte, my venerable predecessor Pope John Paul II, stated that an "important area in which there has to be commitment and planning on the part of the universal Church and the particular Churches [is] the domain of communion (koinonia), which embodies and reveals the very essence of the mystery of the Church. Communion is the fruit and demonstration of that love which springs from the heart of the Eternal Father and is poured out upon us through the Spirit whom Jesus gives us (cf. Rom 5:5), to make us all 'one heart and one soul' (Acts 4:32). It is in building this communion of love that the Church appears as 'sacrament', as the 'sign and instrument of intimate union with God and of the unity of the human race.' The Lord's words on this point are too precise for us to diminish their import. Many things are necessary for the Church's journey through history, not least in this new century; but without charity (agape) all will be in vain. It is again the Apostle Paul who in his hymn to love reminds us: even if we speak the tongues of men and of angels, and if we have faith 'to move mountains', but are without love, all will come to 'nothing' (cf. 1 Cor 13:2). Love is truly the 'heart' of the Church"

These matters, which concern the very nature of the universal Church, have a particular significance for the Church which is in China. Indeed you are aware of the problems that she is seeking to overcome – within herself and in her relations with Chinese civil society – tensions, divisions and recriminations.

In this regard, last year, while speaking of the nascent Church, I had occasion to recall that "from the start the community of the disciples has known not only the joy of the Holy Spirit, the grace of truth and love, but also trials that are constituted above all by disagreements about the truths of faith, with the consequent wounds to communion. Just as the fellowship of love has existed since the outset and will continue to the end (cf. 1 Jn 1:1ff.), so also, from the start, division unfortunately arose. We should not be surprised that it still exists today ... Thus, in the events of the world but also in the weaknesses of the Church, there is always a risk of losing faith, hence, also love and brotherhood. Consequently it is a specific duty of those who believe in the Church of love and want to live in her to recognize this danger too"

The history of the Church teaches us, then, that authentic communion is not expressed without arduous efforts at reconciliation. Indeed, the purification of memory, the pardoning of wrong-doers, the forgetting of injustices suffered and the loving restoration to serenity of troubled hearts, all to be accomplished in the name of Jesus crucified and risen, can require moving beyond personal positions or viewpoints, born of painful or difficult experiences. These are urgent steps that must be taken if the bonds of communion between the faithful and the Pastors of the Church in China are to grow and be made visible. (Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China) 

In other words, Ratzinger/Benedict was telling the members of the underground Church in Red China that it was up to them to make “visible” a “communion” with the "pastors" of the rump church that supports the Communist regime's "population control" policies. “Communion” depends upon them being willing to forgive past—and present!—injustices as well as to forget the inconvenient truth that the most of the leaders of the rump church defect from several of the Church's defined teachings on Faith and Morals, placing them totally outside of the pale of the Catholic Church, as Pope Leo XIII noted in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.

Ratzinger/Benedict was saying nearly eleven years ago the suffering of faithful Catholics in Red China was noted and appreciated, but that it was time to “move on” and “purify memories” so that a “reconciliation” based on a deliberate and calculated overlooking of defections from Faith and Morals on the part of the rump church in China can take place, leaving to a later date, which has now arrived under his successor, “Pope Francis.” In effect, therefore, the antipope emeritus was telling faithful Catholics in Red China to be quiet and to refrain from complaining about the government's “population control policies” and to be good citizens who were to have the sacraments and to be in “communion” with their fellow Chinese Catholics.

An unfair reading of Ratzinger/Benedict's June 30, 2007 letter. Read this footnote from the recently released Compendium and decide for yourselves:

We can see that the Holy Father is talking about a spiritual reconciliation, which can and must take place now, even before a structural merger of official and unofficial Catholic communities takes place. As a matter of fact, the Holy Father seems to make a distinction between “a spiritual reconciliation” and “a structural merger”. He recognizes that the reconciliation is like a journey that “cannot be accomplished overnight” (6.6): however, he emphasizes that the steps to be taken on the way are necessary and urgent, and cannot therefore be postponed because - or on the pretext that - they are difficult since they require the overcoming of personal positions or views. Times and ways may vary according to local situations, but the commitment to reconciliation cannot be abandoned. This path of reconciliation, furthermore, cannot be limited to the spiritual realm of prayer alone but must also be expressed through practical steps of effective ecclesial communion (exchange of experiences, sharing of pastoral projects, common initiatives, etc.). Finally, it should not be forgotten that all without exception are invited to engage in these steps: Bishops, priests, religious and lay faithful. It is by means of practical steps that spiritual reconciliation, including visible reconciliation, will gradually occur, which will culminate one day in the complete structural unity of every diocesan community around its one Bishop and of every diocesan community with each other and with the universal Church. In this context, it is licit and fitting to encourage clergy and lay faithful to make gestures of forgiveness and reconciliation in this direction. (Footnote 2, Compendium, pp. 8-9.) 

This footnote reflects entirely Joseph Ratzinger's abject rejection of the "ecumenism of the return." Ratzinger/Benedict has always believed that people are gradually "absorbed" into the Church by means of "perfecting" their "communion" with other Christians. This is heretical. This is condemned by the authority of the Catholic Church. Yet it is of the essence of Ratzinger/Benedict's theology, which was reflected so completely in his June 30, 2007, Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China and in the Compendium released on May 24, 2009.

After all, it is “reconciliation” and “love” that matters the most, although Catholics understand that true love of God can never sanction anything that is offensive to Him, making, therefore, Ratzinger's appeal for a "reconciliation" with authorities of a rump church who support (or are silent about) government polices contrary to Faith and Morals nothing other than an exercise in pure subjectivism.

All the evidence of the Holy See's actions in the past nearly eighteen years since Bishop Kung’s death on March 11, 2000, has pointed to the betrayal that is being decried at this time by “Cardinal” Zen.

To consider the rump church in Red China to be legitimate is to ignore a number of rather inconvenient facts. The schismatic church in Red China about which the conciliar Vatican has been so obsequious in the past eighteen years supports the "population" policies of the Communist government.

Thus, it supports contraception and sterilization. It supports Red China's one child per family policy. Its bishops are appointed by the Communist authorities. In other words, the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association supports policies that are founded in a rejection of the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and natural law. It supports sin and sinful behavior as legitimate and just as a means of demonstrating fealty to the State and not to the Deposit of Faith entrusted by the God-Man, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to Holy Mother Church through the Apostles.

How can this rump church be considered as one that is faithful to the Divine Redeemer?

It is faithful to the exigencies and dictates of the Communist government.

Then again, of course, the counterfeit church of conciliarism is unfaithful to the Divine Redeemer and it is faithful exigencies and dictates of Communist governments worldwide.

The Catholics who remained faithful to the Church in the years following the Maoist Revolution that took control of mainland China October 1, 1949, longed to cling to the Successor of Saint Peter, the Vicar of Christ on earth. Struggling to survive in the midst of terrible persecutions and to practice their Faith as faithfully as they could, Catholics in the underground Church in Red China looked to the Holy Father, Pope Pius XII, for support and consolation and encouragement in the midst of the terrible sufferings that were being visited upon them. They, like most other Catholics in the world,. believed that the men who "succeeded" Pope Pius XII were true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter, which is why they accepted the conciliar changes.

After all, the devil's men in Peking (now rendered Beijing in English) told Catholics in Red China them that they could not adhere to the Vicar of Christ. These Catholics wanted to demonstrate their loyalty to the men whom they believed to be the Supreme Pastors during their respective false "pontificates." They went along with the changes without realizing that they had been trapped by the devil into believing that the changes he effected as a result of the "Second" Vatican Council and its "popes" thereafter were from God Himself, who is immutable, and that it was necessary to oppose his, the devil's agents in Red China by going along with the conciliar revolution against the Catholic Faith in the name of "loyalty" to the Church.

Catholics in the underground Church in Red China have been struggling to survive. They have not had access to the information that most of us in other parts of the world have been able to access.

We must pray to Our Lady, the Queen of the Apostles, that the truth of our ecclesiastical situation will be made manifest to the Catholics in Red China so that the men who have claimed to be true “popes” since the death of Pope Pius XII on October 9, 1958, have been true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter. We need to pray as well that these Catholics will be the beneficiaries of the Triumph of Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart sooner rather than later.

Mohammedan Converts Get The Silent Treatment From "Pope Francis"

Another group of Catholics within the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism that find themselves victims of the conciliar “popes’” embrace of Mohammedanism as a “religion of peace” are converts from the false religion started by blaspheming, immoral false prophet, Mohammed, who denied the Unity and Trinity of God and that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour is indeed the Divine Redeemer of all men. Mohammed’s religion” was simply a vessel of uniting various Arabic tribes by using the appeal of polygamy and wanton violence against “infidels” in the cause of their false god, Allah.

Although the facts that follow are well-known to longtime readers of this site, it is useful to review them again in order to provide a context for the open letter that Mohammedan converts to what they think is the Catholic Church have sent to “Pope Francis,” who, of course, has ignored these courageous people at every turn.

It is useful to start with the simple fact that Mohammedanism has been a religion of violence from the very beginning:

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.)

Mohammedanism remains now as it was at its origins, however, a heresy based upon a rejection of the doctrine of the Most Blessed Trinity, something that Hillaire Belloc explained in "The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed:"

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." Jorge Mario Bergoglio is 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 amporhous 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 false “pontiff” must be read as they do not realize that they are dealing with an open heretic who is 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 is a very courageous statement. Unfortunately, however, those who drafted it do 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 “Father” Federico Lombadi asa “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. (httMagdi 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"?

“Father” Lombardi meant to say that there is a "legitimate pluralism" as to whether Mohammedanism is a violent religion of its very false, diabolical nature, which was about as absurd as his statement in April of 2009 that there was such a thing as “therapeutic abortion” that was seen as morally licit in some circumstances according to Catholic moral theology (So Long to the Fifth Commandment.)

Once again, Jean-Louis Tauran was only the voice of a message that belonged to "Pope Benedict" himself. Remember, if you will, that Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI personally esteemed the blasphemous Koran on two separate occasions in 2008, including at the “John Paul II Cultural Center” in Washington, District of Columbia, on Thursday, April 17, 2008, and a few weeks thereafter at the Apostolic Palace as he termed the Koran “that dear book.”

Perhaps more significantly, he assumed the Mohammedan “prayer” position at the Blue Mosque on November 30, 2006, the Feast of Saint Andrew the Apostle, and entered into two other mosques while visiting Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Zionist State of Israel eight months later.

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.

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, May 9, 2009. 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, May 12, 2009, 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.

The problem facing the Mohammedan converts who have spoken out so courageously against “Pope Francis” did not begin with the Argentine Apostate. No, conciliarism is false and thus as hideous in the sight of the Most Blessed Trinity as Mohammedanism. This is something that both the suffering Catholics of Red China and the Mohammedan converts do not understand, which means that we must pray to Our Lady, especially on this First Saturday in the month of February, for them to come to the recognition that everything makes sense once one comes to realization that conciliarism is not Catholicism.

Although the lords of conciliarism accept the gods of false religions and make peace with officially atheistic states that persecute faithful Catholics, the saint whose feast is commemorated today, Saturday, February 3, 2018 (Our Lady’s Feast on Saturday, Mass III), Saint Blase preferred death to lending any kind of credence to false gods. Archbishop Jacobus de Vorgaine’s The Golden Legend explains:

Blase is as much to say as glosing, or it is said as belasius of bela, which is habit,and syor, which is to say, little. And thus he is said glosing by the sweetness of his word, meek by his habit of virtues, and little by humility of manners and of conversation.

S. Blase was so sweet, holy and humble in manners, that the Christian men of Cappadocia of the city of Sebaste chose him to be a bishop. The which when he was bishop saw that Diocletian the emperor made so many persecutions to Christian men that S. Blase sought and would dwell in an hermitage in a ditch, in which place the birds of heaven brought to him meat for to eat. And it seemed to him that they came to serve him and accompany him, and would not depart from him till he had lift up his hands and blessed them. And also sick men came to him and anon were cured and healed.

ST. BLAISE PREACHES TO THE PREFECT’S KNIGHTS

Now it happed that the prince [Ryan’s translation: “the prefect”] of this region sent his knights to hunt, and they could take nothing. But by adventure they came unto the desert place where S. Blase was, where they found great multitude of beasts which were about him, of whom they could take none, whereof they were all abashed and [Ryan’s translation: “the hunters could not possibly take them all, and, astonished at what they saw,] showed this to their lord, the which anon sent many knights for him [i.e. St. Blaise], and commanded to bring him and all the Christian men with him.

And that night Jesu Christ appeared to him [i.e., to St. Blaise] thrice, which said to him: Arise up and make to me sacrifice. Lo! here be the knights that come to fetch thee at the commandment of the prince [prefect]. And the knights said to him: “Come out from this place, the president [prefect] calleth thee.”

And S. Blase answered: “My sons, ye be welcome, I see now well that God hath not forgotten me.” He went with them and continually preached, and did many miracles tofore them.

THE BOY WITH A FISH BONE IN HIS THROAT

There was a woman that had a son dying, in whose throat was a bone of a fish athwart, which estrangled him, and she brought him tofore his feet, praying him that he would make her son whole. And S. Blase put his hand upon him and made his prayer to God that this child, and all they that demanded benefits of health in his name, that they should be holpen and obtain it, and anon he was whole and guerished.

THE WIDOW’S PIG

Another woman there was that was poor which had a swine, which the wolf had borne away, and she humbly prayed to S. Blase that she might have again her swine. And he began to smile and said: Good woman anger thee not, for thou shalt have again thy swine, and anon the wolf brought again to the woman, which was a widow, her swine.

THE CHRISTIANS ARE PERSECUTED BY THE PREFECT OF THE CITY

St. Blaise is Arrested

And anon after he was entered into the city, the prince commanded to put him in prison, and after another day he made him to come tofore him, whom he saluted by fair words, saying to him: “Be thou joyful, Blase, the friend of God.”

S. Blase answered to him: “Be thou joyous right good prince, but call not them gods whom thou worshippest, but fiends, for they be delivered to fire perdurable with them that serve and worship them.”

Then was the prince much wroth, and made to beat S. Blase with staves, and after to put him in prison. Then said S. Blase: “O mad man, weenest thou by thy torments and pains to take away from me the love of my God whom I have with me and is my helper?”

The Widow Brings Him Succor

And when this good widow, which by S. Blase had recovered her swine, heard thereof, she slew it, and the head and the feet with a little bread and a candle, she brought to S. Blase, and he thanked God and ate thereof, and he said to her that every year she should offer in his church a candle, “and know thou that to thee and to all them that so shall do shall well happen to them.”

And so she did all her life, and she had much great prosperity.

St. Blaise is Tortured

After this that the right cruel prince had brought him tofore his gods, and in no wise might make him incline for to adore to their gods, he made him to be hanged on a gibbet, and his body to be torn with combs of iron, and this done he was remitted again to prison.

The Passion of the Seven Christian Women

And there were seven women that siewed [followed after] him, which gathered up the drops of his blood, which women anon were taken, and constrained to sacrifice to their gods. The which said: “If thou wilt that we worship thy gods, and that we do to them reverence, send them to the water for to wash and make clean their visages, to the end that we may more cleanlier worship them.”

Then the prince was right glad and joyous, and anon sent them to the water, and the women took them and threw them in the middle of the stagne [pool] or pond, and said: “Now shall we see if they be gods.”

And when the prince heard this he was out of his wit for anger, and smote himself all wroth saying: “Wherefore retained not ye our gods that they should not have thrown them in the bottom of the water?”

The ministers answered: “Thou spakest shrewdly to the women, and they cast them into the water.”

To whom the women said: “The very [true] God may not suffer iniquity ne [nor] falseness, for if they had been very gods they had well eschewed that they had not been thrown there, and had seen what we would have done.”

Then the tyrant became wroth and did do make ready lead molten and iron combs, and seven coats of iron burning as hot as fire on that one side, and that other he did do bring smocks of linen cloth and said to them that they should choose which they would. And one of them that had two small children ran hardily and took the smocks of linen cloth and threw them in the furnace for to go after herself if she had failed. And the children said to the mother, “leave us not after thee, but right sweet mother, like as thou hast nourished us with thy milk so replenish us with the realm of heaven.”

Then the tyrant did do hang them, and with hooks and crochets of iron did do tear their flesh and all to-rent it. Of whom the flesh was as white as snow, and for blood they gave out milk. And as they suffered these great torments the angel of God descended from heaven and comforted them, and said to them: “Have ye no dread, the worker is good that well beginneth and well endeth, and who deserveth good reward shall have joy, and for his work complete he shall have his merit, and for labour he shall have rest, and that shall be the reward.”

Then the tyrant did do take them down and did do throw them into the burning furnace, which women, by the grace of God issued without taking harm, and the fire was extinct and quenched. And the tyrant said to them, “now leave ye your art of enchantment and adore ye our gods.”

And they answered: “Do that thou hast begun, for we be now called to the kingdom of heaven.”

Then he commanded that they should be beheaded; and when they should be beheaded they began to adore God kneeling on their knees, saying: “Lord God which hast departed us from darknesses, and in to this right sweet light hast brought us, and of us hast made thy sacrifice, receive our souls, and make us to come to the life perdurable.”

And thus had they their heads smitten off, and sith [after that] their souls went to heaven.

St. Blaise Is Executed

After this the prince made S. Blase to be brought before him, and said to him: “Hast thou now worshipped our gods or not?”

S. Blase answered: Right cruel man I have no dread of thy menaces, do what thou wilt, I deliver to thee my body whole.”

Then he took him and did him to be cast in to a pond, and anon he blessed the water and the water dried all away, and so he abode there safe. And then S. Blase said to him, “If your gods be very and true gods, let them now show their virtue and might and enter ye hither.”

Then there entered into it sixty-five persons, and anon they were drowned. And an angel descended from heaven, and said to S. Blase: “Blase go out of this water and receive the crown that is made ready of God for thee.”

And when he was issued out of the pond the tyrant said to him: “Thou hast determined in all manners not for to adore our gods.”

To whom S. Blase said: “Poor caitiff [wretch], know thou that I am servant of God, and I adore not the fiends as ye do.”

And anon then the tyrant did do smite off his head, and S. Blase prayed to our Lord before his death that whosoever desired his help from the infirmity of the throat, or required aid for any other sickness or infirmity, that he would hear him, and might deserve to be guerished and healed. And there came a voice from heaven to him saying that his petition was granted and should be done as he had prayed. And so then with the two little children he was beheaded about the year of our Lord three hundred and eighty seven [Ryan’s translation: “283”]  (Golden Legend: Life of Saint Blaise.)

Not exactly the stuff of ecumenism. Ah, but it is very much the stuff of heroic Catholic martyrdom. 

Entrusting ourselves to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary on this First Saturday in the month of February, may we be ceaseless in our prayers for all deceived and betrayed Catholics who attached to the conciliar structures. Our faithful and prayerful meditation of the mysteries contained in Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary will help a few such souls to see and to embrace the soul while, of course, helping us to make a bit of reparation of our own sins.

What are we waiting for?

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

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 John the Beloved, 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 Blase, pray for us.