Francis at the Blue Mosque…

“Silent Adoration”

francis-blue-mosque.jpg

An Act of Apostasy: Francis prays alongside the Muslim Grand Mufti inside the Blue Mosque of Istanbul, Turkey

Mr. Jorge Bergoglio (“Pope Francis”) is currently visiting Turkey. November 29 marks Day 2 of his trip, and, like his predecessor Benedict XVI, he went to Istanbul and, removing his shoes, stepped into the Mosque of the Sultan Ahmed, often referred to as the “Blue Mosque”. As is visible in the photo above and the video below, Francis prayed for several minutes to the same god as the Muslims:

After the prayer, Francis said to the Muslim leader, “I also want to ask you to pray for me” (source).

Are you shocked? Francis’ predecessor of infelicitous memory, Benedict XVI, did the same thing a few years back (details here), and he also visited the Dome of the Rock Muslim holy site in 2009 (details here). This is now a “tradition” in the New Church.

benedict-mosque.jpg

Reading Francis through Benedict:
In 2006, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger commits the same act of apostasy at the same mosque

Then, of course, there was the infamous incident on May 14, 1999, when “Saint” John Paul II kissed the Koran, the Muslim holy book (see photo and details).

Here are some initial news stories on Francis’ visit to the Blue Mosque:

In the Catholic Church, it is not even permitted to pray publicly with heretics or schismatics (Protestants, Eastern Orthodox), who adore the true God — how much less so, then, would it be permissible to pray with representatives of religions that do not adore but actually reject as a blasphemy the Most Holy Trinity!

The usual Novus Ordo loudmouths have done their darndest to argue that the Muslim god is nevertheless the True God, the same God as the Most Holy Trinity. In defense of this absurd notion, they like to pull out an eleventh-century letter of Pope St. Gregory VII to the King of Mauretania, which Vatican II also referenced, that allegedly shows the Pope telling the Muslim king that they both worship the same god. It is not so. We currently have in preparation a post on this very question, refuting the Novus Ordo position and setting the record straight about what Pope Gregory actually said to the Muslim king, and why.

In 1928, Pope Pius XI published an encyclical letter on the question of religious unity, as ecumenism and pan-religious events were becoming popular in his day. In no uncertain terms, the Holy Father taught:

Never perhaps in the past have we seen, as we see in these our own times, the minds of men so occupied by the desire both of strengthening and of extending to the common welfare of human society that fraternal relationship which binds and unites us together, and which is a consequence of our common origin and nature. For since the nations do not yet fully enjoy the fruits of peace — indeed rather do old and new disagreements in various places break forth into sedition and civic strife — and since on the other hand many disputes which concern the tranquillity and prosperity of nations cannot be settled without the active concurrence and help of those who rule the States and promote their interests, it is easily understood, and the more so because none now dispute the unity of the human race, why many desire that the various nations, inspired by this universal kinship, should daily be more closely united one to another.

A similar object is aimed at by some, in those matters which concern the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. For since they hold it for certain that men destitute of all religious sense are very rarely to be found, they seem to have founded on that belief a hope that the nations, although they differ among themselves in certain religious matters, will without much difficulty come to agree as brethren in professing certain doctrines, which form as it were a common basis of the spiritual life. For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians, even those who have unhappily fallen away from Christ or who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny His divine nature and mission. Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little. turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos [1928], nn. 1-2)

This contrasts not only with the endless interreligious prayer meetings and activities the members of the Vatican II Sect constantly engage in, but also refutes directly the teaching of the papal pretenders on this matter, such as that of “Saint” John Paul II, who blasphemously wrote:

What we have just said [about ecumenism] must also be applied — although in another way and with the due differences — to activity for coming closer together with the representatives of the non-Christian religions, an activity expressed through dialogue, contacts, prayer in common, investigation of the treasures of human spirituality, in which, as we know well, the members of these religions also are not lacking. Does it not sometimes happen that the firm belief of the followers of the non-Christian religions — a belief that is also an effect of the Spirit of truth operating outside the visible confines of the Mystical Body — can make Christians ashamed at being often themselves so disposed to doubt concerning the truths revealed by God and proclaimed by the Church and so prone to relax moral principles and open the way to ethical permissiveness?

(“Pope” John Paul II, Encyclical Redemptor Hominis [1979], n. 6; underlining added.)

Yes, the “prayer in common” John Paul II mandated for the members of his church is not confined to prayer only with Protestants but also extends to prayer with non-Christians, such as Jews, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Wiccans, Buddhists, Hindus, Voodooists, etc. This explains why in 1985 he boasted that he had “prayed for the first time with animists” (John Paul II, General Audience, Aug. 21, 1985, n. 8).

The Polish apostate then added insult to injury by uttering one of the most outrageous blasphemies to be found in a “magisterial” text of the Vatican II Church: He outrageously ascribeed Jews’, Muslims’, and Pagans’ firm assent to their errors, to the Holy Ghost! God, the author of all Truth, who offers to lead all to all Truth and wants all to be saved (see Jn 16:13; 1 Tim 2:4), is being called the cause of perseverance in infidelity!

Obviously, a Hindu’s firm adherence to Hinduism, or a Muslim’s firm adherence to Islam, regardless of their personal intentions and possible ignorance of the Gospel, is the result of the work of the devil, not of God! God can “neither deceive nor be deceived” (Act of Faith)! And so here we find one of the giants of Novus Ordo doctrine, John Paul II, ascribing to God what is in fact the work of Satan himself!

Do we need any more evidence that this is the “operation of error” at work, which St. Paul predicted would befall us if we do not love the truth (see 2 Thess 2:10)?

St. John the Evangelist warned us how to identify the spirit of Antichrist:

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are become many Antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last hour… Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also.

(1 Jn 2:18,22-23)
And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world.

(1 Jn 4:3)
For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an antichrist.

(2 Jn 1:7)

Sound familiar?

francis-hidden-crucifix2.jpg

This is by no means the first time that Francis has denied or relativized Christ Jesus the Lord, the Eternal Word (see Jn 1:1). When he visited the synagogue in Jerusalem earlier this year, Francis happily covered the pectoral cross he wears, lest the Jews, who deny that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, be offended at the sight of their loving Redeemer. In fact, the interfaith prayer meeting that took place at the Vatican Gardens on Pentecost Sunday was originally scheduled to take place inside St. Peter’s, yet was moved outside as the Jews did not want to enter a place in which crucifixes are visible.

Is the Novus Ordo Church of Christ, ladies and gentlemen, or of Antichrist?