Michael Bloomberg Embraces Universal Salvation

The pro-abortion, pro-perversity former Mayor of the City of New York, Michael Rubens Bloomberg, would make an excellent member of the counterfeit church of conciliarisim.

Here is a look at just of Michael Rubens Bloomberg’s many qualifications to be a member in good standing of the counterfeit church of conciliarism:

Qualification Number One: Michael Rubens Bloomberg is a self-described “billionaire playboy” who supports the chemical and surgical assassination of innocent preborn children in their mothers’ wombs.

To wit, Michael Bloomberg was once sued by a female employee of his Bloomberg financial and media conglomerate for harassment when he responded as follows upon learning she was expecting a child, “Kill it! Kill it!” (See New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg Testifies in Pregnancy Discrimination Case .) This episode was even too much for the pro-abort protege of Ralph Nader, Mark Green, who brought it up in a campaign advertisement when running as the Democrat Party nominee for Mayor of the City of New York, New York, in 2001 against Bloomberg, who had the endorsement of Republican Party even though he had been a lifelong Democrat until earlier that year and declared himself in 2008 to be an “independent.” One of the first things that Michael Bloomberg attempted to do as Mayor of the City of New York in 2002 was to impose mandatory training in methods of surgical baby-killing in all of the obstetrics/gynecological residency programs in all of the city’s public hospitals, permitting no one to opt out of the program as a matter of conscience (see Kathryn Jean Lopez on Med Students and Abortion).

Proof of Qualification as a Member in the Counterfeit Church of Conciliarism: The “good standing” maintained by Vice President of the United States of America Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., United States Secretary of State John F. Kerry, outgoing United States Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, United States Ambassador to Japan Caroline Kennedy, Minority Leader of the House of Representatives of the United States of America Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi, United States Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Illinois), United States Senators Thomas Harkin (D-Iowa), Patricia Murray (D-Washington), Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island),  Christopher Murphy (D-Connecticut), Robert Menendez (D-New Jersey), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York), Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana), California Governor Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr., former California Governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gray Davis, New York Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo and his father, former New York Governor Mario Matthew Cuomo, former New York Governors George Elmer Pataki and David Paterson, Illinois Governor Patrick Quinn, former Wisconsin Governor James Doyle, former United States Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, former Mayor of the City of New York, New York, Rudolph William Giuliani, former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, United States Representative Charles Bernard Rangel (who is also a Freemason and remains a Catholic in “good standing”), for United States Attorney General Janet Reno, former United States Secretary of Defense  Leon Panetta (a favorite of the now retired conciliar “bishop” of Monterey, California, Sylvester Ryan), forme United States Senator Thomas Daschle, the late United States Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the late United States Representative Geraldine Anne Ferraro-Zaccaro, the late Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America William Brennan, current Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States of America Anthony Kennedy and Sonya Sotomayor (non-practicing but not excommunicated, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, President of Brazil Dilma Roussef, President of Argentine Christine Kirchener, President of Bolivia Evo Morales (now a pantheist he was once a conciliar “bishop”), President of France Francois Hollande (a baptized Catholic who is now an agnostic, but who has never been excommunicated) and, among so many others, President of Argentina Argentine President Christine Kirchner.

Judgment: Check. Bloomberg would be make a good fit as a member of the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Qualification Number Two: Michael Rubens Bloomberg, who is divorced, has a “domestic partner,” a divorcee named Diana Taylor.

Proof of Qualification as a Member of the Counterfeit Church of Conciliarism: Consider the following comments of none other than Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself:

“The problem cannot be reduced to whether” these couples “are allowed to take communion or not because whoever thinks of the problem in these terms doesn’t understand the real issue at hand,” Francis said. “This is a serious problem regarding the Church’s responsibility towards families that are in this situation.” Francis reiterated what he said on the return flight from Rio to Rome after World Youth Day, saying he will be discussing the issue with the group of eight cardinals who will be meeting in the Vatican in early October. Francis added that the issue will also be discussed at the next Synod of Bishops on the Gospel’s anthropological relationship with individual people and the family, so that the whole Synod can look into this problem. “This,” Francis said “is a real existential periphery”. (Francis urges priests to give a helping hand to couples that live together.)

“The problem cannot be reduced to whether” these couples “are allowed to take communion or not because whoever thinks of the problem in these terms doesn’t understand the real issue at hand,” Francis said. “This is a serious problem regarding the Church’s responsibility towards families that are in this situation.” Francis reiterated what he said on the return flight from Rio to Rome after World Youth Day, saying he will be discussing the issue with the group of eight cardinals who will be meeting in the Vatican in early October. Francis added that the issue will also be discussed at the next Synod of Bishops on the Gospel’s anthropological relationship with individual people and the family, so that the whole Synod can look into this problem. “This,” Francis said “is a real existential periphery”. (Francis urges priests to give a helping hand to couples that live together.)

Judgment: Check. Michael Rubens Bloomberg certainly does live on the “existential peripheries.” Another perfect fit for membership in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Qualification Number Three: Michael Rubens Bloomberg strongly defended the building of the “Ground Zero Mosque,” which would have been a “worship center” in a building to be constructed on a site near, but not at, the site where the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed on Tuesday, September 11, 2011:

In his fiercest defense yet of the mosque proposed near Ground Zero, Mayor Bloomberg declared yesterday that it must be allowed to proceed because the government “shouldn’t be in the business of picking” one religion over another.

“I think it’s fair to say if somebody was going to try, on that piece of property, to build a church or a synagogue, nobody would be yelling and screaming,” the mayor said.

“And the fact of the matter is that Muslims have a right to do it, too.”

Placing the proposed mosque two blocks from the World Trade Center site has led to an outcry from opponents, including family members of 9/11 victims, who contend the holy place at 45 Park Place would defile the memories of those who perished in the worst terror attack in US history.

Community Board 1 approved the project Tuesday night by a 29-1 vote after a raucous four-hour hearing in which nine members abstained.

The meeting got so heated that one young girl, whose father is Muslim and mother is Jewish and who went to testify in favor, decided instead to sit silently.

The issue also continues to fuel an intense debate on the Internet. One commenter likened a mosque near Ground Zero to a convent established on the grounds of Auschwitz. Pope John Paul II ordered the nuns to move in 1993 after years of protests from Jewish leaders.

But Bloomberg argued that blocking the 13-story mosque and Islamic cultural center would violate the essence of America.

“What is great about America and particularly New York is we welcome everybody, and if we are so afraid of something like this, what does that say about us?” asked the mayor. (Bloomberg defends Ground Zero mosque as freedom-of-religion.)

Proof of Qualification as a Member of the Counterfeit Church of Conciliarism: The lords of conciliarism stumble all over themselves to praise Mohammedanism and its false teachings. Some, including “Saint John Paul II,” Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, have esteemed its false symbols and, in the case of Ratzinger/Benedict,  entered into its places of false worship, calling them “sacred.”

None other than Jorge Mario Bergoglio, trumping the usual handiwork of the religious syncretist named Jean-Louis Tauran, the president of the “Pontifical” Council for Inter-Religious Diaologue, directly addressed Mohemmdans following the end of their false holiday, Ramadan, last year:

To Muslims throughout the World

It gives me great pleasure to greet you as you celebrate ‘Id al-Fitr, so concluding the month of Ramadan, dedicated mainly to fasting, prayer and almsgiving.

It is a tradition by now that, on this occasion, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue sends you a message of good wishes, together with a proposed theme for common reflection. This year, the first of my Pontificate, I have decided to sign this traditional message myself and to send it to you, dear friends, as an expression of esteem and friendship for all Muslims, especially those who are religious leaders.

As you all know, when the Cardinals elected me as Bishop of Rome and Universal Pastor of the Catholic Church, I chose the name of “Francis”, a very famous saint who loved God and every human being deeply, to the point of being called “universal brother”. He loved, helped and served the needy, the sick and the poor; he also cared greatly for creation.

I am aware that family and social dimensions enjoy a particular prominence for Muslims during this period, and it is worth noting that there are certain parallels in each of these areas with Christian faith and practice.

This year, the theme on which I would like to reflect with you and with all who will read this message is one that concerns both Muslims and Christians: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.

This year’s theme is intended to underline the importance of education in the way we understand each other, built upon the foundation of mutual respect. “Respect” means an attitude of kindness towards people for whom we have consideration and esteem. “Mutual” means that this is not a one-way process, but something shared by both sides.

What we are called to respect in each person is first of all his life, his physical integrity, his dignity and the rights deriving from that dignity, his reputation, his property, his ethnic and cultural identity, his ideas and his political choices. We are therefore called to think, speak and write respectfully of the other, not only in his presence, but always and everywhere, avoiding unfair criticism or defamation. Families, schools, religious teaching and all forms of media have a role to play in achieving this goal.

Turning to mutual respect in interreligious relations, especially between Christians and Muslims, we are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values. Particular respect is due to religious leaders and to places of worship. How painful are attacks on one or other of these!

It is clear that, when we show respect for the religion of our neighbours or when we offer them our good wishes on the occasion of a religious celebration, we simply seek to share their joy, without making reference to the content of their religious convictions.

Regarding the education of Muslim and Christian youth, we have to bring up our young people to think and speak respectfully of other religions and their followers, and to avoid ridiculing or denigrating their convictions and practices.

We all know that mutual respect is fundamental in any human relationship, especially among people who profess religious belief. In this way, sincere and lasting friendship can grow.

When I received the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See on 22 March 2013, I said: “It is not possible to establish true links with God, while ignoring other people. Hence it is important to intensify dialogue among the various religions, and I am thinking particularly of dialogue with Islam. At the Mass marking the beginning of my ministry, I greatly appreciated the presence of so many civil and religious leaders from the Islamic world.” With these words, I wished to emphasize once more the great importance of dialogue and cooperation among believers, in particular Christians and Muslims, and the need for it to be enhanced.

With these sentiments, I reiterate my hope that all Christians and Muslims may be true promoters of mutual respect and friendship, in particular through education.

Finally, I send you my prayerful good wishes, that your lives may glorify the Almighty and give joy to those around you. Happy Feast to you all! (Francis the Self-Caricaturist to Muslims for end of Ramadan: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.)

The conciliar revolutionaries can even outdo Michael Rubens Bloomberg’s defense of the “worship center” as part of a Mohammedan cultural complex at 51 Park Avenue in lower Manhattan in the City of New York, York. The conciliar revolutionaries have handed over Catholic churches to the Mohammedans in order for them to be transformed into centers of false worship known as “mosques”:

Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Syracuse, New York, was sold in December to a Muslim group and will be turned into a mosque. The Muslim organization requested that six stone crosses be removed from the top of the century-old historic church, and the Syracuse Landmark Preservation Board has complied. However, as Syracuse.com explains in an April 6, 2014 article, “Plans to turn a church into a mosque bring pain and hope to changing neighborhood,” everything evens out because the mosque will be named the Mosque of Jesus, Son of Mary “to build a bridge between the old and the new.”

So that’s all right then. Or is it? The news story is written to the theme that Islam and Catholicism share much in common—two sides of the same coin, so to speak. A diocesan spokeswoman is quoted as saying that “the building is once again being used to meet the needs of a growing population on the North Side, just as Holy Trinity did as it served the Catholic faithful.” In this telling, immigrant Muslims are just like immigrant Catholics of a hundred years ago. After all, both believe in Jesus, the son of Mary. “The Muslims could not keep the crosses on the church,” the Syracuse.com report concludes, “But they chose the mosque’s name to build a bridge between the old and the new: The Mosque of Jesus, Son of Mary.”

Why do the crosses have to come down? The reason, as explained by one of the Muslim organizers, is that “crosses are not an appropriate representation of the religion of Islam.” Why is that? Because the Koran maintains that Jesus was never crucified and therefore never rose from the dead (4:157).

In short, there are reasons to wonder if the Jesus, son of Mary that Muslims revere is the same Jesus that Christians revere. For instance, the Syracuse.com story reports that some of the Holy Trinity parishioners are worried that the massive stained glass windows which depict scenes from the life of Christ might be removed next. And well they might worry. Many of the scenes from the life of Christ do not pass the “appropriate representation of Islam” test. Naturally, the crucifixion scene would have to go, along with any representations of Christ’s resurrection, but so also would any depiction of Christ’s baptism or the Transfiguration. Both of these events identify Jesus not just as the son of Mary but as the Son of God, and from the Islamic point of view that is a blasphemous thought. On top of that, Islam prohibits the artistic representation of prophets. Have you ever seen a portrait of Muhammad? Probably not. And if you have any ideas about sketching one of your own, you’d be well-advised to keep it in your private collection. All things considered, the future of Holy Trinity’s rose-colored windows does not look too rosy.

The same Jesus? In places where religiously observant Muslims are in the majority and especially in places where they hold political power, there is much more emphasis on the differences between the two faiths than on the similarities. Christians are looked upon as inferiors, and they are well-advised to keep crosses, icons, and statues out of sight. When they are in power, observant Muslims seem less interested in building bridges than in desecrating churches and burning them down.

In the West, it’s a different story. When Muslims are first establishing themselves in a community, they tend to emphasize the commonalities between the two religions, and thus we get mosques named “Jesus, Son of Mary” and billboards that proclaim “Muslims Love Jesus Too.” Indeed, the supposedly shared love for Jesus is a primary recruitment tool for bringing Christians to Islam. A few years ago, Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, wrote an essay titled “Muslims and Christians: More in common than you think,” which is reprinted in many publications around Christmastime. Hooper writes: “It is well-known that Christians follow the teachings of Jesus. What is less well understood is that Muslims also love and revere Jesus as one of God’s greatest messengers to mankind” (Washington Post, 12/17/10).

Muslims love Jesus too? If so, why do Muslims [official disclaimer: not all of them, of course] display so much contempt for Christians when they gain power over them? Why are they so quick to charge Christians with blasphemy? To desecrate their churches and religious symbols? Could it be that the Jesus they believe in is not the same Jesus Christians worship?

While the Koranic portrait of Jesus borrows some elements from Christianity—the virgin birth, a handful of miracles—the differences are more striking than the similarities. The Jesus of the Koran is not a Jew or a Christian, he is a Muslim. He is not the Son of God, and to say that he is is the greatest of all blasphemies. He was not crucified. He did not rise from the dead. He is not the savior of mankind. And, although Ibrahim Hooper says that Jesus is “one of God’s greatest messengers,” his message differs markedly from that brought by Jesus of Nazareth. Other than the message that people should serve God, there is not much in common. The Muslim Jesus announces that he is a prophet sent by God; that he is not God and never claimed to be; and that he brings “news of an apostle that will come after me whose name is Ahmed [Muhammad]” (61:6). So, on the one hand you have the message, “I am the way and the truth and the life,” and on the other hand you have the message, “I am a messenger.” That’s no small difference.

Those who are looking for more from the Jesus of the Koran—more wisdom, more development of doctrine—will be disappointed. The Muslim Jesus has remarkably little to say about anything. There is nothing like the Sermon on the Mount in the Koran. In fact, that one sermon far exceeds in length the sum total of everything said by the Jesus of the Koran.

He also has remarkably little to do. When Christians hear that Jesus is in the Koran, they tend to assume that the Koran must contain some account of his life. But other than a strange and truncated account of his birth, there is nothing in the Koran that could remotely be called a life of Jesus. You will find considerably more scenes from the life of Jesus in the stained glass windows of Holy Trinity Church than you will in the Koran.

The Jesus of the Koran is nothing more than a disembodied voice. There is no information about where he lived or when he carried out his ministry or who his disciples were. In short, there is no attempt to portray him as recognizable human being. Judging by the cursory attention given to Jesus in the Koran, Muhammad seems to have had little interest in him as a person.

Nevertheless, Muhammad couldn’t afford to leave Jesus out of the picture. Why? Because if Christ is who Christians say he is, then there is no need for another prophet and another revelation. In other words, the claims made by Jesus of Nazareth, if true, would have put a major crimp in Muhammad’s prophetic career. Muhammad’s solution to this problem was to include Jesus in the Koran and recast him as a messenger, rather than as the Messiah, understood as the Son of God.

The reason Jesus is so frequently referred to as “son of Mary” in the Koran is to reinforce the point that he is not the Son of God. Likewise, whenever Jesus appears in the Koran or whenever he is mentioned by Allah, it is almost always for the purpose of denying his divinity. Take Chapter 5, verses 113 to 117. It is one of the few places in the Koran where the narrative about Jesus rises (well, almost) to the level of a scene:

“Jesus son of Mary,” said the disciples, “Can your Lord send down to us from heaven a table spread with food?”…“Lord,” said Jesus son of Mary, “send down to us from heaven a table spread with food…” (5: 113-114)

The interesting thing is what happens next. Allah agrees to send the table, but first he interrogates Jesus: “Jesus son of Mary, did you ever say to mankind: ‘Worship me and my mother as gods besides God?’” Jesus, the faithful Muslim, replies, “I could never have claimed what I have no right to. If I had ever said so, You would surely have known it” (5:117).

So, a demonstration of Jesus’ power to produce a tableful of food is used as an occasion to reject the central tenet of Christianity. As for the table of food, we are left guessing. Does Allah actually send down the meal? There is no further mention of it. Muhammad has made his point, and having made it, moves on to the next lesson.

Notice that the phrase “Jesus son of Mary” is used three times in the table scene. Was this because Muhammad had a deep Christian-like love of Jesus and his mother? Or was there another motive? Given that almost every page of the Koran contains reminders of Muhammad’s prophetic role, it seems highly likely that the Jesus-son-of-Mary motif was simply a device for enhancing his own importance by reducing the status of Christ.

The irony is that this self-serving stratagem has become the main plank for keeping Muslim-Christian dialogue afloat. One would think that Christians would be sore about Muhammad’s appropriation of Jesus and Mary for his own purposes—that is, to deny the Sonship of Jesus. Instead, this is sometimes put in positive terms that seem to overlook, for whatever reason, the problem at hand. For example, the Vatican II document Nostra Aetate says, “The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems,” and two of the five reasons given for the esteem is that Muslims “revere” Jesus and “honor Mary.”

But a close reading of the Koran suggests that its inclusion of Jesus and Mary may not be the sign of hope that many Christians take it to be. John the Baptist said of Jesus, “He must increase, but I must decrease” (Jn 3:30). Muhammad preferred it the other way around. For him to increase, it was necessary that Jesus decrease. Thus, what we find in the Koran is a diminished portrait of Jesus, who is not completely repudiated, but used to bolster Islamic claims.

Up in Syracuse, some Catholics have apparently taken the transformation of Holy Trinity Church into Jesus, Son of Mary Mosque to be a sign of continuity between Christianity and Islam. They might be less sanguine on that score if they knew the rest of the story. (Mohammedanism Gets Another Catholic Church.)

What Dr. Kilpatrick, whose analysis of the falsehoods of Mohammedanism is very accurate and extremely well done, does not understand is that his “pope” has no problem with turning Catholic church into a Mohammedan mosque as he believes that this false religion, which, quite ironically, is premised on a rejection of the doctrine of the Most Holy Trinity, is indeed one that is pleasing to God and is blasphemous and heretical of its very insidious nature.

Pope Leo XIII put it this way in Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892, and no amount of invoking the philosophically absurd and dogmatically condemned “hermeneutic of continuity” can make Pope Leo’s teaching any less in perfect conformity with the precepts of the First and Second Commandments:

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

Judgment: Check. Michael Rubens Bloomberg is in better standing with Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his “bishops” than Dr. William Kilpatrick.

Qualification Number Four: Michael Rubens Bloomberg supports the “gay agenda” in its entirety, including so-called “gay marriage.”

Proof of Qualifications as a Member of the Counterfeit Church of Conciliarism: Well, Bloomberg would have no problem fitting in comfortably as a member of such parishes as Saint Francis Xavier in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York, New York, or Saint Brigid Church in Westbury, New York, or Saint Joan of Arc Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota, or Most Holy Redeemer Church in San Francisco, California. He’s in with them for sure.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, of course, would also welcome Bloomberg into the conciliar fold despite his support of the agenda of perversity, including “marriage” between those of the same gender engaged in sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, as he would say, “Who am I to judge?” Moreover, Bergoglio is very open to “civil unions,” something that he stressed again in Interview Number Six two months ago now:

Q. Many countries have regulated civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?

Bergoglio: Holy Father: Marriage is between one man and one woman. The secular States want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of coexistence, spurred by the need to regulate economic aspects between persons as, for instance, to ensure healthcare. Each case must be looked at and evaluated in its diversity. (March 5 interview with Corriere della Sera.)

Neither Michael Bloomberg or Jorge Mario Bergoglio have any sense of the horror of the sin of Sodom. They do not realize that is not any kind of “legal” or “economic” or “health-care” issues raised by those who are engaged in perverse sins against nature that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.  They are the living embodiment of those who approve or who denigrate the gravity of the sin of Sodom, which was described as follows by Saint Paul in his Epistle to the Romans:

Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use against which is their nature.

And in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.

And as they liked not to  have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy.

Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.  (Romans 1: 24-32)

Michael Rubens Bloomberg would thus feel right at home in the counterfeit church of conciliarism alongside such pro-perversity Catholics in public life as Vice President of the United States of America Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., United States Secretary of State John F. Kerry, outgoing United States Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, United States Ambassador to Japan Caroline Kennedy, Minority Leader of the House of Representatives of the United States of America Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi, United States Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Illinois), United States Senators Thomas Harkin (D-Iowa), Patricia Murray (D-Washington), Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island),  Christopher Murphy (D-Connecticut), Robert Menendez (D-New Jersey), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York), Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana), California Governor Edmund Gerald Brown, Jr., former California Governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gray Davis, New York Governor Andrew Mark Cuomo and his father, former New York Governor Mario Matthew Cuomo, former New York Governors George Elmer Pataki and David Paterson, Illinois Governor Patrick Quinn, former Wisconsin Governor James Doyle, former United States Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, former Mayor of the City of New York, New York, Rudolph William Giuliani, former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, United States Representative Charles Bernard Rangel (who is also a Freemason and remains a Catholic in “good standing”), for United States Attorney General Janet Reno, former United States Secretary of Defense  Leon Panetta (a favorite of the now retired conciliar “bishop” of Monterey, California, Sylvester Ryan), forme United States Senator Thomas Daschle, the late United States Representative Geraldine Anne Ferraro-Zaccaro, current Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States of America Anthony Kennedy and Sonya Sotomayor (non-practicing but not excommunicated, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, President of Brazil Dilma Rousseff, President of Argentine Christine Kirchener, President of Bolivia Evo Morales (now a pantheist he was once a conciliar “bishop”), President of France Francois Hollande (a baptized Catholic who is now an agnostic, but who has never been excommunicated) and, among so many others, President of Argentina Argentine President Christine Kirchner. (Yes, that’s pretty much the same list as earlier, and that’s precisely the point. Everyone’s welcome in the “big tent” of conciliarism except those who adhere to everything contained within the Sacred Deposit of Faith without exception.

Judgment: Check. Michael Rubens Bloomberg is in “full communion” with the lords of conciliarism when it comes to “tolerance” and “diversity.”

Qualification Number Six: Michael Rubens Bloomberg believes that he, a professed agnostic Talmudist, is going straight to Heaven because of all of the “good” that he does:

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg isn’t sure if there’s an afterlife. But if there is, he believes he’s going straight to Heaven:

“I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to Heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed,” he told the New York Times, citing his work on gun control, obesity, and anti-smoking laws. “I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in Heaven. It’s not even close.”

The comments came in an article about Bloomberg’s new $50 million effort to counter the National Rifle Association. The new spending is Bloomberg’s “first major political investment since leaving office,” according to the Times. By comparison, the NRA spends about $20 million on political activities annually. 

The money will be spent forming a political network that organizes and motivates pro-gun control voters (and tries to punish elected officials who work against that agenda). Bloomberg said that gun control advocates have to make their opponents “afraid of us.” 

The former mayor’s new group will focus on “the often-unseen field operations that have been effective for groups like the NRA in driving single-issue, like-minded voters to the polls,” and not television ads, the Times report indicated. It’s a new strategy for the billionaire, who has already spent millions of dollars advocating gun control without any major legislative accomplishments. 

His $50 million commitment may grow over time, as well. Asked about spending more, he casually described other political donations and added, “Let’s see what happens.” (I have earned my place in Heaven.)

Proof of Qualification as a Member of the Counterfeit Church of Conciliarism: Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes all that is necessary to go to Heaven is to “do good,” something that he has stated on more than one occasion:

(Vatican Radio) “Doing good” is a principle that unites all humanity, beyond the diversity of ideologies and religions, and creates the “culture of encounter” that is the foundation of peace: this is what Pope said at Mass this morning at the Domus Santae Martae, in the presence of employees of the Governorate of Vatican City. Cardinal Bechara Boutros Rai, Patriarch of Antioch of the Maronites, concelebrated at the Mass.

Wednesday’s Gospel speaks to us about the disciples who prevented a person from outside their group from doing good. “They complain,” the Pope said in his homily, because they say, “If he is not one of us, he cannot do good. If he is not of our party, he cannot do good.” And Jesus corrects them: “Do not hinder him, he says, let him do good.” The disciples, Pope Francis explains, “were a little intolerant,” closed off by the idea of ​​possessing the truth, convinced that “those who do not have the truth, cannot do good.” “This was wrong . . . Jesus broadens the horizon.” Pope Francis said, “The root of this possibility of doing good – that we all have – is in creation”:

“The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can. He must. Not can: must! Because he has this commandment within him. Instead, this ‘closing off’ that imagines that those outside, everyone, cannot do good is a wall that leads to war and also to what some people throughout history have conceived of: killing in the name of God. That we can kill in the name of God. And that, simply, is blasphemy. To say that you can kill in the name of God is blasphemy.”

“Instead,” the Pope continued, “the Lord has created us in His image and likeness, and has given us this commandment in the depths of our heart: do good and do not do evil”:

“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.

“Doing good” the Pope explained, is not a matter of faith: “It is a duty, it is an identity card that our Father has given to all of us, because He has made us in His image and likeness. And He does good, always.”

This was the final prayer of Pope Francis:

“Today is [the feast of] Santa Rita, Patron Saint of impossible things – but this seems impossible: let us ask of her this grace, this grace that all, all, all people would do good and that we would encounter one another in this work, which is a work of creation, like the creation of the Father. A work of the family, because we are all children of God, all of us, all of us! And God loves us, all of us! May Santa Rita grant us this grace, which seems almost impossible. Amen.” (Culture of encounter is the foundation of peace.)

Judgment: Check. Michael Rubens Bloomberg, the pro-abortion, pro-perversity, pro-corruption of children by means of explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, pro-dispensing pills and devices to those children to make it “safe” for them to engage in sins against Holy Purity, quintessential Food Nazi, anti-smoking Nazi and anti-gun-ownng Nazi, pro-population control former Mayor of New York, New York, believes that he is “doing good.” That’s all that matters, right?

Wrong.

Catholic Reality Check to show that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is as much of a non-Catholic as is Michael Bloomberg and that, at least as it stands now in the objective order of things, both are headed for eternal perdition, not eternal life, unless they convert to the true Faith before they die and publicly abjure their support of one evil after another:

It [the Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation. Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people, but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently, but so ,that, when danger of death is imminent, they be baptized in the form of the Church, early without delay, even by a layman or woman, if a priest should be lacking, just as is contained more fully in the decree of the Armenians. . . . 

It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church. (Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.)

Not looking for you, Mike and Jorge. Not looking good at all.

We have returned to the days of Arianism, the days in which those who are considered “odd” are those who, despite their own sins and failings, defect from nothing contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith. It is very fitting, therefore, that today is the feast day of the great Saint Athanasius of Alexandria, whose valiant deeds were described by Dom Prosper Gueranger. O.S.B., in The Liturgical Year in such a manner as apply the uncompromising heroism of this much-persecuted bishop and Doctor of the Holy Church, who was exiled on five different occasions from Alexandria, to our very own times of apostasy and betrayal today:

The Court of our divine King, during his grandest of seasons, is brilliant beyond measure; and to-day, it is gladdened by the arrival of one of the most glorious champions of the world of truth for his holy cause. Among the guardians of the word of truth, confided by Jesus to the earth, is there one more faithful than Athanasius? Does not his very name remind us of dauntless courage in the defense of the sacred deposit, of heroic firmness and patience in suffering, of learning, of talent, of eloquence–in a word, of everything that goes to from a Saint, a Bishop, and a Doctor of the Church? Athanasius lived for the Son of God; the cause of the Son of God was that of Athanasius; he who blessed Athanasius, blessed the eternal Word; and he who insulted Athanasius insulted the eternal Word.

Never did our holy faith go through a greater ordeal than in the sad times immediately following the peace of the Church, when the bark of Peter had to pass through the most furious storm that hell has, so far, let loose against her. Satan had vainly sought to drown the Christian race in a sea of blood; the sword of persecution had grown blunt in the hands of Diocletian and Galerius; and the Cross appeared in the heavens, proclaiming the triumph of Christianity. Scarcely had the Church become aware of her victory when she felt herself shaken to her very foundation. Hell sent upon the earth a heresy which threatened to blight the fruit of three hundred years of martyrdom. Arius began his impious doctrine, that he who had hitherto been adored as the Son of God was only a creature, though the most perfect of all creatures. Immense was the number, even of the clergy, that fell into this new error; the Emperors became its abettors; and had not God himself interposed, men would soon have set up the cry throughout the world that the only result of the victory gained by the Christian religion was to change the object of idolatry, and put a new idol, called Jesus, in place of the old ones.

But he who had promised that the gates of hell should never prevail against his Church, faithfully fulfilled his promise. The primitive faith triumphed; the Council of Nicaea proclaimed the Son to be consubstantial with the Father; but the Church stood in need of a man in whom the cause of the consubstantial Word should be, so to speak, incarnated–a man with learning enough to foil the artifices of heresy, and with courage enough to bear every persecution without flinching. This man was Athanasius; and everyone that adores and loves the Son of God, should love and honour Athanasius. Five times banished from his See of Alexandria, he fled for protection to the West, which justly appreciated the glorious confessor of Jesus’ divinity. In return for the hospitality accorded him by Rome, Athanasius gave her of his treasures. Being the admirer and friend of the great St. Antony, he was a fervent admirer of the monastic life, which, by the grace of the Holy Ghost, had flourished so wonderfully in the deserts of his vast patriarchate. He brought the precious seed to Rome, and the first monks seen there were the ones introduced by Athanasius. The heavenly plant became naturalized in its new soil; and though its growth was slow at first, it afterwards produced fruit more abundantly than it had ever done in the East.

Athanasius, who has written so admirably upon that fundamental dogma of our faith–the divinity of Christ–also has left us most eloquent treatises on the mystery of the Pasch: they are to be found in the Festal Letters which he addressed each year to the churches of his patriarchate of Alexandria. The collection of these Letters, which were once thought to be irretrievably lost, was found, a few years back, in the monastery of St. Mary of Scete in Egypt. The first, for the year 329, begins with these words, which beautifully express the sentiments we should feel at the approach of Easter: ‘Come, my beloved brethren, celebrate the feast; the season of the year invites you to do so. The Sun of justice, by pouring out his divine rays upon you that the time of the solemnity is come. At such tidings, let us keep a glad feast; let not the joy slip from us with the fleeting days, without our having tasted of its sweetness.’ During almost every year of his banishment, Athanasius continued to address a Paschal Letter to his people. The one in which he announced the Easter of 338, and which he wrote at Treves, begins thus: ‘Though separated from you, my brethren, I cannot break through the custom which I have always observed, and which I received from the tradition of the Fathers. I will not be silent; I will not omit announcing to you the time of the holy annual feast, and the day on which you must keep the solemnity. I am, as you have doubtless been told, a prey to many tribulations; I am weighed down by heavy trials; I am watched by the enemies of truth, who scrutinize everything I write, in order to rake up accusations against me and thereby add to my sufferings; yet notwithstanding, I feel that the Lord strengthens and consoles me in my afflictions. Therefore do I venture to address to you the annual celebration; and from the midst of my troubles, and despite the snares that beset me, I send you, from the furthermost part of the earth, the tidings of the Pasch, which is our salvation. Commending my fate into God’s hands, I will celebrate this feast with you; distance of place separates us, but I am not absent from you. The lord who gives us these feasts, who is himself our feast, who bestows upon us the gift of his Spirit–he unites us spiritually to one another, by the bond of concord and peace.’

How grand is the Pasch, celebrated by Athanasius, an exile on the Rhine, in union with his people who keep their Easter on the banks of the Nile! It shows us the power of the Liturgy to unite men and make them, at one and the same time, and despite the distance of countries, enjoy the same holy emotions and feel the same aspirations to virtue. Greeks or Barbarians, we have all the same mother country, the Church; but that which, after faith, unites us all into one family, is the Church’s Liturgy. Now there is nothing in the whole Liturgy so expressive of unity as the celebration of Easter. The unhappy Churches of Russia and the East, by keeping Easter on a different day from that on which it is celebrated by the rest of the Christian world, show that they are not a portion of the One Fold of which Our Risen Jesus is the One Shepherd. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Pascal Time, Book II, pp. 403-406.)

We must defend the Faith as we accept the rebukes that come out way in silence as we suffer in joy Christ the King as His consecrated slaves through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, thanking Our Lord abundantly for opportunity to be more perfectly conformed to His Holy Cross and as we seek to draw inspiration from this prayer of Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., to our glorious Saint of this day:

Intercede for the country over which was extended thy patriarchal jurisdiction; but forget not this Europe of ours, which gave thee hospitality and protection. Rome defended thy cause; she passed sentence in thy favour, and restored thee thy rights; make her a return, now that thou art face to face with the God of infinite goodness and power. Protect and console her Pontiff, the successor of that Julius who so nobly befriended thee fifteen hundred years ago. A fierce tempest is now raging against the Rock on which is built the Church of Christ; and our eyes have grown wearied for a sign of calm. Oh! pray that these days of trial be shortened, and that the See of Peter may triumph over the calumnies and persecutions which are now besetting her, and endangering the faith of many of her children.

Thy zeal, O Athanasius! checked the ravages of Arianism; but this heresy has again appeared, in our own times, and in almost every country of Europe. Its progress is due to that proud superficial learning which has become one of the principal perils of the age. The Eternal Son of God, consubstantial with the Father, is blasphemed by our so-called philosophers, as being only Man–the best and greatest of men, they say, but still only Man. They despise all the proofs which reason and history adduce of Jesus’ divinity; they profess a sort regard for the Christian teaching which has hitherto been held, but they have discovered (so they tell us) the fallacy of the great dogma which recognizes in the Son of Mary the Eternal Word who became incarnate for man’s salvation. O Athanasius, glorious Doctor of of holy Mother Church! humble these modern Arians; expose their proud ignorance and sophistry; undeceive their unhappy followers, by letting them see how this false doctrine leads either to the abyss of the abominations of pantheism, or to the chaos of scepticism, where all truth and morally are impossibilities.

Preserve within us, by the influence of they prayers, the precious gift of faith, wherewith our Lord has mercifully blessed us. Obtain for us that we may ever confess and adore Jesus Christ our eternal and infinite God, ‘God of God; Light of Light; True God of True God; Begotten not men; who for us men, and for our salvation, took Flesh, of the Virgin Mary.’ May we grow each day in the knowledge of this Jesus, until we join thee in the face-to-face contemplation of his perfections. Meanwhile, by means of holy faith, we will live with him on this earth that has witnessed the glory of his Resurrection. How fervent, O Athanasius, was thy love of this Son of God, our Creator and Redeemer! This love was the very life of thy soul, and the stimulus that urged thee to heroic devotedness to his cause. It supported thee in the combats thou hadst to sustain with the world, which seemed leagued together against thy single person. It gave thee strength to endless tribulations. Oh! pray that we may obtain this love–a love which is fearless of danger, because faithful to him for whom we suffer–a Brightness of his Father’s glory, and Infinite Wisdom, emptied himself, taking the form of a servant and humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the Cross. How else can we make him a return for his devotedness to us except by giving him all our love,as thou didst. O Athanasius! and by ever singing his praise in compensation for the humiliations which he endured in order to save us? (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Paschal Time: Book II, pp. 411-413.)

Saint Athanasius has given us marching orders, and those marching orders do not make us Pharisees, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, or “closed-minded:”

They have the premises – but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The true Faith, obviously. Who has lost and who has won in the struggle – the one who keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith? True, the premises are good when the Apostolic Faith is preached there; they are holy if everything takes place there in a holy way …

“You are the ones who are happy; you who remain within the Church by your Faith, who hold firmly to the foundations of the Faith which has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition. And if an execrable jealousy has tried to shake it on a number of occasions, it has not succeeded. They are the ones who have broken away from it in the present crisis. No one, ever, will prevail against your Faith, beloved Brothers. And we believe that God will give us our churches back some day.

“Thus, the more violently they try to occupy the places of worship, the more they separate themselves from the Church. They claim that they represent the Church; but in reality, they are the ones who are expelling themselves from it and going astray. Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ.” (Letter of St. Athanasius to his flock.)

Let these words continue to be our consolation in these days when it is easier for most people to believe in the mythologies of naturalists in the political realm and the Modernists in the theological realm who esteem false idols than it is to hold steadfast to the Faith.

We turn to Our Lady with every beat of our hearts, consecrated as they must be to Most Sacred Heart of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, pledging to her in this month of May to pray the Litany of Loreto every day in addition to praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit. We can crown Our Lady as Queen of our hearts by making reparation for our sins and those of the whole world by enslaving ourselves to her Divine Son through her Immaculate Heart, giving unto whatever merit we earn each day so that she can dispose of that merit however she sees fit for the honor and glory of the Most Holy Trinity and for the good of souls in the Church Suffering in Purgatory and here in the Church Militant on earth.

The final victory belongs to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart. We must consider it a privilege that we are alive in these times to plant a few seeds for the restoration of the Church Militant on earth and for the restoration of Christendom in the world.

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 Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Andrew the Apostle, 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 Athanasius, pray for us.