Islamophiles King Charles III and Pope Leo XIV Must Abdicate

I am an ecumenical guy, especially regarding Christianity and Judaism—from which sprang the Wonderful Counselor, the Bread of Life, the Lamb of God. Interfaith dialogue and finding common ground here are all well and good. But when it comes to Islam, I am wary, and 1,400 years of history proves I am right to feel this way. After all, Jesus said, “love them” (Matthew 5:44), but Mohammed said, “kill them” (Surahs 4:89 and 9:5); Jesus said, “bless them” (Luke 6:28), but Mohammed said, “crucify them” (Surah 5:33); Jesus said, “pray for them” (Luke 6:28), but Mohammed said, “slay them” (Surahs 2:191 and 9:5); Jesus said, “help them” (Luke 10:29-37), but Mohammed, said “fight them” (Surah 8:39); Jesus said, “give to them” (Luke 6:35), but Mohammed said, “strike their necks” (Surah 47:4); Jesus said, “do good to them” (Luke 6:27), but Mohammed said, “besiege them” (Surah 9:5); Jesus said, “be merciful to them” (Luke 6:36), but Mohammed said, “terrorize them” (Surah 3:151); and Jesus said, “forgive them” (Matthew 6:14), but Mohammed said, “cut off their hands and feet” (Surah 5:33). Our Lord and Savior never started a war, whereas Mighty Mo—the most false of false prophets, who had a six-year-old child bride with special permission from “Allah”—started 27 and sanctioned another 60 or so. Need I say more?

Two prominent men with rock-solid obligations to support Christianity but who seem to be doing quite the opposite are King Charles III and Pope Leo XIV. I will start with Chuck. Upon his birth in 1948 to Queen Elizabeth, he received the title His Royal Highness Prince Charles of Edinburgh and later added Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland. Commonwealth realms from Antigua to Tuvalu have other lofty names for him. None of that matters a whit to me, an American who thinks royalty is absurd. But I do take seriously one of King Charles III’s subsidiary titles: Defender of the Faith. Since the early 16th century, English kings and queens have been the supreme governor of the Church of England. As such, he has divine sanction to, as it says, defend the Christian faith. Educated at such tony schools as Cheam, Gordonstoun, Timbertop (in Australia), the University of Cambridge, University College in Wales and the Britannia Royal Naval College, he has been king since his mother’s death in 2022.

I would like him much more if he did not so vigorously embrace Islam. It’s alarming to know that the United Kingdom’s Muslim population is now about 4 million, or 6%, and growing fast. The King just seems to love these people, and I will give a few examples. He has attempted to learn Arabic in order to better understand the Quran (supposedly dictated to Mohammed by one of Allah’s angels). He served as vice-patron of the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. He often speaks about Islam and the West, insisting that the links “matter more today than ever before.” He has visited Saudi Arabia a dozen times, and why not since London is the crown jewel for wealthy investors throughout the Gulf region? Between 2011 and 2015, the heir to the British throne was personally given 3 million euros in cash by ex-Qatari prime minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al-Thani, some of it in shopping bags (William handed the stash over to one of his favorite charities). He has appeared in Arab attire on several occasions and performed the ardah sword dance in Riyadh in 2014. He has expressed sympathy for Palestinians living under Israeli “occupation.”

The royal family is constitutionally obliged to stand apart from political issues, but much of what Chuck says and does sets the tone. I just wonder why he ignores Lent but highlights Ramadan by opening St George’s Hall at Windsor Castle to a celebration of the iftar meal. Offending Christians seems not to bother him at all. The relativism of European—as well as American—culture allows him to do this and go his merry way. King Charles III, who incidentally is meeting with President Trump and speaking to Congress today, is treated with due deference by the media. Were I a British or American reporter, however, here are some of the questions I would put to him: Sir, do you realize that foreign nationals are 71% more likely to commit sex crimes than native Brits? What about all those no-go zones in London, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and so on? Are you OK with Sharia law which is effectively practiced in some British Muslim communities? You have no issue with the presence of 52 mosques in London’s Newham district? I certainly do. You understand that “honor” killings happen with numbing regularity in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland? You know of how Pakistani grooming gangs in Rotherham have raped and even forced into master-slave relationships dozens of British girls and young women? Does it bother you that British police and judges are so lenient with these people for fear of being called “racist” or “Islamophobic”? Can you deny that a British caliphate is a virtual certainty within the next generation if something drastic is not done? Why is multicultural hospitality more important than upholding your vows as Defender of the Faith? And finally, how can you deny that the religions founded by Jesus and Mohammed are antithetical to each other given that the human heart is far more attuned to love and forgiveness than to power and control?

I will now turn my attention to Pope Leo XIV, known previously as Robert Prevost. Born in Chicago in 1955, he got a good Catholic education and moved from seminarian to priest to bishop to friend of Pope Francis to cardinal before being chosen as the 267th pope on May 8, 2025. On his first apostolic journey, he went to Istanbul where, among other things, he toured the Blue Mosque. He agreed to provide a dedicated prayer room for Muslims at the Vatican Library in Rome, sparking heated debate about the propriety of this dilution of Christian identity. Father Giacomo Cardinali, who serves as vice-prefect of the 500-year-old library, was quick to emphasize its universal character; it has more than 80,000 manuscripts and 1.6 million printed books and artefacts from diverse civilizations—including numerous ancient Qurans among its Arabic holdings. Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Ethiopian and Chinese items can be found there as well. So providing Islamic scholars with a modest prayer room in which rugs are turned toward Mecca was a mere courtesy.

Perhaps. But try howsoever I might to imagine the Muslims reciprocating—a Christian prayer room with an altar and a cross inside the Grand Mosque in Mecca—I cannot do it. This would not happen, not now and not ever, if only because non-Muslims are strictly prohibited from entering the so-called holy city. This ban is enforced by numerous checkpoints, and offenders (brave souls, they) are subject to detention, fines and deportation. They might even take you to Chop-Chop Square in Riyadh for some rough justice. Furthermore, I wonder whether the former Bob Prevost is aware that the walls surrounding the Vatican were completed in 852 A.D. after devastating raids by Muslim forces who sacked St. Peter’s Basilica.

Just last week, Pope Leo XIV concluded an 11-day tour of four African nations: Algeria, Cameroon, Angola and Equatorial Guinea. In the former, he stood in silence in front of the qibla wall (facing Mecca) in what his aides called a “significant moment of interreligious solidarity.” OK, but would Ali Khamenei, before his death on this past February 28, have been willing to do anything of the sort to placate his Christian brothers and sisters? Not a chance.

I want to know why the Pontiff failed to include Nigeria on his African itinerary. That’s where systematic genocide is being perpetrated on Christians by the country’s Boko Haram and Fulani Muslims; police and soldiers stand by and do nothing to prevent it. I would submit that the Vicar of Christ has a duty to go there and use whatever moral influence he has to inspire and protect Nigerian believers. He could have shown some backbone by emulating the original Pope Leo. Known to history as “the Shield of God,” this man risked his life by confronting Attila the Hun in 452 A.D. and persuaded him not to sack Rome.

King Charles III and Pope Leo XIV ought to put their cards, their Christian cards, on the table and show that they follow the way of the cross and not that of the sword. Otherwise, for the reasons stated above, I call on them to abdicate. Only one other British monarch voluntarily stepped aside—Edward VIII in 1936 to marry American divorcee Wallis Simpson. So there is a precedent. As for Holy Fathers who abdicated, we have Pontian (235), Benedict IX (1045), Celestine V (1294), Gregory XII (1415) and Benedict XVI (2013). As an adherent of the one true faith, I think both have to go. Bald-headed Prince William is waiting in the wings and seems ready to ascend in the UK—I hope he keeps the infidels at arm’s length—and the College of Cardinals can find a new man to occupy the Chair of Saint Peter.

Love them or kill them–which?

Then-Prince Charles in Arab attire…

President Trump and King Charles III meet in Washington, April 2026…

Uh-huh…

Vatican Library in Rome…

The original Pope Leo asked Attila the Hun to go away–and he did…