As Pope Leo’s papacy progresses, his role in advancing the Revolution is becoming clearer: make Modernism more palatable by gently “developing” his predecessor’s radical and destructive anti-Catholic doctrine. This is an opinion echoed by Atila Sinke Guimarães from Tradition in Action. He writes:

…. what the Conciliar Church needs now, more than anything else, is to have a long period to digest the progressivist “conquests” that Francis won for it. The aim is not to deny what he did. It is to “reinterpret” it under a more moderate light in order to make the average Catholic assimilate his legacy in small and less repulsive doses.

This attempt at reinterpretation is precisely what we are seeing from conservative Catholic circles – despite Bergoglian loyalists assuring us that Prevost is cut from the same cloth as Pope Francis. For example, there is an attempt to promote “Pope Leo’s version” of Liberation Theology, which is supposedly less extreme than the original version. Then there was the case of the conservative Catholic publication from Melbourne that wrote of its hopes to see the new Pope’s “interpretation of the application” of Synodality.

These are the hopes and dreams of naive Catholics who fail to understand the scope of the Crisis and the momentum it has gained: Prevost is not the Pope who is going to save the Church, any more than Trump was the politician “chosen by God” to save the free world.

Critical Reading of Scripture

Despite his smiling photo-ops and calm demeanour, Pope Leo has shown on more than one occasion that he is intent on applying critical theory to the Word of God. This includes playing down Christ’s miracles, by suggesting that the deaf-mute of the Gospels chose not to speak. “Just as it can sometimes happen to us, perhaps this man chose not to speak anymore because he did not feel understood; he chose to shut off every voice because he had been disappointed and wounded by what he had heard.”

This is a followup to previous occasion when Prevost suggested that the miracle of the loaves and fishes wasn’t so much about the sovereign power of God as it was about natural charity:

“However, when we read the account of what is commonly called the “multiplication of the loaves” (cf. Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:12-17; Jn 6:1-13), we realize that the real miracle performed by Christ was to show that the key to overcoming hunger lies in sharing rather than in greedily hoarding. 

False Ecumenism

Prevost has shown his tolerance for the errors of non-Catholics on many occasions since his election. Possibly the most concerning of these meetings was with representatives of the Eastern Orthodox church, which some Catholics hope will soon reconcile with Rome.

Yet, as pointed out by the WM Review, unless the Eastern orthodox church recognises the primacy of the Roman Pontiff, such a reconciliation can only take place if the Catholic Church embraces error. Specifically, these errors comprise the “redefinition of the Church’s property/note of unity, redefinition of the supernatural virtue of faith, redefinition of the nature of the papacy and constitution of the Church.”

Prevost’s record on clerical sex abuse

The new Pope’s tolerance of clerical sex abuse is another marker which confirms that, morally, he is little different from Bergoglio. An article from May in the Chicago Sun Times points to Prevost’s role as a prominent leader within the Augustinians and suggests that he helped cover for an alleged clerical sex offender. In the article, Prevost is accused of “perceived inaction on improving transparency in his order over sex abuse.”

More than that, the article points to a previous one from the same news outlet that claims “while he was in charge of the Augustinians in Chicago in 2000, allowed an accused pedophile priest to live at a South Side monastery without telling a nearby Catholic elementary school the man was there. Indeed, church records assert there was no school nearby when there was.”

There are other abuse-adjacent claims by the website against Prevost: none of them directly accuse him of abuse, but rather, point to a repeated lack of transparency and accountability.

This leads to another point that should have been raising red flags from the beginning of Prevost’s pontificate: why has the media been so quiet? As a whole, mainstream generally can’t move quickly enough to cover a story with even the faintest scent of a cover-up of abuse by Catholic priests. Yet Prevost’s role in a number of these affairs has largely been ignored until now.

This case, now back in the news, was known prior to Prevost’s election as Pope, yet until now received little media coverage. The details of this case are conflicting and even sketchy, yet that has never proven to be an obstacle for the media, who in Pope Leo’s case, continually assume his innocence.

Then there is this case, where the Pope is allowing Cardinal Carlos Castillo of Peru to remain in his position past retirement date, despite his track record of covering for sodomites in his seminary. As has been mentioned in these pages before, Prevost, as former head of the Dicastery for Bishops, knows all there is to know about the hierarchy, yet continues to promote or tolerate anti-Catholic prelates.

Jubilee of Youth

The Jubilee of Young People, which has just taken place in Rome, is the perfect of example of the way Pope Leo is continuing the Modernist agenda of the previous Popes under the appearance of orthodoxy. Catholic media hailed the Pope’s presence at Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, attended by up to a million young Catholics, as an indicator of the Church’s return to its glorious past.

Yet all conciliar and post-conciliar popes have led liturgies like this one. Images of all of them holding monstrances can be found online: all of them had moments of giving the appearance of a truly holy Pope, despite their many deviations from tradition on other occasions.

Without being too cynical, the question should be asked: what young Catholic would not want to attend an event like this one – a holiday in Rome, usually subsidised by the Archdiocese or family and friends, full of emotional experiences but without any substantial impetus for conversion to a holy life?

The truth is that large gatherings are the norm at events like this one, and that huge numbers for objectively excellent practices like Adoration and confession, while giving the appearance of a wholesome Catholic atmosphere, are not themselves indicators of a Catholic revival.

This is evidenced by the Jubilee meeting for Catholic “influencers”, most of whom attended the Holy Sacrifice of Mass in t-shirts and shorts. Despite being extolled as representatives for Catholicism, the majority of these “influencers” were not event aware of how to pray the Pater Noster in Latin.

Along with the trappings of tradition at the official events, Modernist novelties could also be found; novelties that undermined the reverence and decorum necessary for flourishing of true piety. There was the ubiquitous rock concert in St. Peter’s Square, which some thought was perfectly fine because the altar had been removed.

Then there was the strange group of ‘Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist’: they looked for all the world like neo-pagan priestesses, yet they distributed the Sacred Species at the Pope’s Mass. SOURCE

Events included a liturgical dance-show in front of the altar in the piazza near St. Peter’s. The group danced to Scripture being read in Italian by a woman. While their dress is quite modest by today’s (admittedly very low) standards, it does not reach the higher standards expected by anyone taking part in any form of liturgy. That is not to suggest that liturgical dance can ever be anything other than an embarrassing and inappropriate display of post-conciliar emotionalism.

Yet, the truth is that underneath the lace and Latin lies a cesspool of corruption and heresy, sodomy and vice, and that Prevost is the man of the hour, handpicked by the most corrupt men of all, to make Modernism palatable to unwitting Catholics. Please, dear friends, read the signs of the times and don’t be taken in by this latest Modernist deception.