Pope Leo & Bergoglio’s occult-inspired pectoral cross

In my recent article about Cardinal Bernadin, I referenced a pectoral cross he often wore which showed his allegiance to the occult and to other nefarious characters in the hierarchy. That article cited information from Rosicrucians which explained that their esoteric version of the ‘Good Shepherd’ was indicated by arms crossed over the chest.

Cardinal Fernandez and Pope Francis have also worn this same cross: in Bergoglio’s case, he wore it first as Archbishop and Cardinal of Argentina. 

Crossed arms are also found in Masonry and in its offshoot, the OTO (Ordo Templi Orientis), and were inspired by the Egyptian god, Osiris.

Osiris
Aleister Crowley as Osiris
First sign in the Super-Excellent Master Mason Degree (Richardson’s Monitor of Freemasonry)

As an aside, celebrities seem to be as fond of being photographed making this gesture as they are of making the Illuminati ‘one-eye’ sign and devils’ horns.

Rapper Eminem
Author Steven King
Artist Marina Abramovic
Cardinal Fernandez pictured wearing the same cross at this year’s conclave.
Pope Francis wearing the occult-inspired cross.
The shepherd with arms crossed, slightly elongated body and background of lines or ridges – from the maker’s website.
Another shot of the cross showing the shepherd’s face looking straight ahead.

Pope Leo, as Robert Prevost, was apparently apparently photographed wearing the occult-version. I say ‘apparently’, because the photograph on the left is so outrageous that I had waited to see solid proof that it was not photoshopped. That is, proof was wanting until the photograph on the right was sent to me. It came from a Spanish website called Religion the Free Voice and shows Prevost againt wearing the occult-inspired pectoral cross.

Here is a picture of Pope Leo XIV, taken on the day of his ‘Mass for Creation’. As can be seen, he is wearing a pectoral cross bearing an image of the Good shepherd.

However, there is something very significant about his cross. As the closeups show, this doesn’t appear to be identical with similar crosses worn by Pope Francis, or Cardinals Bernadin and Fernandez: it has been changed slightly.

Zoomed-in image of the cross from the picture above.
Enhanced with Canva software
Here is Leo’s cross again, at even closer range.

What say you, friends? Is this the same cross? In all truth, it appears not to be. The shepherd appears to have only one arm crossed over his breast – his left arm – and his body is a little shorter than in the Bergoglio/Bernadin version. The robe is raised slightly on the right-hand-side (the shepherd’s left) as if he is walking. The Holy Ghost dove is in the same position but the vertical lines/ridges in the background have been removed, or are at least not so prominent. In contrast to the other cross, the shepherd’s head seems to be oriented downwards and slightly towards his right.

What does is all mean? Is Leo playing the players? Has he tapped in to the graces of his new state as Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church? While I’d like to think this is the case, here is a different theory (as presented to me by my son.) If this ‘Good Shepherd’ is inspired by a god of Ancient Egypt, we must cast our minds back to that period.

We know that at times, ancient Egypt was governed by Pharaohs who demanded that they be worshipped as gods, but this wasn’t always the case. There was a time known as the First Intermediate Period during which the Pharaohs ruled in a more ‘synodal’ style. They shared power with the nomes, who were the rulers of a series of city-states called nomarchs. Most notably, this time came after the more authoritarian period of the Old Kingdom – and was later followed by another time of absolute rule by the Pharaohs.

Is it possible that the updated version of the pectoral cross indicates that the authoritarian rule of Bergoglio has given way to Leo’s ‘synodal’ path of cheerfully allowing bishops to implement whatever degree of orthodoxy or error they desire in their own dioceses? (For that is precisely what synodality entails.) Is this cross the symbol of the next phase of the revolution?

No matter what is the meaning of this strange development, please, PLEASE, dear Catholics, choose a simple daily penance to offer to Our Lady that this Pope will consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart and end the confusion which reigns around us. As I’m fond of saying: he doesn’t have to believe, he just has to do it!

Virgo potens, ora pro nobis!

A Liberal Confirms that Prevost is Francis II

One of Pope Francis’ greatest fans, austen ivereigh, has written for the liberal commonweal that there is no doubt Leo will continue francis’ agenda, albeit with a little more style.

After burying Pope Francis, the cardinals chose another pope from the Americas to follow in his path, proving both that the “change of era” inaugurated by Francis is here to stay and that Latin America would still be a key source for the universal Church. Leo XIV is from the south suburbs of Chicago, “the descendant of immigrants, who in turn chose to emigrate,” as he put it to the Holy See ambassadors on May 16. He was referring to the decades he spent as a missionary and bishop in Peru. This is why the first U.S.-born pope is also the second from South America. 

The quiet sixty-nine-year-old American, Robert Francis Prevost, friar of the Order of St. Augustine, slipped past the bookmakers and the pundits, quickly overtaking the Italian curial-establishment papabile, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, to be elected after only four ballots, on the afternoon of the second day of the conclave. As they emerged from the conclave, the cardinals were delighted, as if they had stumbled on a pearl of great price. They spoke of the atmosphere inside: the lighthearted peace in the Sistine Chapel, the sense of fraternity and unity back at the Santa Marta. They remarked on the freedom from the pressures and distractions of the internet that allowed them to settle prayerfully on the one man among them whom they believe God had chosen. They described how moving it had been to watch Prevost as his name was read out, over and over. Joseph Tobin, cardinal archbishop of Newark, who knows the new pope well—having been head of the Redemptorists in Rome when Prevost was there as the prior general of the Augustinians—said he “took a look at Bob” and saw that “he had his head in his hands.” At that moment, Tobin prayed for Prevost, “because I couldn’t imagine what happens to a human being when you face something like that.” Yet once Prevost was elected—and on this the cardinals are unanimous—he was remarkably calm, wholly at peace. Over the next few days, Rome was struck by how effortlessly Prevost became Leo. 

What convinced the 133 cardinals, it turned out, had not been a great speech, but rather the way Prevost carried himself: he was humble, direct, synodal, and pastoral. Prevost would be a pope in the tradition of Francis, yet different in ways the cardinals regarded as necessary. They sought three particular qualities in the next pope. First, they wanted someone with experience of the universality of today’s Church, someone familiar with its breadth and complexity. Second, they were looking for someone who could bring the peace of Christ to the divisions within the Church and in the world at large. Third, they needed someone who could govern firmly but also in a more collegial manner than Francis did. The more they got to know Prevost, the more he emerged as the one who fit that profile. 

The young cardinal who heads the Filipino bishops’ conference, Pablo Virgilio David, said it was the pope as pontifex maximus, or “supreme bridge-builder,” that became a key topic for the cardinals in the ten days of private meetings prior to the conclave. He said Leo’s brief address from the loggia of St. Peter’s after his election was virtually a summary of their discussions. Peace was his theme, the disarming peace of Christ. Leo called for “a Church that builds bridges and encourages dialogue…a synodal Church.” 

The next day, at Mass with the cardinals in the Sistine Chapel, Leo dwelt on the great responsibility entrusted to Peter, his mission to bear witness in a world that often mocks or despises Christian faith. Back in 2013, Prevost thought he would escape being made a bishop; ten years later, he hadn’t wanted to leave behind his diocese in Peru when Francis asked him to head the Dicastery for Bishops in Rome. But in the end, he saw the move to Rome as “a new opportunity to live a dimension of my life, which simply was always answering ‘Yes’ when asked to do a service,” he told Vatican News at that time. “With this spirit, I ended my mission in Peru, after eight and a half years as a bishop and almost twenty years as a missionary, to begin a new one in Rome.” 

And now, when Cardinal Parolin asked Cardinal Prevost if he accepted his election as pope, he gave another, even more radical “Yes.” In his homily the next day, Pope Leo described Peter being led in chains to Rome, “the place of his imminent sacrifice,” and said anyone in the Church who exercises a ministry of authority would recognize that journey. He, too, was being called now “to disappear so that Christ may remain, to make oneself small so that He may be known and glorified (cf. John 3:30).” 

Did he ever sense that Francis had prepared his path? After his arrival in Rome in 2023 to head the Dicastery for Bishops (he had been a member since 2020), Prevost and Francis used to meet for two hours every Saturday morning in the Casa Santa Marta, where Francis lived. They discussed, of course, nominations for bishops, but also their vision of the Church. Prevost was one of Francis’s trusted negotiators with the German bishops over demands that arose from their controversial “Synodal Way” process. Francis came to rely on him more and more. He trusted Prevost’s decision-making and admired his way of working—the way he was able to reconcile different sides. Arthur Roche, the English cardinal who heads the Dicastery for Divine Worship, told me that Prevost was without doubt Francis’s “closest collaborator” in the Vatican during the past two years. 

The time they spent together each week was deeply formative for Prevost, who was struck by Francis’s extraordinary capacity for discernment, as well as his radical commitment to God’s mercy. One morning, when the two were discussing clerical sex abuse, the pope said he wanted to show Prevost something. Francis left the room and returned with a picture from a Gothic cathedral in France which showed Judas taking his own life while Jesus cradled him in his arms. Was it really possible, Francis asked him, for God’s mercy to reach the worst of sinners? Telling this story in a talk to a Chicago-area parish in August of last year, Prevost described how Francis “struggles to express and live that dimension of the Gospel.” It was this focus that had led people to misunderstand or criticize the pope. Francis was convinced, Prevost said, that in a world full of mutual condemnation, “we need people, especially ministers, who can live and offer people the mercy, forgiveness, and healing of God.”

The quiet sixty-nine-year-old American, Robert Francis Prevost, friar of the Order of St. Augustine, slipped past the bookmakers and the pundits.

In early February, with his bronchitis worsening, Francis raised Prevost’s status within the College of Cardinals to bishop. It was done so discreetly that it went mostly unnoticed even by the Vatican press corps. Yet only a handful of others at the conclave were cardinal bishops, among them the two whom the media had dubbed the “frontrunner” papabili—Cardinals Parolin and Tagle. Was Francis sending a little posthumous hint that that list needed expanding?

The bond between Bergoglio and Prevost goes back to the first decade of the new millennium, when the American was based in Rome as prior general of the Augustinians. He spent half of each year of his twelve-year term visiting the three thousand Augustinian friars and their parishes and works across the world, extraordinary preparation for a pope of the global era, bringing him into contact with the Church in Africa, Asia, and the Near East, as well as in the Americas. He was often in Argentina, where the Augustinians have a vicariate with five parishes, five schools, and a formation house; and there he sat down with the famous Jesuit archbishop of Buenos Aires. The two men had a lot in common: both had been given major responsibilities in their religious orders from an early age. 

Prevost recounts that, on his last visit with Archbishop Bergoglio, the two had a disagreement. Bergoglio wanted one of Prevost’s friars for some project or other in his archdiocese. Prevost said no; he had other work in mind for him. The archbishop was very unhappy about this, Prevost later learned, and so when Bergoglio was elected pope in March 2013, Prevost—who was coming to the end of his term as prior general—joked with his brother Augustinians that he could relax: this new pope would never make him a bishop. But when Francis met Prevost again in August, after celebrating Mass for the opening of the Augustinians’ general chapter, the pope effusively thanked him for his help with resolving a problem in Rome. “You can relax for now,” he said, thus hinting that he would soon be coming for him. The following year, when Prevost was back in Chicago, Francis made him apostolic administrator of Chiclayo, and a year later its bishop, an appointment for which Prevost needed Peruvian nationality.

Chiclayo is in Lambayeque, a region of northern Peru near Chulucanas and Trujillo, where Prevost missioned in his thirties and forties. There, he had been a formator of friars, a diocesan canon lawyer, and a parish priest. The 1.2 million-strong Diocese of Chiclayo needed a makeover: for more than thirty years, it had been run by Spanish Opus Dei bishops. For the next decade, Prevost would give it new direction, making it a diocese that modelled the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council. Francis had “masterfully and concretely set forth” that ecclesiology in his 2013 teaching Evangelii gaudium, as Leo XIV reminded his fellow cardinals on May 10. 

In that address, delivered two days after his election, Leo highlighted six “fundamental points” from Evangelii gaudium, which amount to a program for his pontificate. The first was the “primacy of Christ in proclamation.” (As he put it in a 2023 interview: “This comes first: to communicate the beauty of the faith, the beauty and joy of knowing Jesus. It means that we ourselves are living it and sharing this experience.”) The second was the “missionary conversion” of the whole Christian community, to enable others to encounter Christ in acts of mercy. The third, “growth in collegiality and synodality,” meant co-responsibility for the life and mission of the Church. (Synodality, he told people in Chiclayo, was a way for the Church to be closer to the people.) The fourth, “attention to the sensus fidei,” meant taking seriously the people of God as a believing, discerning subject, valuing their traditions and culture. The fifth, “loving care for the least and the rejected,” was the Church’s option for the poor, expressed in attention and concrete acts. The sixth and final point, “courageous and trusting dialogue with the contemporary world,” meant a Church that confronts contemporary challenges rather than offering a refuge from them. 

………

But he is remembered most for his outstanding capacity to convene, to hold people together and rearrange the decks without earning enemies. He brought firm new direction to his diocese in Peru, yet without rejecting what he had inherited. He won over the Opus Dei priests, engaged movements, and reached out to conservatives and charismatics. From the start, he brought people together in synodal assemblies to agree on pastoral priorities and created an institute to form lay leaders. “After ten years of his work, lay people are really well-trained and are positioned,” his successor in Chiclayo, Bishop Edinson Farfán Córdova (also an Augustinian), told me. The content of the summer courses designed to train hundreds of laypeople was drawn, says Bishop Farfán, from the social magisterium of Francis: not just Evangelii gaudium, but also Laudato si’ and Fratelli tutti

In 2018, Prevost was elected vice president of the Peruvian bishops’ conference. The Church was at that time still dealing with the fallout from revelations of abuse and corruption at the heart of the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae (SCV), a right-wing Peruvian movement founded in the 1970s to combat liberation theology. The SCV enjoyed strong support from wealthy Peruvians and from the Vatican under Pope John Paul II, and over the years, many bishops would become entangled with the movement, especially José Antonio Eguren, the archbishop of Piura—the diocese neighboring Chiclayo. 

The bond between Bergoglio and Prevost goes back to the first decade of the new millennium.

The publication of Mitad monjes, mitad soldados (“Half Monks, Half Soldiers”), a devastating 2015 exposé by former “sodálite” Pedro Salinas and journalist Paola Ugaz, led the SCV’s powerful allies to wage legal warfare on the authors in Peru’s corrupt, sclerotic courts. The other effect of the book was to unleash a wave of previously untold abuse stories, stories of people effectively kept as prisoners for years and humiliated by the power games of the SCV’s inner circle. As new victims continued to step forward, Paola Ugaz, overwhelmed, reached out to the Church for help. The bishops’ conference was unable to act collectively: Archbishop Eguren was involved in suing Salinas and Ugaz, while the conference’s president, Héctor Cabrejos, was reluctant to make trouble. 

Prevost, together with the Jesuit cardinal Pedro Barreto and the apostolic nuncio Nicola Girasoli, acted on their own account, publicly declaring their support for the writers and finding ways over the next two years to help the victims. “Robert became the one who individually reached out to the really broken victims,” recalls Ugaz. “He became the bridge between them and the Sodalicio,” she told me in Rome after the conclave, describing how he would meet with Sodalicio leaders to secure financial and medical assistance for the victims. Ugaz describes Prevost as levelheaded, patient, and tenacious. “Robert’s not the guy who will grab a match and set light to the building. He’ll look for ways to help, to make things happen,” she says. They are friends to this day. In Rome for Pope Francis’s funeral, Ugaz brought chocolates and an Alpaca stole for her friend. She ended up giving them to him once he was pope.

In 2020, the Sodalicio stepped up their campaign against the journalists, using death threats and false claims that they were involved in money laundering. Girasoli and Bishop Prevost believed the only way to protect Ugaz was to arrange a meeting with Francis. But because of Covid, this did not happen until 2022, when Ugaz and Salinas persuaded Francis to send his crack Vatican investigators Archbishop Charles Scicluna and Msgr. Jordi Bertomeu. Their report not only confirmed the journalists’ claims but uncovered much more, including a money-laundering scandal that involved diocesan cemeteries. 

After Prevost moved to Rome to head the Dicastery for Bishops, he was closely involved in the measures that led to the SCV’s suppression. In 2024 Francis expelled the Sodalicio founder, Luis Figari, and forced out Archbishop Eguren. He then expelled Eguren and nine other founders. Not long after Eguren fell, Prevost began to be accused of abuse coverup in media close to the SCV. The reports alleged that he had failed to deal properly with a case in Chiclayo. The diocese denied the claims, pointing out that Prevost had followed guidelines precisely. Meanwhile, Ugaz and Salinas began receiving death threats. They came to the Vatican last October, where Prevost saw them more than once. He arranged for them to meet Francis, who promised he would act decisively against the Sodalicio, telling Ugaz: “Pecadores sí, corruptos no” (“One thing are sinners; another thing are the corrupt”). In January this year, in one of his final acts, Francis signed a decree closing down the SCV, which took effect in April, shortly before he died. 

At the conclave, the right-wing Spanish group InfoVaticana recirculated the claims against Prevost—claims rejected by the diocese of Chiclayo and by the Doctrine of the Dicastey of Faith in Rome—to try to prevent his election. A day before the conclave, InfoVaticana described him as a “defeated candidate…frustrated because his aspirations to the papacy had crumbled.” The quote has not worn well. 

…….

Leo has already used the freedoms Francis won to make his own decisions about how to dress and where to live. He is much younger than Benedict and Francis were when they were elected; he uses X and WhatsApp; he speaks fluent American English. But he has made clear that he will continue to build the synodal Church of which Francis dreamed, while likely reformulating some of the themes of Francis’s pontificate in more Augustinian terms. He will teach us how to build a celestial city alongside the earthly city governed by the libido dominandi of the technocratic paradigm, AI, nationalism, and war. Knowing that the world will not listen to a divided Church, he asked at his inauguration Mass that we pray for a united Church, a sign of unity and communion, which becomes a leaven for a reconciled world. As he told the journalists, quoting St. Augustine: “We are the times: Such as we are, such are the times.”

The Synodal Pope

Many traditionalists and conservative Catholics have been asking themselves how it could be possible that Cardinals as diverse as the arch-heretics Hollerich, the ultra-orthodox Burke and the so-called ‘centrist’ Timothy Dolan, could all come away from a decisive conclave in complete agreement over the outcome. They all seem both satisfied and confident.

Even the unholy gay priestesses featured in another article on this site like the new guy and they picked up something about the Pope Leo which others, including me, had missed.

Indeed, an outcome which pleases the likes of Bishops Strickland and Fr. James Martin is quite remarkable. Until recent years, the possibility of such an outcome was almost non-existent – barring a mass conversion of dissidents to true Catholicism. This was due to the inherent unity of Catholic doctrine which ensures that a papal candidate who deviates from that doctrine – or upholds it – should be upsetting someone. “For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three (Lk 12: 52),” said Our Lord. This is division, not for its own sake but as a consequence of the inability of truth and error to coexist.

Thanks to the acceleration of revolutionary error under Pope Francis, however, the possibility of a consensus among polarised Catholic groups has presented itself and has seemingly materialised with the election of Pope Leo XIV. The mechanism for the change is one of the long-held goals of Vatican II: what is now known as ‘Synodality’.

Pope Leo at his installation, carrying the hideous ferula topped by the Scorzelli cross, used by his predecessors. See more here.

Synodality

Prevost spoke about Synodality on a number of occasions prior to his election as Pope. For instance, in 2024 he said:

“One of the risks of that is that we miss the presence of the Holy Spirit. That breeze that may go by that says, ‘Yeah you always did it that way, and maybe for six centuries it was wonderful, but maybe it’s time to change. Maybe it’s time to look at things differently.’”

The dissident Cardinal Hollerich explained Prevost’s point of view in his interview with Avenire:

“Pope Leo spoke of a “Synodal Church ” in his first message. Having participated in the work of the Synod, we have a Pontiff who knows synodality, who understands synodality, who dares synodality. There will be no revolution that nobody wants in the Church, but instead an evolution. And that’s the best way to change.”

There we have it: an evolution and not a revolution, according to Hollerich.

He goes on to outline the Hegelian paradigm that is at play here, describing Leo XIV as a synthesis of Bergoglio and Ratzinger before him; a man who has something to offer traditionalists yet something also for radicals and revolutionaries. He adds that “Synodality is inherent in the Church”, confirming the prediction of anti-Catholic extremists prior to the election of Francis who said that “after four years of Francis, nothing will be the same.”

Cardinal Tagle repeated the same prediction about Prevost almost verbatim at a press conference after the conclave. “Now, will the programs be clones or photocopies? The programs may evolve, and they may take different expressions. But there’s no turning back from that.”

Fiducia Supplicans

Speaking specifically on the encyclical, Fiducia Supplicans, which allows blessings for same-sex couples, Hollerich opines that Leo may reinterpret it but that he won’t abolish it. Prevost’s comments from October 2024 see to confirm this.

Cultural differences may be one of the reasons why “each episcopal conference needs to have a certain authority, in terms of saying, ‘how are we going to understand this in the concrete reality in which we’re living,?’” he told a press briefing at the sidelines of the synod.

“The bishops in the episcopal conferences of Africa were basically saying, that here in Africa, our whole cultural reality is very different … it wasn’t rejecting the teaching authority of Rome, it was saying that our cultural situation is such that the application of this document is just not going to work.

“You have to remember there are still places in Africa that apply the death penalty, for example, for people who are living in a homosexual relationship … So, we’re in very different worlds.”

Prevost is not known ever to have rejected or criticised Fiducia Supplicans himself which indicates that he is personally in favour of blessings for same-sex couples. According to the principle of Sunodlaity (which, remember, is not a Catholic principle), bishops are free to apply or not apply FS as they see fit.

Under the new Pope, we should expect to see FS being implemented where a bishop is liberal and being denounced where a bishop is orthodox in the name of ‘Synodality.’

Traditional Latin Mass

Similarly, we should expect the TLM to be widely available in some diocese yet severely limited in others. It doesn’t appear that Prevost is willing to tarnish the image of his predecessor, Francis, in any way. This means that it’s unlikely that Traditiones Custodes will be rescinded – unless this was part of a deal carved out with traditional Cardinals during the conclave in exchange for votes.

Pope Leo’s first Mass was a Novus Ordo in Latin, which is perhaps a metaphor for what is to come: a dressing-up of error in the trappings of tradition. This indicates Prevost has no intention of getting to the heart of the problem, which is the Modernism that has infected the Church thanks to the Council.

An unholy Spirit

If the spirit of Synodality is alive and well in the Vatican, then so, apparently is the spirit of Francis. This may be the most unsettling thing that has come from the new Pope yet:

A Modernist in Trad Clothing

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves – Matthew 7:15.

Some may think that the election of yet another unworthy Cardinal to the Papacy causes perverse delight for writers who routinely expose wrongdoing in the Church. Nothing could be further from the truth! It is actually a source of pain to be counted among the minority who disregards popular opinion in order to defend the rights of God.

It was Christ Himself who warned us to be on the watch for dangerous men who like to appear as one thing, while having intentions that are altogether different. Our Lord even specifically warned that such men will dress the part in order to lead His unsuspecting sheep astray.

This profile of a ravenous wolf perfectly fits the latest Pontiff, Leo XIV, who has chosen to adopt the outward persona of a traditionalist, all the way from his heavily embroidered pallium down to his relic-embedded pectoral cross.

He is gaining favour with Trads, as stories of him offering private Latin Masses are doing the rounds of social media. Those posts are often accompanied by a photograph, shown below, of then-Cardinal Prevost wearing traditional vestments. However, the liturgical event was not a traditional Mass; rather Prevost was simply incensing an image of Our Lady, possibly the miraculous icon at Gennazzo.  [We know it wasn’t a Mass because the altar is covered, and there are no altar cards, vessels or missal.]

Prevost NOT offering a TLM.

So what is underneath the lovely vestments and fluent Latin that should have us so concerned? It is that Prevost is a Modernist, through and through, and that he a stated goal of picking up where Francis left off, steering the Barque of Peter firmly along a course of Synodality.

The Catholic Esquire has done a great job of explaining succinctly the programme of this papacy and how it is in perfect continuity with that of Francis – and of the entire Revolution. [His short (17min) video can be found here.]

In short, Synodality is the name of the game: decentralising the Church in an attempt to obliterate the foundation of Her unchanging doctrinal authority. Now, obviously, this plan can never ultimately succeed, as Christ is that foundation, but the Synodalists have and will continue to inflict great damage on the Church in their attempt.

We should expect to see national bishops’ conferences implementing their own local brand of Catholicism whilst tolerating all manner of error. We can also expect some tinkering with the Novus Ordo liturgy, as Synodalists move along in their efforts to further delegitimise, and one day completely invalidate that form.

The persecution of Traditional Catholics could perhaps appear to soften, but in no way should a return to the widespread traditional practice of the Faith be expected. Should Traditiones Custodes be revoked, then Traditional Catholics must not let down their guard. If a convincing wolf is in charge, then we must not stand near him saying “what big teeth you have!”

As explained in my last article, we also should not expect to see a cleansing of sodomites from the ranks of the hierarchy under this pontificate. The moral chaos and errors are very likely to increase, rather than diminish. And that means an increase of moral chaos in the wider society as well.

What about Ecclesiastical Freemasonry? Will Pope Leo denounce Masonry in the strongest terms, like his namesake, Leo XIII? That is most unlikely. The best that can be hoped for is the reiteration – on paper, at least – of the Church’s longstanding condemnation as was produced by Tucho Fernandez under Bergoglio in November 2023. That ostensible condemnation was more likely aimed at disempowering the Masonic Old Guard in the Curia, led by then-papabile Cardinal Parolin, than at actually dissuading Catholics from becoming Masons. Francis’ Masonic credentials certainly suggest that this was the case.

Speaking of Masons, an intriguing image was posted on a Masonic Instagram account a few days after the death of Bergoglio. There’s no way of knowing what it meant, but the timing was most interesting. It was accompanied by a snippet of Masonic poetry, without any additional commentary. Note the red cuff on the figure of the Pope, as well as the (Rosicrucian-inspired?) equilateral crosses on his vestments.

From a Masonic Instagram account, posted April 26th, 2025. Pope Francis died April 21st and Leo XIV was elected on May 8th.

As with the election of other Popes since the Council, Freemasons have expressed their congratulations to the newest Pontiff. This was the only example that was easily found, but it is early days yet.

Pope Leo XIV welcomed by the Freemasons of Tanzania

The surest confirmation of Pope Leo’s agenda will be his selection of a new Curia, which won’t happen until after his official installation on May 18th. Some more Masonic well-wishing around that time is to also be expected.

So is there reason for us to be disoriented? Or disillusioned …. depressed? Well, no. All of this has to play out before the time of Our Lady’s Triumph.

Since the majority of Catholics, including a series of Popes, has refused to honour the requests of Our Lady at Fatima and elsewhere, another destructive papacy is simply part of the package.

However, we are not powerless in the face of adversity. In fact, there is much we can do to mitigate the effects of another ‘worm-ridden’ papacy. The following Rules of Engagement with the revolutionary forces – both natural and supernatural – may be of assistance:

  • A renewed commitment to daily prayer, especially the Holy Rosary
  • A commitment to a small form of daily penance for Pope Leo XIV, that God will work much good through his pontificate (and even a conversion can’t be ruled out)
  • A commitment to limiting online criticism to the actions of the new pope, while being careful not to demean his office
  • Similarly, great care should be taken always to distinguish between the human element of the Church and Her Divine origin. {For example, as clearly stated by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos: “To use the words of the fathers of Trent, it is certain that the Church “was instructed by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and that all truth was daily taught it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.” Therefore, it is obviously absurd and injurious to propose a certain “restoration and regeneration” for her as though necessary for her safety and growth, as if she could be considered subject to defect or obscuration or other misfortune.“]
  • Asking heaven for the grace to remain on the Ark; to stay within His Church, no matter how bad things get.

PS. It is well-known that Hollywood and the celeb-world are in cahoots with the revolution everywhere – including within the Church.

Does anyone else think this costume worn by Whoopi Goldberg at the recent Met Gala refers to an ecclesiastical wolf in sheep”s clothing? The furry-looking overcoat seems to peel away, revealing a sombre, even militaristic suit beneath. The bottom of the suit is even more surprising, as it is buttoned all the way down, just like a cassock.

To top it off, the brooch on her lapel is in the shape of a key-hole. Food for thought….

Australian Bishops are in the Synodal Way

Even though they missed out on the red hat, three of Australia’s bishops remain happy to carry water for the Synod.

One of them is Shane Mackinlay, bishop of Sandhurst, who is representing the Bishops Conference at the Synod in Rome. According to McKinley, Fiducia Supplicans was a direct result of the Synod. He told a press conference that although the Pope didn’t act synodally by issuing the heretical document, that’s fine by him:

“As with many things Pope Francis has done in the last year, he did not wait for the final document. He has already responded to things that were raised in the discussions and in the final report last year.”

This is despite the Pope stating that he would absolutely not be making a decision on same-sex unions before the second Synod sessions.

According to Mackinlay, “Fiducia supplicans is a significant step forward … and then I think those of us from the West are not so surprised that in some other parts of the world it is received differently and has a different kind of priority.”

Yes, it is received differently because ‘in some parts of the world’ the Bishops are actually Catholic! Mackinlay is so popular in Rome that he was elected for the second time as the Oceania representative for the Commission for the Final Document of the Synod – quite the appointment.

Another Synod apparatchik is Archbishop Timothy Costelloe, no stranger to these pages. As Archbishop of Perth and president of the Australian Catholic Bishops’ Conference, Costelloe is completely onboard with the Synod’s agenda of re-imagining Catholicism. He couldn’t hide his enthusiasm for heterodox novelty when he told Vatican News that it was great to have priests, women, and lay people usurping to role of the Bishops by being given full voting rights instead of having a ‘back row seat’.

“It shows us the equality and unity of all. Unity is communion of mind and heart, of spirit and action, and of faith at the service of the Church’s evangelising mission.”

This ‘unity’ is nowhere to be found either at the Synod or outside of it, of course. The persecution of traditional Catholics and the clamouring voices of dissenters from the Faith are evidence of that.

Archbishop Costelloe also explained that the so-called ‘conversation in the spirit’ “serves to free oneself from prejudices. The Synod must convert us from a competitive approach to a spirit of listening because in this way it will be of real and effective help to the Pope.”

He posed a few more rhetorical questions: “Should the Synod office be restructured in favour of the local Churches? If so, how? And could the reports become documents to be published?”

Now, don’t worry too much if you don’t have the answer to these questions. Something tells me that the Synod Fathers (and Mothers) already have the answers – pencilled in from Day 1.

The third Australian Synod mouthpiece is Anthony Randazzo, Bishop of Broken Bay diocese, who seems to have mastered the art of verbally giving with one hand while taking with the other.

One the one hand, Randazzo criticises those who are ‘obsessed’ by the issue of women’s ordination. But look at the reasons he gives as objections to it:

“Those issues become all-consuming and focusing for people, to the point that they then become an imposition on people who sometimes struggle simply to feed their families, to survive the rising sea levels, or the dangerous journeys across wild oceans to resettle in new lands.”

The Catholic Diocese of Broken Bay website reports that while Randazzo has ‘no problem with the topic of women’s ordination being discussed and studied at the Synod’, he thinks it should be poor women and not wealthy, well-educated ones who call for it. What? So now the disobedient notion of ordaining women is only wrong when it is attached to white privilege?

Maybe someone needs to tell His Grace that the Amazonian women are way ahead of the curve. They are already receiving a para-liturgical blessing from their Cardinal before beginning their ‘ministry’ of distributing the Sacraments.

How anyone can think this matter was not laid to rest in the past with an infallible statement is beyond me.

Pope’s ‘Deadly Sins’ are Straight from the Masonic Playbook

It’s almost Synod time again: the second session is only weeks away, and the Vatican propaganda machine is letting us know what to expect. As usual, the agenda is full of Masonic mumbo-jumbo which will unfortunately be responsible for aiding and abetting many of the faithful on their path to Hell.

The Synod will begin with a ‘penitential liturgy’ which will include testimonies from three people (it is unclear whether or not these people are Catholic) and which will be geared towards young people. The first speaker is to be a victim of abuse; the second a victim of war and the third is a victim of ‘indifference to migrants’. This will be followed by a sort of general confession of ‘sins’ in which we have all apparently taken part.

Here are the sins – there are notably EIGHT of them: (is some kind of one-upmanship at play here?)

  1. sins against peace
  2. sins against creation
  3. sins against Indigenous populations and migrants
  4. sins of abuse
  5. sins against women, family and youth
  6. the sin of ‘using doctrine as a stone to be hurled’
  7. sins against poverty
  8. sins against synodality – the lack of listening and communion.

The inclusion of ‘sins against synodality’ continues to make the Church into a laughing-stock. Any respect She had left in the eyes of the world after decades of abuse scandals and cringey aggioramento has dissolved under the watch of Pope Bergoglio.

As can be seen, the greatest human rights abuse of all time, abortion, is not included – even though Bergoglio has said it is ‘just as bad‘ as sins against migrants. Of course, Bergoglio is no stranger to hypocrisy; even as he decries sins of abuse, he continues to harbour sex offenders within the very heart of the Church and to gaslight the faithful as an abusive father of the very lowest kind.

This information came from a press conference, and according to the Secretary-General of the Synod, Cardinal Mario Gresch, the Catholic Church is in a ‘dynamic of conversion.’ (Pretty accurate if he means conversion from the True Church to the Ape of the Church.)

In a specious snippet of predictive programming, Gresch reminded the world that the Pope has said, ” the main protagonist of the Synod is the Holy Spirit.” Easy to claim, not so easy to prove.

The relator-general of the synod, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, told the Vatical press conference that the number of official non-Catholic attendees will increase due to ‘the great interest that the sister churches’ have in the Synod. Who exactly are these ‘sister churches’? How is it possible for the Catholic Church, one True Church, to have ‘Sisters”? Does he not mean heretical churches? Sects? Idolators?

Additionally, it was announced that the Synod will be attended by two bishops from China; this is presumably an attempt to legitimise the disastrous Sino-Vatican deal.

The Synod will be preceded by a two-day retreat with the sodo-cleric, Timothy Radcliffe and Benedictine Mother Ignazia Angelini. Mother Angelini’s community is part of the worldwide Subiaco Cassinese Congregation. The Australian monastery of this Congregation is at New Norcia in Western Australia and is a notorious haunt for LGBTI Catholics. As can be seen in the image below, Mother Angelini has a link with Bergoglio’s patrons, the St. Gallen Mafia.

Here is Mother Angelini’s community with the late Cardinal Martini – founding member of the St. Gallen Mafia.

The retreat begins on October 1st and the Synod proper begins on October 3rd, which according to this occult ritual calendar, are Satanic high-days. Coincidence? I think not.

Another Masonic-inspired event during the Synod will be the ecumenical prayer-meeting on October 11th (the 62nd anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council.) It looks as though everything is gearing up for another diabolical Assisi event. The Synod will finish at the end of October, just as occultists are preparing for their great feast of Halloween.

In order to make a direct connection between the Synod and Freemasonry, one need look no further than the Alta Vendita – that Masonic blueprint set down around 150 years ago and which was published for the faithful by Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII.

In planning the infiltration of the Catholic Church (for that is the precise strategy found in the Alta Vendita) the document tells Masonic adherents to “Leave old people and those of a mature age aside; go to the youth, and if it is possible, even to the children… ” This is EXACTLY what Bergoglio and his cronies have said they are planning for the Synod – and what they have in fact been up to for years.

The Masons knew that by gradually descralizing the culture, they would eventually end up with a Pope “according to their needs”; one who would be “more or less imbued with the [revolutionary] Italian and humanitarian principles that we are going to begin to put into circulation…”

The Alta Vendita advises “You wish to establish the reign of the chosen ones on the throne of the prostitute of Babylon; let the clergy march under your standard, always believing that they are marching under the banner of the Apostolic keys…. lay your snares …. in the sacristies, the seminaries and the monasteries rather than at the bottom of the sea…”

Is this not precisely what we see with the upcoming Synod: homosexualist leaders who are infecting seminaries and monasteries with their perverse doctrines; attempts at revising the education of priests; and weak bishops who believe they are promoting the rights of God even as they remain silent in the face of apostasy?

Is Cardinal Gresch’s “dynamic of conversion” anything other that the total revolution called for by the authors of the Alta Vendita?

Prophecy is being fulfilled before our very eyes. The reigning Pontiff is proceeding to play his part in the globalist coup as warned by Our Lady at La Salette:

All the civil governments will have one and the same plan, which will be to abolish and do away with every religious principle, to make way for materialism, atheism, spiritualism and vice of all kinds.

Our Lady of La Salette, pray for us!

SOURCES: https://www.usccb.org/news/2024/second-synod-session-open-penitential-liturgy. https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2024-09/synod-presentation-2nd-session-grech-hollerich-ruffini.html. Timothy A. Gonsalves, CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0, via Wikimedia Commons