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….

The Sanctity of the Church by Romano Amerio

taken from Iota Unum, Chapter VI (Click here to purchase)

#58. Sanctity of the Church. An Apologetical Principal.

That the Church is holy is a dogma of the Faith, included in the creed, but the theological definition of that holiness is a difficult business. We are not here concerned with canonized holiness, which has indeed varied in style with the centuries: the holiness of Emperor Henry II is markedly different to that of St. John Bosco, as is that of St. Joan of Arc from that of St. Therese of Lisieux. There is furthermore a gap between the heroic virtue of the canonized saint, and the holiness inherent in anybody who is merely in state of grace.

In the Summa Theologica, III,q.8,a.3 ad secundum, and in the Catechism of the Council of Trent, in the section on the creed, it is explained how the sins of the baptized do not prejudice the holiness of the Church, but this remains, nonetheless a complex notion which only a rigorous distinction can render clear. A definite distinction must be drawn between the natural element, and the supernatural element which produces the new creature, between the subjective and the objective element; between the historical element and the suprahistorical element which operates within it.

Firstly, the Church is holy because it is the body which has the God-Man as its head. In union with that head it becomes itself theandric (Relating to, or existing by, the union of divine and human operation in Christ): no profane body can be conceived as living in union with a holy head. Secondly, it is objectively holy because it possesses the Eucharist which is in its very essence the Sacred and the Sanctifier: all the Sacraments derive from the Eucharist. Thirdly, it is holy because it contains revealed truth in an indefectible and infallible way. The fundamental principle of Catholic apologetics must be located here: the Church cannot display, throughout its history, an uninterrupted sequence of activity in perfect conformity with the requirements of the Gospel, but it can point to an uninterrupted teaching of the truth: the holiness of the Church is to be located in the latter not the former.

It follows from this that those who belong to the Church will find themselves preaching a doctrine that is better than their own deeds. No man can preach himself, beset by weakness and failure; he can only re-preach the doctrine taught by the God-Man, or better, preach the person of the God-Man Himself. Thus, truth too is a constituent element in the holiness of the Church, and is forever attached to the Word and forever at odds with corruption, including one’s own.

The holiness of the Church is revealed in what could be called a subjective way in the holiness of its members, that is, in all those that live in grace as vital members of the mystical body. It appears in an obvious and outstanding way in its canonised members, whom grace and their own activity have pushed onwards to the highest levels of virtue. This holiness did not fail, be it noted once again, even in the periods of the greatest corruption of society and among the clergy; an age when the papacy was depraved by pagan influences saw the flourishing of Catherine of Bologna (+1464), Bernadino of Feltre (+1494), Catherine dei Fieschi (+1503), Francis of Paola (+1507), Jeanne de Valois (+1503) as well as many reformers such as Girolamo Savonarola (+1498).

Considerations and facts of this sort, however, do not clear the field of all objections. Paul VI conceded to the Church’s critics the fact that “the history of the Church has many long pages that are not all edifying” but he did not distinguish clearly enough between the objective holiness of the Church and the subjective holiness of its members. In another address, he put it in these terms: “The Church ought to be holy and good, it ought to be as Christ intended and designed it to be and we sometimes see that it is not worthy of the title.”

It would seem that the Pope is turning an objective note of the Church into a subjective one. It is indeed true that Christians ought to be holy, and they are inasmuch as they live in a state of grace, but the Church is holy. It is not Christians that make the Church holy, but the Church that makes them holy. It is also true that the biblical affirmation of the irreproachable holiness of the Church non habentem maculam aut rugam (Having neither spot nor wrinkle: Ephesians 5:27) is applicable to the Church in time only in an initial and partial way, despite the fact that it is indeed holy. All the Fathers take that flawlessness as connected with the final eschatological purification rather than with the Church’s pilgrim state in time.