Trad Inc’s Pyrrhic Victory

Be silent no more! Cry out with one hundred thousand tongues. I see that, because of this silence, the world is in ruins, the Spouse of Christ has grown pale; the color is taken from her face because her blood has been sucked out, that is the blood of Christ, which is given as a free gift and not by right – St. Catherine of Siena

In the 3rd century BC, King Pyrrhus of Greece went to war against the Romans. Initially, his forces were victorious, but the casualties they sustained were so high that Pyrrhus was unable to win a more decisive later battle. From this historical failure is derived the term, Pyrrhic victory, which has come to mean a victory which is hollow: one which loses more than it gains.

Two thousand years later, Italy is again the scene of a Pyrrhic victory; mainstream traditionalist media is claiming a triumph while also sustaining great losses, both of credibility and of personal integrity.

A deal with the devil

The Tridentine Mass of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage held in St. Peter’s Basilica was hailed by some as the sign that Pope Leo is welcoming tradition into the Vatican. It was a product of the “Zip It” policy which promised to “see no evil” in return for access (for some) to the Latin Mass.

With a huge crowd of faithful Catholics and a number of high-ranking prelates in attendance, the liturgy was accompanied by an exorcism prayer offered by Cardinal Ernest Simoni. Cardinal Simoni, aged 97, had been tortured and imprisoned for 28 years in Albania for refusing to renounce his faith.

Without casting shade on the piety of the Cardinal, it must be asked whether a single exorcism prayer could be sufficient to cleanse St. Peter’s from the multitude of abuses she has endured over the past decade. Surely a solemn reconsecration would be necessary before traditionalists could dare to offer Mass inside St. Peter’s walls?

The Vatican’s liaison was Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, who was also in attendance on the day. Zuppi has been assisting at traditional liturgies around Rome for a number of years, one example being the Pontifical Mass he offered for Laetare Sunday with the FSSP in 2014.

Yet, Zuppi is so closely aligned with the promotion of sodomy that his presence at these Masses should be a source of scandal to traditional Catholics.

The pilgrimage of sodomites which entered the Basilica last month, organised with the explicit support of Cardinal Zuppi, was only the latest in a series of his sodomy-related scandals.

Read the rest at Pax Orbis

Trad. Inc. & the Art of War

It seems ironic that the same voices that condemn collegiality among the bishops are insisting traditionalist Catholics unite under a milquetoast banner of love, in an effort to secure their Latin Masses. This tactic is flawed and will lead, in some cases, to the most tragic of consequences that can befall a Christian: the loss of his eternal soul.

Much of the current appeal to unity is based in emotion and not reason; there is little substance in the arguments which are often ad hominem (“You’re all sedes!” or “You hide behind your avatars!”) or straw men (“You say the Mass doesn’t matter!”)

Yet the most obvious weakness is the appeal to an obsolete tactic: that of tolerance in the face of an extremely devious enemy. While it may be argued that it was this approach which led to the widespread availability of the traditional Latin Mass under Pope Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum (I would posit that it did not), relying on previously-used tactics for their own sake is a great weakness for anyone engaged in a war.

The ancient military strategist, Sun Tzu, set out his approach to defeating an enemy in his treatise, The Art of War and warned against re-using a previous tactic because it worked in the past.

His advice to military commenders has been relied upon for centuries. He wrote:

Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances.

Military tactics are like unto water; for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.

He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain.

Sun Tzu – On the Art of War, #28-31

Reassess Tactics

Sun Tzu wrote these words more than 2500 years ago and they still ring true. “Let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances.” Applying this to the current crisis in the Church, we could say that during the pontificate of Pope Francis, many conservative, but Modernist prelates began to wake up to the fact that there was, in fact, a crisis and that Bergoglio was not its cause, but merely its symptom. That process, sometimes slow but at other times more rapid, of realising that something devastating happened at the Second Vatican Council was evident, as these good men began to piece together the pattern of revolutionary infiltration and indoctrination which led the Church to the sad state in which She finds Herself today.

Sun Tzu

Now that we have another Pope spouting the same heresies and errors, albeit in a more smooth and sophisticated manner, it is simply not reasonable to give the conservative Novus Ordo prelates ane more time, allowing them to gradually come to the conclusion that is evident to those with eyes to see: this is the time to declare strongly, clearly and without equivocation, the fundamental teachings of the Catholic Church.

This is the time to boldly draw attention to the errors being taught by Pope Prevost and his Synodal mouthpieces with calm and simplicity.

Avoid the strong

Sun Tzu recommended that strategists “avoid what is strong and strike at what is weak.” In the case at hand, what is “strong” is the Pope’s popularity, a perceived belief that the Church is back on track and, it must be said, the universal relief that Pope Francis is dead. Thus in order to avoid “what is strong”, conservative prelates should be maintaining the state of high alert which existed under Bergoglio, exposing the reality that the Church is still in grave danger, that souls are threatened and that aesthetics do not compensate for heterdox teaching.

This obligation extends to those traditionalist commentators who, having accepted the strategy of appeasement as laid out by Cardinal Burke, are now refusing to call out Pope Leo for his errors and have taken to chastising those who do have the fortitude to expose him.

When we add our approval of the new Pope’s actions and words to that already given by the mainstream Church and the world at large, we only magnify the errors and soothe guilty consciences, putting souls at risk of eternal damnation.

Attack the weakness

The tactic of attacking an opponent’s weakness is so obvious that it should require no explanation, yet this is precisely what the group we have come to know as “Trad. Inc.” has decided to avoid doing.

The great weakness of Pope Prevost is that he is literally speaking heresy. When he says that “we have to change attitudes before we even think about changing what the Church says about any given question”, this needs to be called out as heresy.

When he says that it is “highly unlikely” rather than impossible, that doctrine on sexuality will change, this needs to be called out as heresy.

No amount of incense, lace or Latin can make up for errors like these. (For an excellent appraisal of the Pope’s disastrous Crux interview, see this video by The Catholic Esquire.)

Swallowing the Bait

Many are overjoyed that Cardinal Burke is to offer a Latin Mass in St. Peter’s during the upcoming Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage. We are told that this is a sign that God has not abandoned His Church (But who says that He has? The neo-counter-revolutionaries certainly do not.) This permission is somehow seen as a gift, an olive branch being held out to traditionalists by the new Pope, as a sign of his good will.

But what has Sun Tzu to say about such a thing? He suggests caution unless the intentions of the enemy are known.

We cannot enter into alliances until we are acquainted with the designs of our neighbours. Do not swallow bait offered by the enemy.

    Sun Tzu – On the Art of War, #32-33

    The permission given for the Latin Mass does indeed have the appearance of bait intended to harm the traditionalist movement and it is not only “anonymous podcasters” suggesting there is a problem. Respected priests like Fr. Isaac Mary Relyea and Fr. Murr have also expressed their disappointment and fears about the Mass. Fr. Murr even said that St. Peter’s needs to be re-consecrated due to the Pachamama incident, this need being compounded by the more recent appearance of a sodomite pilgrimage group within its walls. (Alas, I have lost the reference video for this comment by Fr. Murr. The link will be added when I track it down.)

    Pope Francis with the Pachamama idol in St. Peter’s Basilica

    The ancient Roman poet, Virgil, had his own warning for cases like this one: “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts”. This was a reference to the Trojan Horse, a Grecian gift to the ancient city of Troy, which was filled with soldiers who then infiltrated and utterly destroyed the city and its inhabitants.

    It’s worth pointing out that the term, “Greek love”, was used as a euphemism for sodomy by Classical scholars, which brings us back to one of the major themes of this pontificate and a red flag for anyone wishing to make peace with it: homosexuality. Pope Leo’s appointments and those of Pope Francis which Prevost has left in place are an ongoing source of scandal to the faithful.

    St. Paul points out exactly what should be our attitude to sodomites and those who tolerate them or condone their sin:

    “For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? (2 Cor 6: 14-16)

    Scripture would seem to preclude offering Mass in a Church which has been defiled by pagan worship and a depraved, sacrilegious pilgrimage. It only adds to the scandal for Cardinal Burke and the Summorum Pontificum organisers to offer a TLM under such circumstances, yet we are told this is a sign that we are “winning”.

    Ignorance of the enemy leads to a defeat

    Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

    Sun Tzu – On the Art of War, #34

    There is no question that, at some point in the future, the Church will rise again and our enemies will be thwarted. It shows a lack of faith in Our Lady’s promise of Her Triumph to believe otherwise. Yet until that day comes, the Church Militant will continue to suffer and will, most probably, experience an escalation in suffering and persecution, which only by the grace of God, we will be able to endure. This could be thought of the way that Catholics “know themselves.”

    To say that the rallying of Traditionalist troops around a well-meaning, but Modernist, prelate like Cardinal Burke is a sign of the coming Restoration is not only delusional, but it is dangerous. Failing to point out Leo’s errors endangers souls – perhaps not the souls of Traditionalists who are better catechised, but the souls of those countless Novus Ordo catholics – the “normies”, who trust in the pope and uncritically accept what he teaches.

    Narcissistic revolutionaries thrive on the tolerance produced by misplaced charity. The silence of Trad. Inc. is a fruit of “knowing oneself but not knowing the enemy.” According to the philosophy of Sun Tzu, such a situation leads to a defeat for every victory.

    It may well be that those aligned with Burke will see their Masses protected or restored, but the price of this “victory” could be enormous. Doubtful Catholics who once had the opportunity to be challenged by the Resistance movement, who were provoked to investigate Vatican II and its errors and to question mainstream Catholic narratives, are now being confirmed in their sin by the silence of Trad. Inc.

    It is not only sodomites who are at risk of this: when we consider that most Catholics today live in habitual mortal sin via the use of contraception, failing to confess honestly, making sacrilegious Communions, denying dogma such as the Real Presence and extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it offends against charity to allow them to believe that doctrine can change.

    Silence is tantamount to saying “to hell with the rest of the Catholic world as long as we have our Masses.” That is the defeat which will be the cost of any perceived victory: a rejection of supernatural charity which will lead to the widespread loss of souls.


    The Art of War – free download

    Zipping it – for the Greater Good

    Ah, the Greater Good.

    It’s a little like the Golden Rule (Those who have the Gold Make the Rules) except that in this case, those who think they are greater get to decide what is good.

    For when traditional Catholic commentators were told to “zip it” rather than criticise the current papal aberrations, the “good ” involved was not the good of the Church nor was it the salvation of souls. Rather, the apparent “good”, decided by the “greater” ones, was their attempt to secure for themselves their Latin Masses. This, it seems, would be in return for a very small fee: keeping quiet about Leo and his papacy’s remarkable similarity to that of Bergoglio.

    The Greater Good must be contrasted with the Common Good, which is actually the Catholic position.

    Whereas the Common Good must take the needs of everyone into account, the Greater Good always involves the sacrifice of some for the sake of the whole. This principle is never more consequential than in the matter of salvation, where every individual’s soul needs to be considered.

    For to remain silent when Pope Leo unashamedly continues the agenda of Bergoglio and his conciliar and post-conciliar predecessors does put souls at risk – of despair, of error and of deception.

    One is reminded of the words of Our Lady of Buen Suceso of the Purification at Quito, Ecuador, where she said several times that ” that one who should speak will fall silent”.

    If “the one”, presumably the Pope, falls silent then it is not surprising that other Catholics who should speak out would also follow suit. That is, those traditional Catholic commentators who were so quick to point out Bergoglio’s errors and who did so much good in alerting the faithful during his reign, fell silent when it came to Prevost.

    Thankfully, it does appear that the ‘zip it” crowd already have egg on their faces and that some, at least, have begun to rethink their ill-fated strategy.

    One commentator, notorious for his self-promotion, has already backtracked somewhat. This is the same man who made a video prior to the conclave in which he said that the election of Prevost would be the worst possible scenario for the Church. After the conclave, he scrubbed that video and refused to call our Pope Leo’s errors. (Thanks to Novus Ordo Watch, the original video can be found here.)

    It should be mentioned that this backtracking coincided with the release of his latest book which he unashamedly promoted during his first foray into criticism of the new Pope. Perhaps he realised that the book’s target audience included those Catholics who are feeling dazed and confused by the traditionalists’ Zip-It policy.

    Another Zip-it proponent has also begun to loosen his lips to allow some initial criticism of the shameful desecration of St. Peter’s during the James Martin crowd’s pilgrimage. Yet another has put out a strident blogpost, explaining that this LGBT pilgrimage crossed his bright line, allowing criticism to spring forth from his keyboard. We are assured that his wait-and-see policy was born, ever so ‘umbly, out of charity alone.

    Don’t forget, these are the men who until now, gave Leo a pass when the red flags first began flying. They remained quiet when footage emerged of a talk he gave, praising the evil Cardinal Bernadin. Likewise, when Leo de facto canonised Bergoglio, the most prominent traditionalist commentators had nothing to say. The pagan Mass for Creation? Silence. Scandalous appointments? Crickets.

    If the Great Unzipping really has taken place, it will be interesting to see what the future holds for the likes of Chris Jackson, Steven Kokx and The Catholic Esquire. They have done the heavy lifting during this wait-and-see phase of the new papacy, unflinchingly calling it as they have seen it, rather than kowtowing to the compromise directive issued, as has become all too clear, from the doyen of Trad-dom, Cardinal Burke.

    For it is difficult to draw any other conclusion than this: that Burke was the middle-man in a mutually beneficial transaction between wealthy traditionalists and Modernist Rome.

    Consider: a group of rich, traditionalist Catholics pulled their purse-strings closed under Bergoglio, thereby making a significant impact on the Vatican’s bottom line. Remember, Rome is in a quite desperate financial situation these days.

    Those same wealthy Catholics had been suffering under Bergoglio. His outrageous behaviour caused them a loss of prestige and influence as they were no longer ‘in’ with the papacy, in the same way they had been under John Paul II and Benedict XVI.

    In order to restore their reputations as the Catholic elite, it would be necessary to find a new Pope who matched their sensibilities – of aesthetics, anyway. Doctrine doesn’t matter when one has a private chapel with any number of cancelled priests willing to provide bespoke Latin Masses.

    And so a deal was struck: in return for the flow of money to Rome, the mild-mannered Prevost would have to be elected. He looked the part and fluently spoke the correct languages: English and Latin. It would fall to Cardinal Burke to do the lobbying prior to the conclave.

    If all this seems a bit far-fetched, it should be remembered that Steve Bannon said from the beginning that the conclave was “rigged”.

    Additionally, some months ago, Anthony Stine, on Return to Tradition, cited an article from a big legacy media outlet in the US, which revealed that a secret meeting took place in Rome prior to the conclave. It was apparently attended by wealthy Italian and American Catholics who promised to send money to the Vatican if an American was elected Pope.

    Remember also that the Italian news outlet, Corriere della Sera, confidently reported that Prevost was seen entering Cardinal Burke’s apartment on April 30 for ‘a top-secret summit’, even though this was strenuously denied by reliable reporters like Diane Montagna and Ed Pentin.

    From whom is it likely that Montagna and Pentin receive their Vatican-insider information? Could it be from Cardinal Burke himself? Is it possible that the journalists were set up – no doubt for the Greater Good?

    From where did Montagna receive the results of the bishops survey that shows Bergoglio had lied about the Latin Mass being unpopular with the hierarchy? Could those documents not have been leaked by Cardinal Burke himself?

    Why did they not come out during Bergoglio’s reign? It was certainly possible to have arranged it.

    Was it because such a revelation would have only hardened Bergoglio’s heart against the traditional Mass? Leaked under Prevost, however, the latter would potentially have the opportunity to play the Good Guy and rescind Traditiones Custodes, or at least, not bother to see it enforced.

    Where does the so-called Trad Inc. fit into the picture? Well, if they want their Masses secured, and hopefully Traditiones Custodes rescinded, they would have to toe the line. No more criticism of Rome, no more bad press for the Pope. The rest of Christendom would then have to take its chances with the mish-mash of heresy, sodo-liturgies and Modernism going on outside the small enclaves of tradition. This would appease the Catholic elite by making the papacy look reasonable once more and start the coffers flowing to Rome.

    Rome would have its income restored; the wealthy Catholics would have their prestige restored; Trad Inc. would have its Masses restored. At least, that was the plan, with Cardinal Burke as the lynch-pin. He was to be truly cardinalis. (Latin for ‘pivotal’).

    There were two sticking points in this plot – other than whatever small murmurings came from the consciences of those involved. One is the yearning for truth that exists in the soul of every person of good will; the other is the fact that silence in the face of outrage has a limit.

    Many traditional Catholics knew that this silence was unnatural and so sought their news from the few honest reporters, like those mentioned above. And this website, although very small, should be included among those who has tried to expose Pope Leo’s agenda from Day 1. (eg here.)

    Now that Trad Inc’s floodgates of histrionics appear ready to open, releasing a barrage of complaints against Pope Leo onto the faithful, we should all be cautious as we begin again to consume their commentary. For they abandoned faithful Catholics in a time of need, no less than the shepherds whom they like to so roundly denounce as having abandoned the faithful.

    The public’s trust in Trad. Inc. has been severely eroded and without a clear apology, the damage may be irreparable.

    Our Lady, Seat of Wisdom, pray for us.

    Prevost: Making Modernism Palatable

    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.

    Perhaps Leo’s papacy can be summed up in the image of Luce, which remains omnipresent throughout the Eternal City.

    What appears to be Catholic, and even quaintly so, is in reality something sinister and dangerous to souls.

    Like Luce, the Jubilee mascot with ties to the occult, and which was created by an artist who is a promoter of LGBTI rights (and a sex-toy vendor), the Vatican may seem newly orthodox, returning to tradition and appealing to young people.

    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.

    The Alta Vendita

    To aid in the distribution of this valuable document, I’ve published it below as a downloadable file. The following is taken from the booklet’s frontispiece:

    This little bombshell exposes the truth about the once secret papers of the Alta Vendita, which lay out a Masonic blueprint for the subversion of the Catholic Church. The booklet quotes the actual Alta Vendita document, examines how far the Masonic plan has succeeded, cites Papal denunciations of Freemasonry and gives advice on how Catholics should respond to this grave spiritual danger.

    We are making this booklet available to as many people as possible and hope to distribute it world-wide. The issue is the salvation of souls and peace in the world.

    Published at the request of John Vennari by The Fatima Center.

    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.”