A True Peace Among Men Can Never Be Established or Maintained Without Catholicism

Much has been made about the January 9, 2026, address that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV delivered to the diplomatic corps accredited to the Holy See in its conciliar captivity as the currently presiding head of the conciliar sect denounced abortion, euthanasia, surrogacy, and even denounced an Orwellian tendency to suppress beliefs contrary to what is considered to be “accepted” by the elites in many Western countries.

None of this doth a true pope make as even some evangelical Protestants and Orthodox Jews could make the same comments about the prevailing moral evils of the day.

One of the reasons I fooled myself so long into thinking that Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II was going to “restore” right order in the Catholic Church was because he rarely missed an opportunity to condemn both contraception and surgical baby-killing as well as expressing is outrage that sodomites had organized a “pride” march in Rome even though he himself had made possible this outrage by the conciliar Vatican’s concordat with the Republic of Italy in 1983 that removed Rome’s civil status as a holy city:

Pope John Paul II expressed ''bitterness'' today about a gay pride festival held in Rome during this Roman Catholic Holy Year, saying that the event, which ends today, was an affront to the church and the ''Christian values'' of the Italian capital.

''In the name of the church of Rome, I cannot not express bitterness for the affront to the Grand Jubilee of the year 2000 and for the offense to the Christian values of a city that is so dear to the hearts of Catholics across the world,'' the pope said in a Sunday message delivered from a balcony over St. Peter's Square.

For months, church officials lobbied to cancel the festival, but today was the first time the pope personally addressed the issue. That he did so even after the most contested part of the program, Saturday's gay pride parade, was over was a sign of how strongly he feels about an issue that still divides many Catholics.

So was the fact that he spoke out right after holding a special Jubilee Mass for inmates at a Rome prison, effectively eclipsing the appeal he made there for governments around the world to reduce sentences for prisoners during the Holy Year. (John Paul II Declares His Bitterness over Sodomite Event.nytimes.com/2000/07/10/world/pope-declares-his-bitterness-over-gay-event.html.)

Lost on Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II was the simple fact that the heresies of “religious liberty” and “separation of church and state” that he embraced so fervently and propagated so willingly were responsible for letting loose the forces that had become so emboldened by the last year of the Twentieth Century, the year 2000, as to hold a “festival” of sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance near the Eternal City, which, thanks to Wojtyla/John Paul II, lost its status as a holy city in the Lateran Concordat of 1983:

In the light of political and social changes which have occurred in Italy over the last decades and developments promoted by the Church since the Second Vatican Council;

Bearing in mind the principles sanctioned in the Constitution by the Italian Republic and, on behalf of the Holy See, the declarations of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council on religious freedom and relations between the Church and the government, including the new codification of Canon Law;

Considering furthermore that, in accordance with Article 7, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Italian Republic, the relations between the State and the Catholic Church are regulated by the Lateran Pacts, which, moreover, can by modified by mutual consent by both Parties without having recourse to any process of constitutional revision;

[The Parties] have recognised the opportunity to agree on the following mutually agreed amendments to the Lateran Concordat:. . . . (Modifications to the Lateran Concordat (1984) : text)

Upon the signing of the Accord which modifies the Lateran Concordat, the Holy See and the Republic of Italy, desirous of ensuring with fitting precision the application of the Lateran treaties and the agreed modifications, and of avoiding any difficulties of interpretation, declare with mutual interest:

1.  With Reference to Article 1

The principle, normally stated in Lateran treaties, that the Catholic religion is the sole religion of the Italian state is no longer in force. (Supplement to Modifications to the Lateran Concordat (1984) : text)

Obviously, we can see just how well much influence the conciliar "popes" have had in Italian politics as baby-killing has been permitted under cover of the civil law and has rank pornography is displayed on Roman billboards as part of the "fruit," shall we say, of the soon-to-be "canonized" Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II's 1984 Concordat between the State of Vatican City and the Republic of Italy:

ROME, Aug. 3— The Italian Senate today approved a new concordat with the Vatican that will end Roman Catholicism's status as the state religion of Italy and that officially guarantees freedom of religion for non- Catholics.

The new concordat, which will replace one that has been in effect since 1929, will go before the Chamber of Deputies for final approval in September.

It easily cleared the Senate today after a two-day debate.

The concordat, which was drafted by a joint church-state commission, was signed by the Government and the Vatican in February, but the commission was given six months to work out final details.

The concordat is the formal realization of an article in Italy's 1948 Constitution on religious liberty and a revision of the Lateran Pacts signed in 1929 by Mussolini and Pope Pius XI.

Under the new accord, religious education in schools will now be optional. Rome will lose its status as a ''holy city,'' a role that had allowed the church to ban plays, books and films considered offensive to the church. (New Concordat With Vatican Is Approved by Italian Senate.)

Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II thus helped to complete the Masonic overthrow of the Papal States by removing the concession that Pope Pius XI had won from Benito Mussolini in the 1929 Lateran Concordat that established the sovereign State of Vatican City, thus ending what was a sixty-year virtual imprisonment of popes in the Vatican and Castel Gandolfo. Pornography, filth, and degradation abound in Rome now as a result of the 1984 Lateran Concordat. Yes, such is the stuff of conciliar "heroic sanctity."

An occasional word of truth about Faith and Morals or even about events in the secular world does make one who defects from the Holy Faith in one thing, no less many things, a member of the Catholic Church.

Saint Augustine of Hippo, whom Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV quoted extensively in his address to diplomats five days ago, made it very clear that to defect from the Faith in one thing is defect from It in Its entirety:

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1986.)

In completely with each of his six predecessors in the conciliar seat of apostasy and betrayal. Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV clearly rejects the following words of Pope Leo XIII quoted just above:

On the one hand, therefore, it is necessary that the mission of teaching whatever Christ had taught should remain perpetual and immutable, and on the other that the duty of accepting and professing all their doctrine should likewise be perpetual and immutable. (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1986.)

It with this preface in mind that I going provide a brief commentary on several passages of the currently presiding universal face of apostasy’s address to the Vatican diplomatic corps on Friday, January 9, 2026:

During the past year, having accepted the invitation given to Pope Francis, I had the joy of visiting Türkiye and Lebanon. I am grateful to the Authorities of both countries for their welcome.  In İznik, Türkiye, together with the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and representatives of other Christian denominations, I commemorated the 1700^th anniversary of the first Ecumenical Council.  This was an important opportunity for renewing our commitment to the journey towards the full visible unity of all Christians. In Lebanon, I met a people who, despite their difficulties, are full of faith and enthusiasm. There, I sensed the hope of young people who aspire to build a more just and cohesive society, and to strengthen the bond of cultures and religions that makes the Land of the Cedars unique in the world. (To members of the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See, 9 January 2026.)

Comment Number One:

Yet another denial of the unicity of the Catholic Church.

Even before Pope Leo XIII issued Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 29, 1894, wherein he invited the Orthodox to return to the Catholic Church unconditionally as well as exhorting Protestants to return, Pope Pius IX issued Ad Orientales, whose text is not available in English, in 1848 to Eastern Catholics and the Orthodox, begging the latter to return to the only source of Christian unity, the Catholic Church.

Yet it is that the likes of the conciliar “popes,” including Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, have been “searching” for a “unity” that exists solely within the bosom of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Not only that, of course but men like Prevost/Leo keep boasting about the fact that they continue this “search” even though Pope Pius XI specifically warned about the dangers of obstinate wrangling concerning matters of irreformable doctrine:

Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors. Did not the ancestors of those who are now entangled in the errors of Photius and the reformers, obey the Bishop of Rome, the chief shepherd of souls? Alas their children left the home of their fathers, but it did not fall to the ground and perish for ever, for it was supported by God. Let them therefore return to their common Father, who, forgetting the insults previously heaped on the Apostolic See, will receive them in the most loving fashion. For if, as they continually state, they long to be united with Us and ours, why do they not hasten to enter the Church, "the Mother and mistress of all Christ's faithful"? Let them hear Lactantius crying out: "The Catholic Church is alone in keeping the true worship. This is the fount of truth, this the house of Faith, this the temple of God: if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. Let none delude himself with obstinate wrangling. For life and salvation are here concerned, which will be lost and entirely destroyed, unless their interests are carefully and assiduously kept in mind. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)

Obviously, this means nothing to the conciliar revolutionaries, who never cease to congratulate themselves on their useless search for “unity” with heretics and schismatics.

“Pope Leo XIV” then went on to provide a discourse about Saint Augustine of Hippo’s The City God that partially mispresents Saint Augustine’s teaching about Church-State relations, especially, as will examined shortly, concerning the modern concept of “freedom of conscience”:

Dear Ambassadors,

Prompted by the tragic events of the sack of Rome in 410 AD, Saint Augustine wrote De Civitate Dei, The City of God. This is one of the most powerful of his theological, philosophical and literary works. As Pope Benedict XVI observed, it is aconvn “impressive work crucial to the development of Western political thought and the Christian theology of history.” [1] It draws, as we would say in  contemporary terms, on a “narrative” that was spreading, for “the pagans, still numerous at that time, and even quite a few Christians, thought that the God of the new religion and the Apostles themselves had shown themselves incapable of protecting the city. In the days of the pagan gods, Rome was caput mundi, the great capital, and no one could have imagined that it would fall into the hands of its enemies. Now, with the God of the Christians, this great city no longer seemed secure.” [2]

Certainly, our times are very distant from those events. This is not simply a question of temporal distance, but also of a different cultural awareness and a development of categories of thought. However, we cannot overlook the fact that our own cultural sensibilities have drawn nourishment from that work, which, like all the classics, speaks to people of every generation.

Augustine interprets events and history itself according to the model of two cities. First, there is the city of God, which is eternal and characterized by God’s unconditional love (amor Dei), as well as love for one’s neighbor, especially the poor. Then there is the earthly city, which is a temporary dwelling place where human beings live until death. In our day, the latter includes all social and political institutions, from the family to the Nation State and international organizations. For Augustine, this city was epitomized by the Roman Empire. Indeed, the earthly city is centered on pride and self-love (amor sui), on the thirst for worldly power and glory that leads to destruction. However, this is not a reading of history that seeks to contrast eternity with the present, the Church with the State, nor is it a dialectic about the role of religion within civil society.

In Augustine’s view, the two cities coexist until the end of time. Each has both an external and an internal dimension, for they are to be understood not only in light of the external manner in which they are constructed throughout history, but also through the lens of the internal attitudes of each human being towards the realities of life and historical events. In this perspective, each of us is a protagonist and thus responsible for history. Moreover, Augustine emphasizes that Christians are called by God to dwell in the earthly city with their hearts and minds turned towards the heavenly city, their true homeland. At the same time, Christians living in the earthly city are not strangers to the political world, and, guided by the Scriptures, seek to apply Christian ethics to civil government.

The City of God does not propose a political program. Instead, it offers valuable reflections on fundamental issues concerning social and political life, such as the search for a more just and peaceful coexistence among peoples.  Augustine also warns of the grave dangers to political life arising from false representations of history, excessive nationalism and the distortion of the ideal of the political leader.

Although the context in which we live today is different from that of the fifth century, some similarities remain highly relevant. We are now, as then, in an era of widespread migratory movements; as then, we are living at a time of a profound readjustment of geopolitical balances and cultural paradigms; as then, we are, in Pope Francis’s well-known expression, not in an era of change but in a change of era. [3]

In our time, the weakness of multilateralism is a particular cause for concern at the international level.  A diplomacy that promotes dialogue and seeks consensus among all parties is being replaced by a diplomacy based on force, by either individuals or groups of allies.  War is back in vogue and a zeal for war is spreading.  The principle established after the Second World War, which prohibited nations from using force to violate the borders of others, has been completely undermined.  Peace is no longer sought as a gift and a desirable good in itself, or in the pursuit of “the establishment of the ordered universe willed by God, with a more perfect form of justice among men and women.”  Instead, peace is sought through weapons as a condition for asserting one’s own dominion.  This gravely threatens the rule of law, which is the foundation of all peaceful civil coexistence.

Furthermore, as Saint Augustine notes, “there is no one who does not wish to have peace.  For even those who make war desire nothing but victory; they desire, that is to say, to attain to peace with glory.  For what else is victory than the conquest of those who resist us?  And when this is done there is peace… for even those who intentionally interrupt the peace in which they are living have no hatred of peace, but only wish it changed into a peace that suits them better.  They do not, therefore, wish to have no peace, but only the peace that they desire.” (To members of the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See, 9 January 2026.)

Comment Number Two:

Saint Augustine, though, taught that true peace is that of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, that starts in the souls of men who at peace with Him by abiding in a state of Sanctifying Grace. Saint Augustine also taught that the Roman Empire fell because of the want of order within the souls of men, which was similar to  what Plato wrote in his Republic, namely, that order within the soul leads to order in polities.

Pope Leo XIII, writing in Mirae Caritas, May 29, 1902, explained the importance of those who wield civic authority to be in states of Sanctifying Grace:

But that decay of faith in divine things of which We have spoken is the effect not only of pride, but also of moral corruption. For if it is true that a strict morality improves the quickness of man's intellectual powers, and if on the other hand, as the maxims of pagan philosophy and the admonitions of divine wisdom combine to teach us, the keenness of the mind is blunted by bodily pleasures, how much more, in the region of revealed truths, do these same pleasures obscure the light of faith, or even, by the just judgment of God, entirely extinguish it. For these pleasures at the present day an insatiable appetite rages, infecting all classes as with an infectious disease, even from tender years. Yet even for so terrible an evil there is a remedy close at hand in the divine Eucharist. For in the first place it puts a check on lust by increasing charity, according to the words of St. Augustine, who says, speaking of charity, "As it grows, lust diminishes; when it reaches perfection, lust is no more" (De diversis quaestionibus, Ixxxiii., q. 36). Moreover the most chaste flesh of Jesus keeps down the rebellion of our flesh, as St. Cyril of Alexandria taught, "For Christ abiding in us lulls to sleep the law of the flesh which rages in our members" (Lib. iv., c. ii., in Joan., vi., 57). Then too the special and most pleasant fruit of the Eucharist is that which is signified in the words of the prophet: "What is the good thing of Him," that is, of Christ, "and what is His beautiful thing, but the corn of the elect and the wine that engendereth virgins" (Zach. ix., 17), producing, in other words, that flower and fruitage of a strong and constant purpose of virginity which, even in an age enervated by luxury, is daily multiplied and spread abroad in the Catholic Church, with those advantages to religion and to human society, wherever it is found, which are plain to see. (Pope Leo XIII, Mirae Caritas, May 28, 1902.)

Yes, the keenness of the mind is blunted by the sort of bodily pleasures that most people in the world  have partaken throughout the course of their adult lives. Such men can never come to act in a truly wise manner as they respond to the provocations of the moment and are without any thought about horror of, no less possessing any remorse for, their own personal sins. Men who live in such a way will always be lost in a sea of confusion that will never lift from their minds until they embrace the true Faith and make a good, integral Confession of their sins to a true priest. It is after such a conversion that one can come to grow spiritually as an adorer of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in His Real Presence before the Blessed Sacrament. Those who spend such time with Christ the King receive infused graces into their souls.

Pope Leo XII noted the ineffable ability of the Blessed Sacrament to quicken the mind and strengthen the will:

To this it must be added that by this same Sacrament our hope of everlasting blessedness, based on our trust in the divine assistance, is wonderfully strengthened. For the edge of that longing for happiness which is so deeply rooted in the hearts of all men from their birth is whetted even more and more by the experience of the deceitfulness of earthly goods, by the unjust violence of wicked men, and by all those other afflictions to which mind and body are subject. Now the venerable Sacrament of the Eucharist is both the source and the pledge of blessedness and of glory, and this, not for the soul alone, but for the body also. For it enriches the soul with an abundance of heavenly blessings, and fills it with a sweet joy which far surpasses man's hope and expectations; it sustains him in adversity, strengthens him in the spiritual combat, preserves him for life everlasting, and as a special provision for the journey accompanies him thither. And in the frail and perishable body that divine Host, which is the immortal Body of Christ, implants a principle of resurrection, a seed of immortality, which one day must germinate. That to this source man's soul and body will be indebted for both these boons has been the constant teaching of the Church, which has dutifully reaffirmed the affirmation of Christ: "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (St. John vi., 55).

In connection with this matter it is of importance to consider that in the Eucharist, seeing that it was instituted by Christ as "a perpetual memorial of His Passion" (Opusc. Ivii. Offic. de festo Corporis Christi), is proclaimed to the Christian the necessity of a salutary selfchastisement. For Jesus said to those first priests of His: "Do this in memory of Me" (Luke xxii, 18); that is to say, do this for the commemoration of My pains, My sorrows, My grievous afflictions, My death upon the Cross. Wherefore this Sacrament is at the same time a Sacrifice, seasonable throughout the entire period of our penance; and it is likewise a standing exhortation to all manner of toil, and a solemn and severe rebuke to those carnal pleasures which some are not ashamed so highly to praise and extol: "As often as ye shall eat this bread, and drink this chalice, ye shall announce the death of the Lord, until He come" (1 Cor. xi., 26).

Furthermore, if anyone will diligently examine into the causes of the evils of our day, he will find that they arise from this, that as charity towards God has grown cold, the mutual charity of men among themselves has likewise cooled. Men have forgotten that they are children of God and brethren in Jesus Christ; they care for nothing except their own individual interests; the interests and the rights of others they not only make light of, but often attack and invade. Hence frequent disturbances and strifes between class and class: arrogance, oppression, fraud on the part of the more powerful: misery, envy, and turbulence among the poor. These are evils for which it is in vain to seek a remedy in legislation, in threats of penalties to be incurred, or in any other device of merely human prudence. Our chief care and endeavour ought to be, according to the admonitions which We have more than once given at considerable length, to secure the union of classes in a mutual interchange of dutiful services, a union which, having its origin in God, shall issue in deeds that reflect the true spirit of Jesus Christ and a genuine charity. This charity Christ brought into the world, with it He would have all hearts on fire. For it alone is capable of affording to soul and body alike, even in this life, a foretaste of blessedness; since it restrains man's inordinate self-love, and puts a check on avarice, which "is the root of all evil" (1 Tim. vi., 10). And whereas it is right to uphold all the claims of justice as between the various classes of society, nevertheless it is only with the efficacious aid of charity, which tempers justice, that the "equality" which St. Paul commended (2 Cor. viii., 14), and which is so salutary for human society, can be established and maintained. This then is what Christ intended when he instituted this Venerable Sacrament, namely, by awakening charity towards God to promote mutual charity among men. For the latter, as is plain, is by its very nature rooted in the former, and springs from it by a kind of spontaneous growth. Nor is it possible that there should be any lack of charity among men, or rather it must needs be enkindled and flourish, if men would but ponder well the charity which Christ has shown in this Sacrament. For in it He has not only given a splendid manifestation of His power and wisdom, but "has in a manner poured out the riches of His divine love towards men" (Conc. Trid., Sess. XIII., De Euch. c. ii.). Having before our eyes this noble example set us by Christ, Who bestows on us all that He has assuredly we ought to love and help one another to the utmost, being daily more closely united by the strong bond of brotherhood. Add to this that the outward and visible elements of this Sacrament supply a singularly appropriate stimulus to union. On this topic St. Cyprian writes: "In a word the Lord's sacrifice symbolises the oneness of heart, guaranteed by a persevering and inviolable charity, which should prevail among Christians. For when our Lord calls His Body bread, a substance which is kneaded together out of many grains, He indicates that we His people, whom He sustains, are bound together in close union; and when He speaks of His Blood as wine, in which the juice pressed from many clusters of grapes is mingled in one fluid, He likewise indicates that we His flock are by the commingling of a multitude of persons made one" (Ep. 96 ad Magnum n. 5 (al.6)). In like manner the angelic Doctor, adopting the sentiments of St. Augustine (Tract. xxxvi., in Joan nn. 13, 17), writes: "Our Lord has bequeathed to us His Body and Blood under the form of substances in which a multitude of things have been reduced to unity, for one of them, namely bread, consisting as it does of many grains is yet one, and the other, that is to say wine, has its unity of being from the confluent juice of many grapes; and therefore St. Augustine elsewhere says: 'O Sacrament of mercy, O sign of unity, O bond of charity!' " (Summ. Theol. P. III., q. Ixxix., a. 1. . All of which is confirmed by the declaration of the Council of Trent that Christ left the Eucharist in His Church "as a symbol of that unity and charity whereby He would have all Christians mutually joined and united. . . a symbol of that one body of which He is Himself the head, and to which He would have us, as members attached by the closest bonds of faith, hope, and charity" (Conc. Trid., Sess. XIII., De Euchar., c. ii.). The same idea had been expressed by St. Paul when he wrote: "For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all we who partake of the one bread" (I Cor. x., 17). Very beautiful and joyful too is the spectacle of Christian brotherhood and social equality which is afforded when men of all conditions, gentle and simple, rich and poor, learned and unlearned, gather round the holy altar, all sharing alike in this heavenly banquet. And if in the records of the Church it is deservedly reckoned to the special credit of its first ages that "the multitude of the believers had but one heart and one soul" (Acts iv., 32), there can be no shadow of doubt that this immense blessing was due to their frequent meetings at the Divine table; for we find it recorded of them: "They were persevering in the doctrine of the Apostles and in the communion of the breaking of bread" (Acts ii., 42).

Besides all this, the grace of mutual charity among the living, which derives from the Sacrament of the Eucharist so great an increase of strength, is further extended by virtue of the Sacrifice to all those who are numbered in the Communion of Saints. For the Communion of Saints, as everyone knows, is nothing but the mutual communication of help, expiation, prayers, blessings, among all the faithful, who, whether they have already attained to the heavenly country, or are detained in the purgatorial fire, or are yet exiles here on earth, all enjoy the common franchise of that city whereof Christ is the head, and the constitution is charity. For faith teaches us, that although the venerable Sacrifice may be lawfully offered to God alone, yet it may be celebrated in honour of the saints reigning in heaven with God Who has crowned them, in order that we may gain for ourselves their patronage. And it may also be offered-in accordance with an apostolic tradition-for the purpose of expiating the sins of those of the brethren who, having died in the Lord, have not yet fully paid the penalty of their transgressions.

That genuine charity, therefore, which knows how to do and to suffer all things for the salvation and the benefit of all, leaps forth with all the heat and energy of a flame from that most holy Eucharist in which Christ Himself is present and lives, in which He indulges to the utmost. His love towards us, and under the impulse of that divine love ceaselessly renews His Sacrifice. And thus it is not difficult to see whence the arduous labours of apostolic men, and whence those innumerable designs of every kind for the welfare of the human race which have been set on foot among Catholics, derive their origin, their strength, their permanence, their success. (Pope Leo XIII, Mirae Caritatis, May 28, 1902.) 

When was the last time you heard someone in public life citing the example of Saint Henry the Emperor or Saint Edward the Confessor or Saint Stephen of Hungary or Saint Wenceslaus of Bohemia or Saint Louis IX, King of France, or Saint Casimir of Poland or Saint Elizabeth of Hungary as the example of civil leadership that would shape their own exercise of civil power? No, candidates for public office cite the "plaster saints" of Modernity who reject the Social Reign of Christ the King as their models for civil governance, believing in the "sovereignty of the people" and/or in some sort of nebulous, generic "common ground" about God that is of the essence of the naturalism of Judeo-Masonry.

Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is, like his six immediate predecessors in the current line of antipopes, incapable of even thinking in such terms, no less speaking about them before publicly, no less to diplomats accredited to the Holy See in its conciliar captivity.

The currently reigning universal face of apostasy then discussed the United Nations, sustainable development and “international humanitarian law”:

It was precisely this attitude that led humanity into the tragedy of the Second World War.  From those ashes, the United Nations was born, whose eightieth anniversary was recently celebrated.  The UN was established by the determination of fifty-one nations as the center of multilateral cooperation in order to prevent future global catastrophes, for safeguarding peace, defending fundamental human rights and promoting sustainable development. (To members of the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See, 9 January 2026.)

Comment Number Three:

Although Pope Pius XII himself was at first very cautiously favorably disposed to the United Nations, His Holiness began to express reservations about the world organization in the 1950s, especially involving its inability to curb Soviet aggression in Eastern and Central Europe after World War II nor to stop the Suez crisis from escalating in 1956.

As we know today, though, the United Nations has become a bloated, corrupt bureaucratic machine that has promoted “women’s reproductive rights, “population control,” climate control, and an authoritarian “health agenda” promoted through the so-called World Health Organization that was on full display during the scamdemic from 2020 through 2022 and whose apparatchiks want nations to surrender their sovereignty on matters of “public health” to them in times of “crises” manufactured by “scientists” looking for ways to sicken people and thus to increase the power of globalist bodies such as it.

Indeed, that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV would mention “sustainable development” means that he has no understanding that this phrase is an euphemism to achieve depopulation in order to “save the planet” on the basis of fake, phony, fraudulent claims that have been false time and time again by intellectually honest scientists, not those driven by ideological goals:

It's no understatement to say that the 2006 documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" changed the direction of public policy. And in fact, that's exactly what failed presidential candidate Al Gore intended the film to do. Fortunately for him, he found a willing audience of Hollywood celebrities and left-wing media outlets to uncritically promote his ideology and activism. 

Unfortunately for him, 2006 is now far enough in the past that we can test some of the predictions, claims, and statements of fact he makes in that film. So that's exactly what we did.

At the start of 2026, nearly 20 years after the film hit theaters and helped pave the way for Europe's delusional "net zero" policies, electric car mandates, and low-flow showerheads, OutKick rewatched "An Incovenient Truth" to see how well it held up over time. Spoiler alert: not particularly well!

The film starts off as a glowing tribute to Al Gore himself, an unsurprising beginning given his obvious ego and hubris. Almost immediately  afterward, it jumps straight into the propaganda. He references Hurricane Katrina as an example of more extreme weather events in the modern world. There's a "Simpsons" video with propaganda of "global warming," remember, this is pre-rebrand to "climate change," with a young girl seeing her ice cream cone melt. Gore talks about what got him into this field which is one professor who took some measurements of CO2, then made vague predictions of what would happen if we didn't make changes. 

He says we started measuring CO2 in 1958, which, of course, thoroughly discredits his activism. Assuming the latest estimate is accurate, the earth is billions of years old. It keeps growing by the year, but as of January 2026, it's 4.54 billion years. Sure, you can estimate CO2 concentrations for part of that past, but not all of it. Or even a sizable percentage of it. And making predictions and assumptions on such limited data is awful science.

But ignoring the past and focusing on the future, one of his most concrete predictions of doom came regarding Mt. Kilimanjaro. In his discussion, he shows pictures of snow on the African mountain from decades ago, then images from the early 2000's with much less snow. He blames this on global warming, then ominously predicts, "Within the decade there will be no more snows on Kilimanjaro." 

How'd that age?

Gore's Predictions Prove Woefully Wrong

Well, we're now two decades removed from this claim, and there continues to be snow on Kilimanjaro. In fact, one story from The Times of London published a few years ago specifically highlighted how wrong Gore's forecast was. Methley Swai, the owner of a trekking company for Kilimanjaro excursions, told The Times: "Many people have made Kilimanjaro a bucket list priority because of the Al Gore deadline but when they get here they are pleasantly surprised to find lots of snow."

Sure enough, the story also reported, "There were also abnormally high snowfalls in 2018, which led to the highest recorded growth for the total snow depth on Tanzania’s inactive volcano, an aggregated increase of 1.2m."

Whoops! We're not done there!

His next example of declining snow is Glacier National Park. Gore tells a story about how he personally climbed it with his daughter in 1998, then shows pictures of less glacier activity in the mountains. Then, the kicker. A concrete prediction of what would happen to the park.

"Within 15 years this will be the park formerly known as Glacier," he says, to oohs and aah from the crowd.

 Here's how poorly this prediction has aged. Even CNN was forced to report in 2020 that "Glacier National Park is replacing signs that predicted its glaciers would be gone by 2020," because unfortunately for Gore and his agenda, there continues to be plenty of glaciers remaining.

Nailed it again, buddy.

He mentions Argentina and Peru as countries where glaciers that are in danger of disappearing. Yet, as you'd expect, there are still glaciers in Argentina and Peru in 2026. In fact, one travelog from 2025 posted photos of the El Pertito Moreno glacier in Argentina, with the comment "Just west of El Calafate, this frozen river is one of the few glaciers in the world still growing." 

Nailed it again buddy.

Gore then uses a graph to show how our climate is warming, though, naturally, it's purposefully misleading. The warming period he demonstrates in the modern era barely reaches above 0.0, after decades of well below average weather. Essentially, we experienced decades of cooling, as immortalized in a Time magazine cover from the 1970's warning of global cooling, and the trend reversed. He also claims we can use ice in Antarctica to look back 650,000 years and show CO2 concentration at that point in time That's nice, but again, doesn't come close to covering 4.54 billion years of world history. He talks about Ice Ages, with zero acknowledgment that those Ice Ages ended without human intervention. 

He uses a prop lift to show that we have the highest CO2 levels yet, and within 50 years, or 2056, he expects the concentration of CO2 will be well over 750ppm, doubling in a matter of decades. It's currently around 420ppm. When the movie was made, two decades ago, it was 380ppm. At that rate of increase, it would take 185 years from when he made his prediction to reach 750ppm.

Whoops. 

Oddly enough, after years of climate "experts" saying that weather isn't climate, meaning individual weather events or yearly outcomes aren't representative of changes in climate, Gore repeatedly references record warm temperatures in 2005 as "proof" of global warming. He specifically mentions the number of days over 100 degrees in western US cities to back up his fearmongering. Naturally, these trends have not been consistent. For example, in 2006 when this movie was released, Las Vegas had 86 days when temperatures reached 100 degrees. In 2025, there were 77. 

Gore Makes Hurricane Predictions, Drought Predictions, That Prove False

Later on, Gore references hurricanes in the South Atlantic, once again using those as proof of increasing extreme weather, as if we have measurements of all hurricane activity in that ocean for 4.54 billion years. He claims that Katrina is yet more proof, using a graphic to show that it intensified because it went over warmer waters. These extreme storms will become more frequent, he says, because of warming temperatures. There is, of course, no evidence that this has happened. There were 14 hurricanes that made landfall from 2003-2005 in the United States. There were eight that made landfall from 2022-2024 in the United States.

Just this past year, the NOAA predicted an above-average hurricane season in 2025, literally a few months in advance. They were completely wrong, as there was average to below-average activity, with no increase in hurricane strength. Every single time. 

Global warming causes more rain, but also more drought, Gore continues. He mentions extreme drought in middle Africa and Lake Chad evaporating to back it up. Here's what a quick search on Lake Chad reveals today: "Despite historic shrinkage, satellite imagery from 2024 and 2025 indicates the lake has not continued to decline and has shown signs of replenishment since the early 2010s."

Whoops again!

He highlights the decline of Arctic sea ice, again saying it's rapidly diminishing. Except, current measurements for 2025-2026 show that sea ice extent is roughly in line with 2012-2013, just barely below the 1980-2010 average. Which is, of course, influenced by the period of colder weather that existed in the 1970's.

Ironically, Gore then shows himself going on an airplane, after saying this is all the fault of human beings and their activity. Zero awareness.

One of his biggest and most terrifying claims is that the ice sheet covering Greenland is in danger of melting. The audience once again reacts in horror as he shows simulations of oceanic sea rise that would cover much of The Netherlands, San Francisco, Florida, Beijing, Calcultta, Manhattan, and Shanghai in such a catastrophic scenario. 

Per the NOAA Arctic report card, here's how the Greenland ice sheet did in 2024: "The Greenland Ice Sheet lost 55 ± 35 Gt of mass in 2024, the lowest annual ice loss since 2013. This occurred due to above-average snowfall and below-average melting." 

Temperatures didn't change either. "We report monthly mean air temperatures measured at weather stations in Greenland. Air temperatures observed over the 2024 mass balance year were close to the 1991-2020 average."

The 2025 report also found that the mass balance in the Greenland Ice Sheet showed "less loss than the 2003-24 annual average. "Above-average snowfall and below-average melt" contributed to "losing less mass this year."

Additionally, a study published in January 2026 found that "Prudhoe Dome, a 500-meter-thick ice cap on the northwestern Greenland ice sheet, was completely ice-free around 7,100 years ago with temperatures 3-5°C higher than they are today," per meteorologist Chris Martz. As he explains, it "goes to show that these processes can happen naturally without any anthropogenic influence."

Gore's Hypocrisy Is Evident Throughout

As the documentary continues, he brings up the Aral Sea disappearing as a further example of the dangers of human intervention in our climate. Except the Aral Sea dried up in part because "poorly thought-out irrigation strategies introduced by the Soviet Union in the 1960s-70s." Restoration efforts are underway to undue some of that damage, and as of 2025, "the volume of water in the North Aral has increased by 42%."

He appeals to authority, saying that peer-reviewed research unequivocally says global warming is factual and not up for dispute. Of course, this has changed over time, with plentiful new research contradicting his claim of consensus. To the point where Gore and his partners had to change their messaging to "climate change" to avoid dealing with many of their predictions not coming true.

Without a hint of irony, he puts up a quote saying: "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it." Precisely the critique leveled at "global warming" scientists who rely on government funding. No problem to solve? No funding. Gore himself benefits from this; no demand for his presentation? No gigantic speaking fees.

He then says it's dishonest to say we need to make a choice between the economy and the planet, an incredibly inaccurate prediction considering the damage countries like Germany and the United Kingdom have done to their economies by producing less energy to satisfy Gore's ravings. Literally just this past week, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright made headlines by explaining that Germany has invested "half a trillion" in clean energy, doubled the capacity of their grid, yet produce 20% less electricity than they did before the half trillion dollar investment, and they sell it at three times the price."

Coincidentally, Gore says "If we do the right thing, then we're going to create a lot of wealth and a lot of jobs." Not only has the jobs part been proven false, but the "wealth" that's been created has mostly gone to people like Gore. Meanwhile, in the real world, California's "Ivanpah Solar Power Facility," which cost $2.2 billion to construct, is shutting down after it never met its energy production goals, killed birds and harmed the desert landscape.

Hard to be more wrong than that.

He concludes by putting up a world map showing his travels to show his slideshow, again, completely ignoring the CO2 emitted by his paid travel. There's more charts, demanding higher mileage per gallon standards, saying that it wouldn't hurt car manufacturers. Sure enough, car manufacturers have lost billions upon billions chasing his goals, including by building electric cars that aren't actually less polluting when viewed in totality. Ford has shut down its "Lightning" truck after poor demand, and Porsche sent itself into a tailspin by investing in EV's, to the point where their CEO was forced to resign in 2025 after damaging the company. As just a few examples.

He then extols the virtues of making choices to individually limit our carbon footprint. Excellent timing, considering his pal Kamala Harris just bought an $8 million mansion in Malibu. Surely a decision made to limit her carbon footprint, and in fear of losing her house to the sea level rise Gore warns about.

"Are you ready to change the way you live?" the documentary asks over the credits. The answer, as demonstrated by Gore and his celebrity pals, is that absolutely none of them are willing to change anything about their lives in order to "solve" climate change. Because they don't actually believe in it, they just want a cause to signal their virtue. They want something to provide meaning to their lives. Gore gave them that, much in the same way he discusses a single college professor giving him meaning with global warming. The good news is that based on the track record of predictions in the documentary, they have nothing to worry about anyway. (Predictions From Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" Have Proven Completely False.)

The global climate control propaganda has always been about the erosion of genuine human liberty, including the Natural Law right of private property, the eclipsing of national sovereignty by a phalanx of globalist organizations, a global redistribution of money to the globalist bureaucrats, and social control by unelected globalist bureaucrats just as much as the scamdenic was five years ago, and it is a sign of how thoroughly ideological the conciliar “popes” have bee in their obeisance to the climate controllers’ utterly false contentions and diabolically inspired agenda.

Now, we turn our attention to Prevost/Leo’s comments about “international humanitarian law”:

I would like to draw particular attention to the importance of international humanitarian law.  Compliance with this cannot depend on mere circumstances and military or strategic interests. Humanitarian law, in addition to guaranteeing a minimum of humanity during the ravages of war, is a commitment that States have made.  Such law must always prevail over the ambitions of belligerents, in order to mitigate the devastating effects of war, also with a view to reconstruction.  We cannot ignore that the destruction of hospitals, energy infrastructure, homes and places essential to daily life constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law.  The Holy See firmly reiterates its condemnation of any form of involvement of civilians in military operations.  It likewise hopes that the international community will remember that the protection of the principle of the inviolability of human dignity and the sanctity of life always counts for more than any mere national interest.

With this in mind, the United Nations has mediated conflicts, promoted development and helped States protect human rights and fundamental freedoms.  In a world facing complex challenges such as geopolitical tensions, inequalities and climate crises, the UN should play a key role in fostering dialogue and humanitarian support, helping to build a more just future. Efforts are therefore needed to ensure that the United Nations not only reflects the situation of today’s world rather than that of the post-war period, but that it is also more focused and efficient in pursuing policies aimed at the unity of the human family instead of ideologies. (To members of the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See, 9 January 2026.)

Comment Number Fouf:

Talk about ideology.

It is the role of the Catholic Church to unite all men everywhere, not Judeo-Masonic globalist organizations whose leaders desire power and control, not the common temporal good pursued as it must be in light of man’s Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven.

Moreover, so-called “international humanitarian law” is not the same thing as the binding precepts of the Divine and Natural Laws from which all just laws of men are derived as God the Author of those laws. We must abide by the laws of God and not idolizes laws of men that consider, for example, opposition to abortion and sodomy to be unjust and even punishable by the civil state.

Although longtime readers may be tired of my doing so, permit me to quote once again from Pope Pius XI’s affirmation that the true “league of nations” is the Catholic Church, nothing else:

When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another's word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.

There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

The entire gestalt of the conciliar sect was outlined in Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII’s Pacem in Terris, April 11, 1963, that set the stage for Gaudium et Spes and Dignitatis Humane, December 7, 1965, and direct rejection of Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio and Pope Pius XI’s Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937:

As is known, the United Nations Organization (U.N.O.) was established on June 26, 1945, and to it there were subsequently added specialized agencies consisting of members designated by the public authority of the various countries with important international tasks in the economic, social, cultural, educational and health fields. The United Nations Organization had as its essential purpose the maintenance and consolidation of peace between peoples, fostering between them friendly relations, based on the principles of equality, mutual respect, and varied forms of cooperation in every sector of human endeavor.

143. An act of the highest importance performed by the United Nations Organization was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, approved in the General Assembly of December 10, 1948. In the preamble of that Declaration, the recognition and respect of those rights and respective liberties is proclaimed as a goal to be achieved by all peoples and all countries.

144. We are fully aware that some objections and reservations were raised regarding certain points in the Declaration, and rightly so. There is no doubt, however, that the document represents an important step on the path towards the juridical-political organization of all the peoples of the world. For in it, in most solemn form, the dignity of a human person is acknowledged to all human beings; and as a consequence there is proclaimed, as a fundamental right, the right of every man freely to investigate the truth and to follow the norms of moral good and justice, and also the right to a life worthy of man’s dignity, while other rights connected with those mentioned are likewise proclaimed.

145. It is therefore our ardent desire that the United Nations Organization — in its structure and in its means — may become ever more equal to the magnitude and nobility of its tasks, and may the time come as quickly as possible when every human being will find therein an effective safeguard for the rights which derive directly from his dignity as a person, and which are therefore universal, inviolable and inalienable rights. This is all the more to be hoped for since all human beings, as they take an ever more active part in the public life of their own country, are showing an increasing interest in the affairs of all peoples, and are becoming more consciously aware that they are living members of the whole human family. (Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, April 11, 1963.)

Roncalli/John XXIII’s guarded optimism about the United Nations was but a forerunner of the outright globalism that has been embraced especially by the conciliar “popes,” including Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who believed that Catholics had to subordinate themselves to the diktats of globalist organizations, Robert Francis Prevost.

Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order.

I am not going to comment about Prevost/Leo XIV’s discussions of the American involvement in Venezuela or the situation in the Holy Land solely because to do so would more time than I want to spend on an address that only a handful of Catholics have paid (or will pay) any attention to whatsoever.

I am, though, going to discuss the false “pontiff’s direct criticisms of Orwellian speech and to note that the widespread ascent and acceptance of Orwellianism through the Western world is but an ape of Marxist doctrine that was made possible in the West by the precise thing that Prevost/Leo believes is the remedy, “freedom of conscience”:

Moreover, in the contortions of semantic ambiguity, language is becoming more and more a weapon with which to deceive, or to strike and offend opponents. We need words once again to express distinct and clear realities unequivocally. Only in this way can authentic dialogue resume without misunderstandings. This should happen in our homes and public spaces, in politics, in the media and on social media.  It should likewise occur in the context of international relations and multilateralism, so that the latter can regain the strength needed for undertaking its role of encounter and mediation.  This is indeed necessary for preventing conflicts, and for ensuring that no one is tempted to prevail over others with the mindset of force, whether verbal, physical or military.

We should also note the paradox that this weakening of language is often invoked in the name of freedom of expression itself.  However, on closer inspection, the opposite is true, for freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed precisely by the certainty of language and the fact that every term is anchored in the truth.  It is painful to see how, especially in the West, the space for genuine freedom of expression is rapidly shrinking.  At the same time, a new Orwellian-style language is developing which, in an attempt to be increasingly inclusive, ends up excluding those who do not conform to the ideologies that are fueling it.

Unfortunately, this leads to other consequences that end up restricting fundamental human rights, starting with the freedom of conscience.  In this regard, conscientious objection allows individuals to refuse legal or professional obligations that conflict with moral, ethical or religious principles deeply rooted in their personal lives.  This may be the refusal of military service in the name of non-violence, or the refusal on the part of doctors and healthcare professionals to engage in practices such as abortion or euthanasia.  Conscientious objection is not rebellion, but an act of fidelity to oneself.  At this moment in history, freedom of conscience seems increasingly to be questioned by States, even those that claim to be based on democracy and human rights.  This freedom, however, establishes a balance between the collective interest and individual dignity.  It also emphasizes that a truly free society does not impose uniformity but protects the diversity of consciences, preventing authoritarian tendencies and promoting an ethical dialogue that enriches the social fabric. (To members of the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See, 9 January 2026.)

Comment Number Five:

Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV makes much of the fact that he is a member, albeit a lay one, of the Order of Saint Augustine and fashions himself an expert about Saint Augustine’s teaching. However, it is very curious that he seems to be entirely unaware that Saint Augustine taught that it is the duty of the civil state to suppress heresy and that the death of the soul is worse than the freedom of error:

To the end of his life Augustine never ceased to fight for the truth against all the heresies then invented by the father of lies; in his ever repeated victories, we know not which to admire most: his knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, his powerful logic, or his eloquence. We see too that divine charity which, while inflexibly upholding every iota of God’s rights, is full of ineffable compassion for the unhappy beings who do not understand those rights. . . .

“Who,” he says, “could love us more than God does? Nevertheless God makes use of fear in order to save us, although he teaches us with sweetness. When the Father of the family wanted guests for his banquet, did he not send his servants to the highways and hedges, to compel all they met to come in? This banquet is the unity of Christ’s Body. If, then, the divine goodness has willed that, at the fitting time, the faith of Christian kings should recognize this power of the Church, let the heretics brought back from the byways, and schismatics forced into their enclosures, consider not the constraint they suffer, but the banquet of the Lord to which they would not otherwise have attained. Does not the shepherd sometimes use threats and sometimes blows to win back to the master’s fold the sheep that have been enticed out of it? Severity that springs from love is preferable to deceitful gentleness. He who binds the delirious man and waked up the sleeper from his lethargy molests them both, but for their good. If a house were on the point of falling, and our cries could not induce those within to come out, would it not be cruelty not to save them by force in spite of themselves? and that, even if we could snatch only one from death because the rest, seeing it, obstinately hastened their own destruction: as the Donatists do, who in their madness commit suicide to obtain the crown of martyrdom. No one can become good in spite of himself; nevertheless, the rigorous laws, of which they complain, bring deliverance not only to individuals but to the whole cities, by freeing them from the bonds of untruth and causing them to see the truth, which the violence or the deceits of the schismatics had hidden from their eyes. Far from complaining, their gratitude is now boundless and their joy complete; their feasts and their chants are unceasing.” (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year—Time after Pentecost, Book V, Volume 14, pp. 92-103.)

VI. From a hardened heretic, St. Augustine became not only a fervent Catholic, but also a teacher and protector of the true faith. The gift of the Catholic faith he prized above everything, and offered frequently to God most humble thanks for it. "There is no greater treasure," he writes, "no greater honor, no greater good, in this world, than the Catholic faith." From the period of his conversion, he was eager in his endeavors to convert the heretics from their errors, and bring them back into the pale of the true Church, both, by word of mouth, and also by his pen. His most fervent wish was, that all might be Catholics. May you esteem the gift of the Catholic faith more than you have heretofore done. Give thanks to God that He has bestowed this gift upon you. Seek, by words as well as by a truly Christian life, to convert others to the true faith. And, finally, learn from St. Augustine, how you should pass the time which God gives you, when he sends you sickness before your end. Guard yourself against frivolous and idle conversations, do not permit them at your sick bed. Use the time to repent of your iniquities. Let others read to you from a devout book, that you may constantly be occupied with good thoughts. The last days of your life are precious; use them rightly; they never return. Cease not to repent of your sins and to pray God to forgive you, until your last breath; for, the words of St. Augustine are and ever will remain true: " No Christian, however piously he may have lived, should die without repentance." (Father Francis X. Weninger, S.J., On the Feast of Saint Augustin of Hippo, August 28.)

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of “naturalism,” as they call it, dare to teach that “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.” And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that “that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.” From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an “insanity,” viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.” But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching “liberty of perdition;” and that “if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.”

And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that “the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right.” But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests?” (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

Saint Augustine was not a globalist.

Saint Augustine was not a religious indifferentist.

Saint Augustine believe everything on earth that pertained to the good of souls must be subordinated to the Catholic Church. The lay Augustinian, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, does not.

Pope Pius XII spoke about peace on many occasions during the nineteen years of his pontificate, and he noted the following in his encyclical letter on situations in Poland, Hungary, and the Holy Land in 1956:

But even while Our heart still fears on this account, We behold the threat of another frightening crisis. As you know, Venerable Brothers, the flames of another war are being fanned menacingly in the Near East, not far from that holy land where angels descended from Heaven and hovered over the crib of the Divine Child, announcing peace to men of good will. (Luke 2. 14).

6. What else can We do, who embrace all peoples with a father’s affection, but raise suppliant prayers to the Father of Mercies and God of all comfort (cfr. 11 Cor. 1. 3), and urge all of you to join in them with Us? For “the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but powerful before God.” (11 Cor. 10. 4)

7. We trust solely in Him Who can illuminate the minds of men with His heavenly light and incline their incited wills to those more temperate counsels by which right order among nations may be established, to their common advantage and with certainty that the legitimate rights of all interested parties are being secured.

8. May all men, especially those who hold the destinies of nations in their hands, remember that war brings no lasting benefit, but a host of misfortunes and disasters. Differences among men are not resolved by arms, bloodshed, or destruction, but only by reason, law, prudence, and justice.

9. When wise men who are motivated by a desire for lasting peace meet to discuss such differences, they should certainly feel obliged to enter upon the ways of justice rather than the rash road of violence if they reflect upon the grave dangers of a war which may start as a tiny spark, but can burst into an enormous conflagration.

10. Amidst these dangerous crises We wish especially to convince the heads of governments. We cannot possibly doubt their realization that no other interest motivates Us but the common good and prosperity of all, which can never be achieved by the massacre of one’s brothers.

11. And since, as We have said, We place Our hope above all in the providence and mercy of God. We repeatedly, urge you, Venerable Brothers, not to cease encouraging and promoting this zealous crusade of prayer. Through it — with the intercession of His Mother, the Virgin Mary — may Almighty God in His goodness grant an end to the threat of war, a happy solution to the conflicting claims of nations, and assurance everywhere, to the common benefit of all, of those rights granted the Church by her Divine Founder. Thus may “the whole human family, which has been rent asunder by sin’s wound, be brought under the sway of His most sweet rule.” (Prayer for the Feast of Christ the King) (Pope Pius XII, Laetamur Admodum, November 1, 1956.)

That is the language of a true pope, not the incessant praise of “dialogue” and multinationalism.

Thus, we turn as always to Our Lady, who was nowhere mentioned by Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV in his address to diplomats nine days ago, and ask her through our fidelity to her Most Holy Rosary as the Queen of Peace that the peace of her Divine Son, the Prince of Peace, remain ever in our hearts, minds, and souls so that we might be instruments of the true peace that God desires for all men, namely, the peace of a soul in a state of Sanctifying Grace as a foretaste of the true peace to be found the glory of an unending Easter Sunday in Paradise.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar, pray for us.

Saint Antony of the Desert, pray for us.

On the Feast of Saint Antony of the Desert

Today is the Feast of Saint Antony of the Desert, a Church Father and the Founder of Monasticism, whose heroic austerities and penances should inspire each of us to try to be at least a little more mortified and to seek more voluntary penances so that we, following his example, can cooperate with the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ that flow into our souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces, to rely upon the August Queen of Heaven to send her holy legions to drive the devils away, everywhere fight them, subduing their boldness and thrusting them down into the abyss.

Here is the account of the life and work of Saint Antony of the Desert as found Dom Prosper Gueranger’s The Liturgical Year, which includes the readings for Matins in today's Divine Office:

The East and West unite, to-day, in honoring St. Antony, the Father of Cenobites. The Monastic Life existed before his time, as we know from in-disputable testimony; but he was the first Abbot, because he was the first to bring Monks under the permanent government of one Superior or Father.

Antony began with seeking solely his own sanctification; he was known only as the wonderful Solitary, against whom the wicked spirits waged an almost continued battle: but, in course of time, men were attracted to him by his miracles and by the desire of their own perfection; this gave him Disciples; he permitted them to cluster round his cell; and Monasteries thus began to be built in the desert. The age of the Martyrs “was near its close; the persecution under Dioclesian, which was to be the last, was over as Antony entered on the second half of his course: and God chose this time for organizing a new force in the Church. The Monastic Life was brought to bear upon the Christian world; the Ascetics, as they were called, not even such of them as were consecrated — were not a sufficient element of power. Monasteries were built in every direction, in solitudes and in the very cities; and the Faithful had but to look at these communities living in the fervent and literal fulfillment of the Counsels of Christ, and they felt themselves encouraged to obey the Precepts. The apostolic traditions of continual prayer and penance were perpetuated by the Monastic system; it secured the study of the Sacred Scriptures and Theology; and the Church herself would soon receive from these arsenals of intellect and piety her bravest defenders, her holiest Prelates, and her most zealous Apostles. Yes, the Monastic Life was to be and give all this to the Christian world, for the example of St. Antony had given her a bias to usefulness. If there ever were a Monk to whom the charms of solitude and the sweetness of contemplation were dear, it was our Saint; and yet, they could not keep him in his desert, when he could save souls by a few days spent in a noisy city. Thus, we find him in the streets of Alexandria, when the pagan persecution was at its height; he came to encourage the Christians in their martyrdom. Later on, when that still fiercer foe of Arianism was seducing the Faith of the people, we again meet the great Abbot in the same capital, this time, preaching to its inhabitants, that the Word is consubstantial to the Father, proclaiming the Nicene faith, and keeping up the Catholics in orthodoxy and resolution. There is another incident in the life of St. Antony, which tells in the same direction, inasmuch as it shows how an intense interest in the Church must ever be where the Monastic Spirit is. We are alluding to our Saint’s affection for the great St. Athanasius, who, on his part, reverenced the Patriarch of the Desert, visited him, promoted the Monastic Life to the utmost of his power, used to say that he considered the great hope of the Church to be in the good discipline of Monasticism, and wrote the Life of his dear St. Antony.

But, to whom is due the glory of the Monastic Institute, with which the destinies of the Church were, from that time forward, to be so closely connected, as that the period of her glory and power was to be when the monastic element flourished, and the days of her affliction were to be those of its decay? Who was it that put into the heart of Antony and his disciples the love of that poor and unknown, yet ever productive, life? It is Jesus, the humble Babe of Bethlehem. To him, then, wrapt in his swaddling-clothes, and yet the omnipotent God, be all the glory! It is time to hear the account of some of the virtues and actions of the great St. Antony, given by the Church in her Office of his Feast.

Antony was born in Egypt, of noble and Christian parents, who left him an orphan at an early age. Having, one day, entered a Church, he heard these words of the Gospel being read: If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all thou hast, and give to the poor. He took them as addressed to himself and thought it his duty to obey these words of Christ his Lord. Selling therefore his possessions, he distributed all the money among the poor. Being freed from these obstacles, he resolved on leading on earth a heavenly life. But at his entrance on the perils of such a combat, he felt, that besides the shield of faith, wherewith he was armed, he must needs fortify himself with the other virtues; and so ardent was his desire to possess them, that whomsoever he saw excelling in any virtue, him did he study to imitate.

Nothing, therefore, could exceed his continency and vigilance. He surpassed all in patience, meekness, mercy, humility, manual labor, and the study of the Sacred Scriptures. So great was his aversion for the company of, or conversation with, heretics, especially the Arians, that he used to say, that we ought not even to go near them. He lay on the ground, when necessity obliged him to sleep. As to fasting, he practiced it with so much fervor, that his only nourishment was bread seasoned with salt, and he quenched his thirst with water; neither did he take this his food and drink until sunset, and frequently abstained from it altogether, for two successive days. He very frequently spent the whole night in prayer. Antony became so valiant a soldier of God, that the enemy of mankind, ill-brooking such extraordinary virtue, attacked him with manifold temptations; but the Saint overcame them all by fasting and prayer. Neither did his victories over Satan make him heedless, for he knew how innumerable are the devil’s artifices for injuring souls.

Knowing this, he betook himself into one of the largest deserts of Egypt, where such was his progress in Christian perfection, that the wicked spirits, whose attacks grew more furious as Antony’s resistance grew more resolute, became the object of his contempt, so much so, indeed, that he would sometimes taunt them for their weakness. When encouraging his disciples to fight against the devil, and teaching them the arms wherewith they would vanquish him. He used often to say to them: “Believe me, Brethren, Satan dreads the waterings of holy men, and their prayers, and fasts, and voluntary poverty, and works of mercy, and humility, and, above all, their ardent love for Christ our Lord, at the mere sign of whose most holy Cross, he is disabled and put to flight.” So formidable was he to the devils, that many persons, in Egypt, who were possessed by them, were delivered by invoking Antony’s name. So great, too, was his reputation for sanctity, that Constantine the Great and his sons wrote to him, commending themselves to his prayers. At length, having reached the hundred and fifth year of his age, and having received a countless number into his institute, he called his Monks together; and having instructed them how to regulate their lives according to Christian perfection, he, venerated both for the miracles he had wrought, and for the holiness of his life, departed from this world to heaven, on the sixteenth of the Kalends of February (January 17).

We unite, great Saint! with the Universal Church, in offering thee the homage of our affectionate veneration, and in praising our Emmanuel for the gifts he bestowed upon thee. How sublime a life was thine, and how rich in fruit were thy works! Verily, thou art the Father of a great people, and one of the most powerful auxiliaries of the Church of God. We beseech thee, therefore, pray for the Monastic Order, that it may re-appear in all its ancient fervor; and pray for each member of the great Family. Fevers of the body have been often allayed by thy intercession, and we beg for a continuance of this thy compassionate aid — but the fevers of our soul are more dangerous, and we beg thy pity and prayers that we may be delivered from them. Watch over us, in the temptations, which the enemy is unceasingly putting in our way; pray for us, that we may be vigilant in the combat, prudent in avoiding dangerous occasions, courageous in the trial, and humble in our victory. The angel of darkness appeared to thee in a visible shape; but he hides himself, and his plots from us; here again, we beg thy prayers, that we be not deceived by his craft. May the fear of God’s judgments, and the thought of eternity, penetrate into the depth of our souls. May Prayer be our refuge in every necessity, and Penance our safeguard against sin. But above all, pray that we may have that, which thou didst counsel above all — the Love of Jesus — of that Jesus, who, for love of us, deigned to be born into this world, that so he might merit for us the graces wherewith we might triumph — of that Jesus, who humbled himself even so far as to suffer temptation, that so he might show as how we were to resist and fight. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of Saint Antony of the Desert, January 17.)

Saint Antony's holiness and his pure love of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, was hated by the adversary, who sought to lead him away from his austere practices without success. Saint Antony hated everything to do with the devil, including the heresies that he inspired others to promote, and the great Desert Father warned one and all to keep no kind of communion with heretics. His biographer, none other than the great Saint Athanasius of Alexandria, explained this very clearly:

How he rejected the schism of Meletius and the heresies of Manes and Arius.

68. And he was altogether wonderful in faith and religious, for he never held communion with the Meletian schismatics, knowing their wickedness and apostacy from the beginning; nor had he friendly dealings with the Manichæans or any other heretics; or, if he had, only as far as advice that they should change to piety. For he thought and asserted that intercourse with these was harmful and destructive to the soul. In the same manner also he loathed the heresy of the Arians, and exhorted all neither to approach them nor to hold their erroneous belief. And once when certain Arian madmen came to him, when he had questioned them and learned their impiety, he drove them from the mountain, saying that their words were worse than the poison of serpents.

How he confuted the Arians.

69. And once also the Arians having lyingly asserted that Antony's opinions were the same as theirs, he was displeased and angry against them. Then being summoned by the bishops and all the brethren, he descended from the mountain, and having entered Alexandria , he denounced the Arians, saying that their heresy was the last of all and a forerunner of Antichrist. And he taught the people that the Son of God was not a created being, neither had He come into being from non-existence, but that He was the Eternal Word and Wisdom of the Essence of the Father. And therefore it was impious to say, 'there was a time when He was not,' for the Word was always co-existent with the Father. Wherefore have no fellowship with the most impious Arians. For there is no communion between light and darkness. 2 Corinthians 6:14 For you are good Christians, but they, when they say that the Son of the Father, the Word of God, is a created being, differ in nought from the heathen, since they worship that which is created, rather than God the creator. But believe that the Creation itself is angry with them because they number the Creator, the Lord of all, by whom all things came into being, with those things which were originated. (Saint Athanasius, Saint Antony of the Desert.)

This is a saltuary warning to us not to have any kind of fellowship with the most impious conciliar revolutionaries as there can never be any communion between light and darkness.

Obviously, we must, as always, spend time in prayer, if at all possible, which it is not for many Catholics around the world today in this time of apostasy and betrayal, before Our Lord's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament and pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, using the shield of Our Lady's Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel and the weapon of her Rosary to protect us from the contagion of apostasy and betrayal that is all around us. We must also, of course, make reparation for our own many sins by offering up all of our prayers and sufferings and sacrifices and humiliations and penances and mortifications and fastings to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We must pray to her so that we can be instruments, unworthy though we may be, of planting the seeds for the restoration of Holy Mother Church and of the Social Reign of Christ the King so that everyone in the whole will exclaim with hearts consecrated to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.