Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV: An Empty Cassock Who Worries About Worried About How People “Feel,” Not About What God Has Revealed

I promise you—both for your sake and for mine—to make this a relatively a very brief commentary, perhaps as brief as under twenty pages of text exclusive of two appendices.

Why is that?

Glad that you asked one of those penetrating questions again.

Why is that, you asked?

Answer: Because even though it has only been four months, twenty days since the conciliar apostates elected Robert Francis Prevost to be their universal public face of apostasy I have written a number of articles about the man who is known more commonly by his conciliar stage name, “Pope Leo XIV”:

Annuntio Vobis Dolorum Magnum: Habemus Antipapam, Clothes Do Not Make Any Man a True and Legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, part one, Clothes Do Not Make Any Pope a True and Legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, part 2 (or Continuity with Whom and with What?), Clothes Do Not Make Any Man A True and Legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, part 3: What Further Need Does Anyone Have for Clues?, An Evangelii Gaudium Primer (or Understanding Robert Francis Prevost's Having Made Jorge's Magna Carta His Very Own), Robert Francis Prevost Makes His Own the Old Conciliar Songs, Robert Francis Prevost Pours Old Conciliar Wine into the Oldest Conciliar Wineskins, An Evangelii Gaudium Primer (or Understanding Robert Francis Prevost's Having Made Jorge's Magna Carta His Very Own), part two, An Old Cottage Industry is Reborn: What Did Leo Really Mean to Say?, Boy, If Only Leo Knew, Huh?, Michael Martin's Boilerplate Liturgical Revolutionary Claptrap, From Teilhard de Chardin to Paul Couturier to Robert Francis Prevost, Leo's "Coordinates" of Peace, Human Dignity, and Dialogue are Worthy of Captain Peter Peachfuzz Himself, Boy, If Only Leo Knew, Huh?, part two, Chicoms Enabled by Globalists and Modernists, part one, Chicoms Enabled by Globalists and Modernists, part two, Boy, If Only Leo Knew, Huh?", part three, To Disobey a True Pope is to Disobey God Himself, An Integral Ecology of Modernism and Naturalism, The Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church is Eternal and Universal, No Miracle At All to Deny, Debunk, and Deconstruct the Miraculous, Boy, If Only Leo Knew, part four, Boy, If Only Leo Knew, Huh?, part five, Memorandum to Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV: Yes, God Avenges Sins and Sinners, Another Memorandum to Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV: The Primary of the Roman Pontiff is Universal and Eternal, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV: A True Son of Conciliarism's Reconcilation with False Religions, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV and His Boys in the Band, and Lavender Friendly Leo Strikes Again,

Believe or not, I am getting really tired of repeating endlessly.

Thus, I am going to quote only from the following answer that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV gave in an interview to Crux that was videotaped and then transcribed for publication:

Just a quick follow up on the LGBTQ+ point, it can be a very ideological issue. However, beyond any ideological views, I think people felt this was just spoken about in a different way, with a different tone, under Francis. What will your own approach be?

Well, I don’t have a plan at the moment. I was asked about that already a couple of times during these first couple of months, about the LGBT issue. I recall something that a cardinal from the eastern part of the world said to me before I was pope, about “the western world is fixated, obsessed with sexuality.” A person’s identity, for some people, is all about sexual identity, and for many people in other parts of the world, that’s not a primary issue in terms of how we should deal with one another. I confess, that’s on the back of my mind, because, as we’ve seen at the synod, any issue dealing with the LGBTQ questions is highly polarizing within the Church. For now, because of what I’ve already tried to demonstrate and live out in terms of my understanding of being pope at this time in history, I’m trying not to continue to polarize or promote polarization in the church.

Interjection Number One:

First, adherence to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural has nothing to do with “ideology.”

Second, the use of the phrase “LGBTQ” itself confers legitimacy to a nonexistent category of human self-identification upon those who commit acts of sodomy and its related perverse vices.

Third, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ divided people during His Public Ministry and even whilst He underwent His fearful Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday, and He told us in no uncertain terms that He and His teaching will be a source of division even among families:

Fear not therefore: better are you than many sparrows. Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven. Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it. He that receiveth you, receiveth me: and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me. (Matthew 10: 31-40.)

The commentary in the Challoner Douay-Rheims Bible on verse thirty-five is important to reproduce here as so many worldly Catholics, many of whom are the victims of the conciliar revolution and thus have been robbed of the most basic elements of the sensus Catholicus and have been "catechized" by the "world" and by "worldly" relatives who hate the Faith because they are steeped, whether or not they realize it, in one unrepentant sin after another, come to despise those in their families who want to change their lives and to live for the "higher things" rather than to be immersed in the ways of the world:

"I came to set a man at variance"... Not that this was the end or design of the coming of our Saviour; but that his coming and his doctrine would have this effect, by reason of the obstinate resistance that many would make, and of their persecuting all such as should adhere to him.’

Fourth, it is not the mission of a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter to make people feel good about themselves by avoiding polarization. A true pope must exhort hardened sinners to convert lest he becomes an accomplice to their sins:

The Spiritual Works of Mercy

• To instruct the ignorant.
• To counsel the doubtful.
• To admonish sinners.
• To bear wrongs patiently;
• To forgive offences willingly;
• To comfort the afflicted;
• To pray for the living and the dead.

Catholics also believe that there are nine ways that they can be accessories to the sins of others:

• 1. By counsel.
• 2. By command.
• 3. By consent.
• 4. By provocation.
• 5. By praise or flattery of the evil done.
• 6. By silence.
• 7. By connivance.
• 8. By partaking.
• 9. By defense of the ill done.

Conciliarism is by its very false nature uncharitable as it makes a mockery of the authentic, immutable teaching that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by making it appear that it is somehow opposed to tenderness and mercy to follow these words that Saint Paul wrote in his Second Epistle to Saint Timothy:

[1] I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: [2] Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. [3] For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: [4] And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. [5] But be thou vigilant, labour in all things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill thy ministry. Be sober. (2 Tim. 4: 1-15.)

A physician does not "judge" anyone if he warns him what might happen if he does not stop engaging in a certain course of behavior that is deleterious to his bodily health.

Similarly, one who warns another about the state of his soul as he persists in a life of unrepentant sin is simply performing a fundamental Spiritual Work of Mercy, and those who are inclined to and/or steeped in perverse sins against nature are not to be left without being remonstrated as this is a duty of a Catholic before God and to the eternal and temporal good of the sinner.

It is one thing to sin and to be sorry and then to seek out the mercy of the Divine Redeemer in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. It is quite another to persist in sin, no less perverse sins against nature, unrepentantly and to expect others to reaffirm him in those sins, whether explicitly by words of approval or implicitly by silence, which betokens consent. Catholics must judge the states of their own souls every night in their Examen of Conscience, and they have a duty to help others to recognize the serious states of sin into which they have plunged themselves, praying beforehand to God the Holy Ghost to fill them with wisdom and prudence so as to provide a warning in such a way that could plant a seed to get an unrepentant sinner to a true priest in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance.

Fifth, Pope Saint Pius X explained that while Our Lord was kind and merciful to erring sinner, He could arm Himself with righteousness against who had no intention reforming their lives of pestilential wickedness:

How far this position is removed from that of Catholic teaching! We have already seen how its fallacies have been condemned by the Vatican Council. Later on, we shall see how these errors, combined with those which we have already mentioned, open wide the way to Atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with that of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being found in any religion? In fact, that they are so is maintained by not a few. On what grounds can Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? Will they claim a monopoly of true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed, Modernists do not deny, but actually maintain, some confusedly, others frankly, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is obvious. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? Certainly it would be either on account of the falsity of the religious sense or on account of the falsity of the formula pronounced by the mind. Now the religious sense, although it maybe more perfect or less perfect, is always one and the same; and the intellectual formula, in order to be true, has but to respond to the religious sense and to the believer, whatever be the intellectual capacity of the latter. In the conflict between different religions, the most that Modernists can maintain is that the Catholic has more truth because it is more vivid, and that it deserves with more reason the name of Christian because it corresponds more fully with the origins of Christianity. No one will find it unreasonable that these consequences flow from the premises. But what is most amazing is that there are Catholics and priests, who, We would fain believe, abhor such enormities, and yet act as if they fully approved of them. For they lavish such praise and bestow such public honor on the teachers of these errors as to convey the belief that their admiration is not meant merely for the persons, who are perhaps not devoid of a certain merit, but rather for the sake of the errors which these persons openly profess and which they do all in their power to propagate.

We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one’s personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

As was the case with his theologically, morally, and pastorally corrupt predecessor, Robert Francis Prevost is attempting to turn Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself into the exact image of the falsified Christ that was at the foundation of The Sillon, whose falsehoods were near and dear to the heart of the first in the current line of antipopes, Angelo Roncalli/“Saint John XXIII.” Roncalli said in his opening address at the “Second” Vatican Council, October 11, 1962, the Feast of the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that errors did not have to be opposed, that they just kind of “go away” over time, and Prevost seeks it as his mission to follow Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s efforts to serve as an agent of “mercy” even though it is gravely sinful to reaffirm hardened sinners in their lives of apostasy.

I return to the next excerpt from the interview Robert Francis Prevost gave to Crux:

What I’m trying to say is what Francis said very clearly when he would say, ‘todos, todos, todos’. Everyone’s invited in, but I don’t invite a person in because they are or are not of any specific identity. I invite a person in because they are a son or daughter of God. You’re all welcome, and let’s get to know one another and respect one another.

Interjection Number Two:

No, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is an exclusivist Who will into Heaven only clothed with the wedding garment of Sanctifying Grace and no one can approach Him in this life to receive Him in Holy Communion unless he is similarly clothed:

And the king went in to see the guests: and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment. 12 And he saith to him: Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? But he was silent.  13 Then the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.  14 For many are called, but few are chosen. (Matthew 22: 11-14.)

At that time, Jesus spoke to the chief priests and the Pharisees in parables, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like a king who made a marriage feast for his son. And he sent his servants to call in those invited to the marriage feast, but they would not come. Again he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatlings are killed, and everything is ready; come to the marriage feast.’ But they made light of it, and went off, one to his farm, and another to his business; and the rest laid hold of his servants, treated them shamefully, and killed them. But when the king heard of it, he was angry; and he sent his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burnt their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The marriage feast indeed is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy; go therefore to the crossroads, and invite to the marriage feast whomever you shall find.’ And his servants went out into the roads, and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad; and the marriage feast was filled with guests. Now the king went in to see the guests, and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment. And he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was speechless. Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet and cast him forth into the darkness outside, where there will be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.’ For many are called, but few are chosen. (Matthew 22: 1-14.)

The wedding garment, of course, is that of our Baptism, and the purity with which a Catholic, having confessed his sins in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance and praying to Our Lady at all times to have perfect contrition for his sins, must approach Holy Communion. The Parable of the Marriage Feast, therefore, is a direct and through rebuke to Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s “inclusive” theology of who should receive what purports to be Holy Communion at the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service:

Writing in The Light of the World, Father Benedict Baur, O.S.B., explained that a Catholic needs to be in a state of Sanctifying Grace to receive Holy Communion and he needs to accept the totality of Catholic doctrine to be a member of the Catholic Church and thus be able to sanctify and to save his immortal soul. Please consider the reflections offered below, especially those parts highlighted in bold, as they serve as a masterful rebuke to what the conciliar revolutionaries believe and how they reaffirm unrepentant sinners in lives that lead to eternal damnation: 

1. “Give peace, O lord, to them that patiently wait for Thee,” we prayed last Sunday (Introit). Today we receive the answer of the Lord: “I am the salvation of the people” (Introit). Then before our eyes the gates of heaven are opened, and we see the immense throngs which move forward in an unbroken procession toward heaven. To all these who are called He will bring salvation.

2. The hall of the marriage feast is open, the banquet is ready. For us this means the sacrifice which is prepared at this hour at the celebration of the Mass. The banquet hall is the Christian Church. At Mass, the Lord (Christ) enters the hall and goes about to welcome His guests, to espouse their souls as His bride in an intimate union of prayer and sacrifice. But in order to take part in the banquet it is not enough that one merely enter the hall, that one is baptized; it is essential that one possess also the wedding garment, “the new man who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth” (Epistle)—freedom from sin and a disposition to obey the commandments of God (Communion). This parable issues a serious warning to all of us who wish to offer the Mass with the priest.

But the banquet of the Mass is not the final meal; it is the introduction to the banquet of eternal communion; that is, of our eternal union with God. We have received the grace of baptism; we are called to His banquet and are granted admission to the hall of the Church. Through our participation in the Eucharist banquet we prepare the way for the true, heavenly banquet. But there is a condition: “Attend, My people, to My law, incline your ears to the words of My mouth” (Introit). At Holy Communion we must be able to say: “Thou hast commanded Thy Commandments to be kept most diligently. Oh that my ways may be directed to keep Thy justifications.”

It must be our serious endeavor to be “prepared in soul and body . . . [to] perform the works that are Thine” (Collect). Therefore the Epistle admonishes us: “Be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind and put on the new man who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth. Wherefore, putting away lying, speak ye the truth every man with his neighbor, for we are members of one another. . . . Let not the sun go down upon your anger.” Such is the wedding garment, the new man. He who does not wear this garment, cannot take part in the banquet of heaven. He may have a found a place on earth in the hall of the Church, but when the King comes (for judgment at the last day) He will ask: “Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having on a wedding garment?” And then He will command His waiters” “Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness” (Gospel). The return of Christ at the end of the world will bring the separation of the cockle and the wheat.

3. “I am the salvation of the people,” the salvation of all those who perform their duties faithfully, as they promised to do at their baptism, and who daily “put on the new man.” While celebrating Mass they bury the old man, the man of sin, the man of passion, the man of evil habits; and they devote themselves to Christ, to God, to God’s will and commandments. They live according to the will of God and for His honor. Thus they daily put on the new man through celebration of the Mass. They enrich their wedding garment always more and more, and they make themselves ready to partake of the Holy Sacrifice. Here the words of the Offertory are fulfilled, “Thou wilt quicken me, O Lord; . . . and Thy right hand shall save me.”

Meditation

1. The liturgy today leads us into the brilliantly lit and festively decorated banquet hall, which is thronged with guests dressed in resplendent wedding garments, awaiting the arrival of the King. The hall is the Church; we, the baptized, are the guests. The wedding garment is the garment of sanctifying grace. We are all waiting for the arrival of the Lord, the King.

2. “Be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind and put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness in truth” (Epistle). The nearer the day of the return of the Lord approaches, the more insistent become the admonitions of the Church: “You know not the day nor the hour” (Matt. 25:13). “As in the days of Noe, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, even till that day in which Noe entered into the ark, and they knew not till the flood came and took them all away; so also shall the coming of the Son of Man be. . . . Watch ye, therefore, because ye know not at what hour your Lord will come” (Matt. 24: 34 ff.). The Church wishes that we that we be ready when the Lord comes at the hour of our death. We shall be ready if we wear the wedding garment of sanctifying grace. We shall be ready if we renew our inner disposition, if at each Mass, at each Holy Communion, at each sincere prayer, at each stimulation of grace, we put on the new man in our thoughts, our judgment, our will, and our actions.

In the Christian life there is only one direction, forward and upward. If we fail to progress, if we cease to exert ourselves every day and every moment, we shall lose ground, we shall revert to the old man, to separation from god. We shall be ready to meet the King if we strive incessantly and do not weaken. That is what the Epistle means when it admonishes: “Be ye renewed.” The Church fears that we might become weak, that we might neglect grace and thus lose our wedding garment of sanctifying grace. She fears that, like the foolish virgins, we may go to meet the Lord without the necessary oil in our lamps. She fears lest, when the bridegroom comes, we shall not be ready and we shall be excluded. “I know you not.”

“The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king who made a marriage for his son. . . . And the marriage was filled with guests. And the king went into see the guests, and He saw there a man who had not a wedding garment, and he saith to him: Friend how camest though in hither, not having on a wedding garment? But he was silent” (Gospel). It is not sufficient that we have come to the banquet hall of the Church; a wedding garment is also required. It is not enough that we have received baptism and have accepted the Christian faith; we must live according to the gospel; we must live a life of justice and holiness; we must possess sanctifying grace and Christian virtues. “Wherefore, putting away lying, speak ye the truth every man with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. Be angry and sin not. Let not the sun go down on your anger. Give not place to the devil. He that stole, let him steal no more, but rather let him labor, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have something to give to him that suffereth need. Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth, but that which is good, to the edification of faith, that it may administer grace to the hearers. . . . Let all bitterness, and anger, and indignation, and clamor, and blasphemy be put away from you, with all malice. And be ye kind one to another, merciful, forgiving one another, even as God hath forgiven you in Christ. . . . But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not so much as be named among you, as becometh saints (Eph. 4:25-29; 5:3).

3. The wedding banquet to which we are invited is Holy Communion. But the Apostle gives us a grave warning: “Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of Lord (I. Cor. 11:27-29).

The wedding to which we are invited is the blessed possession of God. “That My joy ay be in you and your joy may be filled” (John 15:11). We will be granted admission to the eternal banquet only if we are clothed in the wedding garment of sanctifying grace and have overcome every fault of our former lives, having done full penance for our sins, either in this life or in purgatory. With the liturgy during these weeks we long for the wedding banquet of eternal life. We put on the new man; we strive for perfect for perfect charity in all our acts.

Prayer

Almighty and merciful God, in Thy loving kindness shield us from all adversity, that being prepared in soul and boy, we may we free minds perform the words that are Thine. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

[Reflection for Monday after the Nineteenth Sunday after Pentecost]

1. The Church now looks forward to the end of time. In those days “shall many be scandalized and shall betray one another and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise and shall seduce many. And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold” (Matt. 24:10-12). The Church will be ridiculed, derided, and persecuted. She will await in her white garments the coming of the Lord. She looks up to Him, and He reassures her: “I am the salvation of the people, saith the Lord; in whatever tribulations they shall cry to Me, shall I hear them; and I will be their Lord forever”. . . .

3. As long as we hold fast to Christ, our salvation is assured. Separation from Christ means the loss of our salvation. If we refuse to accept His doctrine, if we refuse to obey His commandments, if we refuse to follow His counsels, if we fail to cooperate with the operation of His grace in us, we shall not be saved. Only when we give ourselves to Him completely will He work in us the fullness of our salvation, the fullness of His grace and blessing. Christ desires our entire being.

“I am the salvation of the people.” We place our complete trust in the salvific will of the Savior for all sinners, for He will give us salvation. In this we place our confidence in spite of our many infidelities, in spite of our half-heartedness in spite of our frequent misuse and neglect of grace. Great as is our sinfulness and our need, greater still is His mercy, His love, and His will to save. For this reason we approach the Holy Sacrifice with great courage and confidence. “If I shall walk in the midst of tribulation, Thou wilt quicken me, O Lord; and Thou wilt stretch out Thy hand against the wrath of my enemies; and Thy right hand shall save me” (Offertory).

The entirety of the two reflections from Father Benedict Baur's The Light of the World contradict the entirety of Jorge Mario Bergoglio's oft-repeated contentions that it is neither possible nor desirable to demand that Catholics strive for what he believes is an "unattainable ideal" of spiritual and moral perfection. Please consider the following passage from the quotations above as perhaps the best refutation of Bergoglio's "inclusive" theology concerning the reception of the Holy Eucharist:

But in order to take part in the banquet it is not enough that one merely enter the hall, that one is baptized; it is essential that one possess also the wedding garment, “the new man who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth” (Epistle)—freedom from sin and a disposition to obey the commandments of God (Communion). This parable issues a serious warning to all of us who wish to offer the Mass with the priest.

It is clear that Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not believe that one musr be free from nor have any kind of disposition to obey the Commandments of God, which he, aping Martin Luther, believe are too "burdensome" to be taken at face value.

Additionally, Father George Leo Haydock explained that the wedding garment is that of Sanctifying Grace, of the abiding life of the Most Blessed Trinity in one’s immortal soul. The Holy Eucharist is the summit of charity, and true Charity cannot persist in one’s immortal soul without Sanctifying Grace as Mortal Sin and Charity cannot coexist together:

Ver. 11. Wedding garment, which Calvin erroneously understands of faith, for he came by faith to the nuptials. St. Augustine says it is the honour and glory of the spouse, which each one should seek, and not his own; and he shews this, in a sermon on the marriage feast, to be charity. This is the sentiment of the ancients, of St. Gregory, St. Ambrose, and others. What St. Chrysostom expounds it, viz. an immaculate life, or a life shining with virtues, and free from the filth of sin, is nearly the same; for charity cannot exist without a good life, nor the purity of a good life, without charity. In his 70th homily on St. Matthew, he says that the garment of life is our works; and this is here mentioned, that none might presume, (like Calvin and his followers) that faith alone was sufficient for salvation. When, therefore we are called by the grace of God, we are clothed with a white garment, to preserve which from every stain, from every grievous sin, depends upon the diligence (the watching and praying) of every individual. (St. John Chrysostom) — It was the custom then, as it still is in every civilized nation, not to appear at a marriage feast, or at a dinner of ceremony, except in the very best attire. (Bible de Vence)

Ver. 12. Not having a wedding garment. By this one person, are represented all sinner void of the grace of God. (Witham) — To enter with unclean garments, is to depart out of this life in the guilt of sin. For those are no less guilty of manifesting a contempt for the Deity, who presume to sit down in the filth of an unclean conscience, than those who neglected to answer the invitations of the Almighty. He is said to be silent, because having nothing to advance in his own defence, he remains self-condemned, and is hurried away to torments; the horrors of which words can never express. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxx) (See Matthew 22 – Haydock Commentary Online.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio did not believe this, and it is clear that Robert Francis does not believe it either. To believe that “everyone” is welcome is to believe what the arch-heretic John Calvin believed, that all those with “faith” will enjoy the eschatological wedding feast, something that Saint Jude Thaddeus, writing under the direct inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, explained in no uncertain terms is false:

[1] Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James: to them that are beloved in God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called. [2] Mercy unto you, and peace, and charity be fulfilled. [3] Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. [4] For certain men are secretly entered in, (who were written of long ago unto this judgment,) ungodly men, turning the grace of our Lord God into riotousness, and denying the only sovereign Ruler, and our Lord Jesus Christ. [5] I will therefore admonish you, though ye once knew all things, that Jesus, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, did afterwards destroy them that believed not:

[6] And the angels who kept not their principality, but forsook their own habitation, he hath reserved under darkness in everlasting chains, unto the judgment of the great day. [7] As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and going after other flesh, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire. [8] In like manner these men also defile the flesh, and despise dominion, and blaspheme majesty. [9] When Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil, contended about the body of Moses, he durst not bring against him the judgment of railing speech, but said: The Lord command thee. [10] But these men blaspheme whatever things they know not: and what things soever they naturally know, like dumb beasts, in these they are corrupted.

[11] Woe unto them, for they have gone in the way of Cain: and after the error of Balaam they have for reward poured out themselves, and have perished in the contradiction of Core. [12] These are spots in their banquets, feasting together without fear, feeding themselves, clouds without water, which are carried about by winds, trees of the autumn, unfruitful, twice dead, plucked up by the roots, [13] Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own confusion; wandering stars, to whom the storm of darkness is reserved for ever. [14] Now of these Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying: Behold, the Lord cometh with thousands of his saints, [15] To execute judgment upon all, and to reprove all the ungodly for all the works of their ungodliness, whereby they have done ungodly, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against God. 

[16] These are murmurers, full of complaints, walking according to their own desires, and their mouth speaketh proud things, admiring persons for gain' s sake. [17] But you, my dearly beloved, be mindful of the words which have been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, [18] Who told you, that in the last time there should come mockers, walking according to their own desires in ungodlinesses. [19] These are they, who separate themselves, sensual men, having not the Spirit. [20] But you, my beloved, building yourselves upon your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, 

[21] Keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, unto life everlasting. [22] And some indeed reprove, being judged:[23] But others save, pulling them out of the fire. And on others have mercy, in fear, hating also the spotted garment which is carnal. [24] Now to him who is able to preserve you without sin, and to present you spotless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, in the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,[25] To the only God our Saviour through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory and magnificence, empire and power, before all ages, and now, and for all ages of ages. Amen. (Jude 1-25.)

Yes, there is quite a contrast between Saint Jude and the conciliar authorities who believe that the spotted garment is no impediment to salvation.

Ah, but final part of Prevost/Leo’s recent interview includes the coup de grace concerning the necessity of “changing attitudes” before “doctrine” can change:

At some point, when specific questions will come up… People want the church doctrine to change, want attitudes to change. I think we have to change attitudes before we even think about changing what the Church says about any given question. I find it highly unlikely, certainly in the near future, that the church’s doctrine in terms of what the church teaches about sexuality, what the Church teaches about marriage, [will change].

Interjection Number Three:

Catholic doctrine is immutable. It is not subject to “change” on what the “people” think or how they act. Catholic doctrine can never change, and the fact that Prevost/Leo makes it appear that it can without saying explicitly that it will change means that he is either about or dismissive the immutable nature of doctrine and thus about the immutable nature of God Himself. See Appendix A below for yet another review of Holy Mother Church’s condemnation of dogmatic evolution.

God’s Divine Revelation can never be conformed to how contingent beings think and act.

Rather, God’s rational creatures, men, must always conform themselves to Him as He has revealed Himself exclusively to His Catholic Church.

Also, I am including in Appendix B a reminder to those who are all atwitter about Prevost/Leo’s discussing the possibility of doctrinal “change” my dishonor roll of how the conciliar revolutionaries have been attempting to change doctrines for the past sixty-seven year, including about marriage itself.

To the final excerpt from the Crux interview with Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV:

I’ve already spoken about marriage, as did Pope Francis when he was pope, about a family being a man and a woman in solemn commitment, blessed in the sacrament of marriage. But even to say that, I understand some people will take that badly. In Northern Europe they are already publishing rituals of blessing ‘people who love one another’, is the way they express it, which goes specifically against the document that Pope Francis approved, Fiducia Supplicans, which basically says, of course we can bless all people, but it doesn’t look for a way of ritualizing some kind of blessing because that’s not what the Church teaches. That doesn’t mean those people are bad people, but I think it’s very important, again, to understand how to accept others who are different than we are, how to accept people who make choices in their life and to respect them.

I do understand that this is a very hot-button topic and that some people will make demands to say, “we want the recognition of gay marriage,” for example, or “we want recognition of people who are trans,” to say this is officially recognized and approved by the church. The individuals will be accepted and received. Any priest who has ever heard confessions will have heard confessions from all kinds of people with all kinds of issues, all kinds of states of life and choices that are made. I think that the Church’s teaching will continue as it is, and that’s what I have to say about that for right now. I think it’s very important. (Pope Leo speaks to Crux’s Elise Ann Allen about LGBTQ+ issues and the liturgy)

Final Comment:

Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is a naturalist who wants Catholics to “accept” those who are living in states of Mortal Sin and to “respect” so-called “life choices” that are illegitimate.

However, a good confessor will retain the sins of penitents who do not want to reform their lives. He will not absolve the sins who are determined to continue sinning.

While we must bear ourselves with kindness and respect to others, it is sometimes necessary to shun those who want us to accept their decisions to live in ways that offend God and put themselves with themselves by virtue of the fact that men who rebel against God are perforce rebelling against their own human nature that pines for the glory of the Beatific Vision.

Catholics can never give the appearance of approving sinful lifestyles lest they themselves become accomplices in their sins by silence.

Finally, Prevost/Leo’s tentative “I think that the Church’s teaching will continue as it is” communicates a tentativeness or uncertainty about what is possible, and his remarks have already emboldened sodomite activists to keep on pushing for everything they desire from the conciliar authorities.

On the Commemorated Feast of Saint Wenceslaus

Today, Sunday, September 28, 2025, the Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost, is also the Commemorated Feast of Saint Wenceslaus of Bohemia

Father Francis X. Weninger, S. J., wrote the following summary of our Saint’s holy life:

St. Wenceslas, duke of Bohemia, was the son of Wratislas and Drahomira. In proportion as his father was a model of all Christian virtues, his mother was the possessor of all vices, besides being a great enemy to the Christian Religion. Wratislas, upon his dying bed, gave Wenceslas in charge of his grandmother Ludmilla, while Boleslas, his younger, was kept by Drahomira. As both women were totally different in their morals, so also the conduct of the two children became entirely unlike. Wenceslas became pious and holy; Boleslas, godless and licentious. Drahomira seized the government of the state and persecuted the Christians most cruelly. She banished the priests, dismissed the Christians from all public places, which she filled with heathens of whom the faithful had nothing to expect but cruelty. The nobles would not submit to this administration, and deposing Drahomira, placed Wenceslas on the throne, and bound themselves to him by an oath of allegiance. Drahomira, burning with rage when she perceived that the Christians were again protected by the pious Ludmilla, was determined to revenge herself. She sent some hired assassins who strangled her with her own veil, while she was at her devotions in her private chapel. Not satisfied with this murder, Drahomira sought to make away with her son Wenceslas.

Meanwhile, this holy Prince conducted himself towards God and his subjects in such a manner, that he was beloved and highly esteemed by every one. He was extremely kind in all his actions, temperate in eating and drinking, unwearied in his care for his subjects, and blameless in his whole conduct. He was so charitable to the poor and to prisoners, so compassionate to widows and orphans, that the Christian world could count but few men like him. The prisoners he visited at night and gave them rich alms, the sick he supplied with all they needed, and showed a fatherly heart to the widows and orphans. It is known that he himself, at night, carried wood upon his shoulders to the destitute. Not a shadow of impurity tarnished the brightness of his life, and he preserved his chastity unpolluted to his end. He gave daily several hours to prayer, and even in winter frequently visited the Church at night barefooted. One of his servants who accompanied him, one day complained of the cold, and the duke told him to step in the footprints which he, walking before him, had made in the snow. The servant did so and no longer felt any cold; for the footprints of the prince were warmed by his love to the Holy Eucharist. Towards the priests he was always extremely generous. He often served them at the Altar, and allowed not the least wrong to be done them by word or deed. He distinguished himself especially in his devotion to the Holy Mass at which he daily assisted. He sowed, gathered and prepared with his own hands, the wheat which was used in making the Hosts; and cultivated and pressed the grapes for the wine used at Holy Mass. In one word, Wenceslas reigned and lived like a Saint.

Count Radislas, scorning the piety of the duke, caused the people to rebel and marched against Wenceslas. The latter, sending him a deputation, made offers of peace, but Radislas would not even listen to the king's message, esteeming it a sign of Wenceslas's cowardice. Hence the holy duke was forced to meet him at the head of his army. The two armies were drawn up opposite each other in battle array, when Wenceslas, sad that so much innocent blood should be shed, and being willing rather to give his own than that of his subjects, challenged Radislas to single combat, with the condition that the victory should be on the side of him who should slay his adversary.

Radislas accepted the challenge, and spear in hand, galloped in full armor towards the Saint. The latter was also clad in armor, but carried only a sword. Radislas intended to unhorse Wenceslas with his spear and thus have him in his power. The Saint went to meet him, making the sign of the cross. At the moment when Radislas was about to thrust his spear, he saw, by the side of Wenceslas, two angels who cried to him: "Stand off!" This cry acted like a thunderbolt upon Radislas, and changed his intentions. Throwing himself from his horse, he fell at the Saint's feet, asking for grace and pardon, promising obedience in future. Wenceslas raised him from the ground and kindly received him again into favor.

Soon after, the duke was summoned to Worms to assist at the general Diet. The emperor and all the princes and dignitaries were already assembled, but Wenceslas had not yet appeared as he was detained by hearing Mass. Thinking that his delay was intentional and caused by pride, they determined to receive him very coldly, and without the honor he had a right to expect. But when the Saint entered the hall, Otho, the emperor, saw two angels accompanying him, carrying before him a golden cross. When the Emperor had recovered from the awe with which this sight had inspired him, he arose from his throne and going towards the Saint, he led him to the seat prepared for him. The entire assemblage were greatly astonished at this act of the emperor, but when he related what he had seen, they all regarded the Saint with the greatest reverence. The emperor also bestowed the royal dignity and power on Wenceslas, and presented him with the arm of the holy martyr, St. Vitus, which Wenceslas received gratefully and with due respect, and took with him to Bohemia. At the close of the Diet, the Saint returned as king, and continued his holy life.

The more the pious monarch was loved and honored by his subjects on account of his holiness and his new dignity, the more hostile Drahomira and Boleslas grew towards him. Wenceslas, who perceived this, determined to resign his crown. But the wicked Drahomira would not wait for this. Boleslas had become father of a son, and Wenceslas was invited to be present at the baptism of the young prince. Although the holy king had reason to suppose that this invitation covered other intentions, he accepted it, in order not to manifest any distrust of his brother. Having gone to confession and Holy Communion, he went fearlessly to the palace of Boleslas. He was received with great honor and magnificently entertained. At midnight, before the banquet was ended, the Saint quietly left the hall, and went, according to his custom, into the Church. Drahomira seized this opportunity, and calling Boleslas aside, told him that the hour was now come when he could revenge himself and make the royal crown his own. The blood-thirsty tyrant needed no persuasion. Seizing his sword, he hastened, with some attendants, into the Church and stabbed his holy brother with such brutal force, that the blood bespattered the wall, where it is yet to be seen at this day. But the punishment of God soon overtook the murderers. The earth opened and swallowed Drahomira, the instigator of the sinful deed, with her horse and carriage, in that part of Prague which is called the castle of Ratschin. Of the murderers who were with Boleslas when he committed the crime, some lost their reason, while the rest died by their own hands. Although God delayed the punishment of Boleslas, it came at last. Having long been tormented by most painful maladies, at length he expired in all his wickedness.

The shrine of the holy king Wenceslas was honored with many miracles, after God had crowned his virtuous soul with everlasting glory in the kingdom of Heaven. (St. Wenceslas, King and Martyr.)

Saint Wenceslaus was not a Modernist. He was a Catholic king of a kingdom who prostrated Himself before the King of Kings, Who is meant to reign as the King of all men and all nations. We must invoke his holy intercession as we offer up our our prayers and sufferings and sacrifices and humiliations and penances to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Although Saint Wenceslaus lived about three centuries before Our Lady gave Saint Dominic her Most Holy Rosary, we can be assured that this great saint and martyr is praying Our Lady's Psalter in Heaven.

We must join Saint Wenceslaus in asking the help of the Mother of God so that we can make time in our lives to be as prostrate before the King of Kings as he was, intent on combating all forms of naturalism with Our Lady's help and as we promote her Most Holy Rosary, total consecration to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, the Brown Scapular, and the Miraculous Medal as we pass out Green Scapulars to those whom God's Providence places in our paths on a daily basis.

Saint Wenceslaus lived for Christ the King. So we must we, without any exception whatsoever. We must live for Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen, never tiring of raising the standards of our King and Queen as high as we can in the midst of our daily lives, never fearing what we will lose in terms of human respect and material security for living and dying as did Saint Wenceslaus, who served as a champion of the King here on earth so that he could praise Him for all eternity in an unending Easter Sunday of glory in Heaven. So must we.

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 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 Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Wenceslaus, pray for us.

Appendix A

Holy Mother Church’s Condemnation of Dogmatic Evolutionism

These firings, therefore, with all diligence and care having been formulated by us, we define that it be permitted to no one to bring forward, or to write, or to compose, or to think, or to teach a different faith. Whosoever shall presume to compose a different faith, or to propose, or teach, or hand to those wishing to be converted to the knowledge of the truth, from the Gentiles or Jews, or from any heresy, any different Creed; or to introduce a new voice or invention of speech to subvert these things which now have been determined by us, all these, if they be Bishops or clerics let them be deposed, the Bishops from the Episcopate, the clerics from the clergy; but if they be monks or laymen: let them be anathematized. (Sixth Ecumenical: Constantinople III).

For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence, but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.

Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.

The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .

3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.

And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.

But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870.)

They [the Modernists] exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all its weight and authority. But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns those "who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind...or endeavor by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church"; nor that of the declaration of the fourth Council of Constantinople: "We therefore profess to preserve and guard the rules bequeathed to the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, by the Holy and most illustrious Apostles, by the orthodox Councils, both general and local, and by everyone of those divine interpreters, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church." Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX, ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: "I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the Church.'' (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical' misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. . . . The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way. (Pope Saint Pius X, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)

Appendix B

The Dishonor Roll of How the Conciliar Revolutionaries Have Warred Against Catholic Doctrine

1. The honor and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity, which has been profaned by the worldly nature of liturgical rites that are designed to appeal to the “people” and not to reflect the reverence due to Him in the Holy Sacrifice of Mass and the sacrality necessary to raise the people out of the muck and mire of this passing world, The Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service celebrates the world, sacralizes the profane, and profanes all that is holy and sacred (please purchase G.I.R.M. Warfare: The Conciliar Church's Unremitting Warfare Against Catholic Faith and Worship if you have done not so already). God’s honor and glory has also been blasphemed and profaned by the abundant praise heaped upon false religions, their false doctrines, their false leaders and by the esteem shown to idols by the conciliar “popes” and “bishops.”
2. God’s immutability, which has been rendered mutable by dogmatic evolutionism’s different contemporary appellations (Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II’s “living tradition,” Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s “hermeneutic of continuity,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s open embrace of dogmatic evolutionism by means of distorting and misrepresenting the teaching of Saint Vincent Lerins, each of which ignores the condemnations of dogmatic evolutionism found in The Third Council of Constantinople, Singulari Vos, May 15, 1834, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864, the Decree on the Doctrine of the Faith issued by the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council, April 24, 1870, Lamentabili Sane, July 1, 1907, Pascendi Dominicae Gregis, September 8, 1907, Praestatia Scripturae, November 18, 1907, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910, and Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.
3. The unicity and infallibility of Holy Mother Church, which has been granted a “perfect immunity from error” (e.g., cf. Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)
4. The ends proper to Holy Matrimony, which have been inverted by the conciliar revolutionaries according the “personalism” of Father Herbert Doms and Dietrich von Hildebrand that was condemned directly by Pope Pius XII on April 1, 1944.)
5. The very nature of the papacy itself, which was become an object of derision, ridicule, and abject disobedience in the past sixty years with the recrudescence of the Gallicanism by the Society of Saint Pius X and then by scores of others in the “resist while recognize” movement.
6. Religious liberty and the separation of Church and State.
7. New ecclesiology.
8. Episcopal collegiality.
9. Ecclesial synodality.
10. False interpretations of Sacred Scripture.
11. Misrepresentations of the teachings of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Apostles, Martyrs, Doctors, and Confessors.
12. False Mariology.
13. False Eschatology.
14. False Canon Law.
15. False Ecumenism and inter-religious “prayer” services.
16. A rejection of the fact that the Old Covenant was superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant instituted by Our Lord at the Last Supper and ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on Good Friday.
17. Endless praise of pagan religions that deny the doctrine of the Most Holy Trinity and thus of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s Sacred Divinity.