| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 437 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 432 Guest(s)
Applebot, Bing, Facebook, Google, Yandex
|
| Latest Threads |
LFSPN: The Media as Psych...
Forum: LFSPN
Last Post: Stone
11 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 48
|
Opinion: Abp. Vigano accu...
Forum: Archbishop Viganò
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 12:20 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 52
|
IDF admits photo of Israe...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 12:02 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 43
|
Holy Mass in New Hampshir...
Forum: April 2026
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 11:30 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 46
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Seco...
Forum: April 2026
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:50 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 96
|
Archbishop Lefebvre: 1975...
Forum: Sermons and Conferences
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:47 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 7,029
|
‘Mirror of the Blessed Vi...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:45 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 56
|
Mgr. Louis de Ségur: Shor...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:32 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 602
|
Second Week after Easter ...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
04-19-2026, 07:13 AM
» Replies: 8
» Views: 29,004
|
Second Sunday after Easte...
Forum: Easter
Last Post: Stone
04-19-2026, 07:13 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 26,587
|
|
|
| Opinion: Abp. Vigano accuses Clinton of Benedict XVI resignation trigger |
|
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 12:20 PM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
 |
Abp. Vigano accuses Clinton of Benedict XVI resignation trigger – Vatican banking shutdown
Archbishop Viganò stated that Hillary Clinton and John Podesta caused the shutdown of the Vatican banking ATMs
that were thought to have pressured Benedict XVI to resign.
![[Image: Untitled-2.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Untitled-2.png)
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
Exsurge Domine
Apr 18, 2026
Editor’s note: The following text is taken from Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s X account, first published on April 18, 2026, and republished here in full.
(LifeSiteNews) — It is understandable that many Catholics feel offended and scandalized by the statements made by the President of the United States regarding Leo, even if one certainly cannot claim that Jorge Bergoglio refrained during his “reign” from launching attacks and provocations against Donald Trump.
Moreover, the latter’s intervention is contextualized by the statements orchestrated against him this week on the CBS, propaganda program 60 Minutes by three utterly corrupt cardinals: Cupich, McElroy, and Tobin, three prelates who are notoriously ultra-Bergoglian and ultra-progressive, part of the network of the serial abuser Theodore McCarrick, inextricably linked to the radical “woke” Left, and key electors and closest collaborators of Robert Prevost.
When asked by journalists about Donald Trump’s post, Leo replied: “I am not afraid of the Trump administration, nor of boldly proclaiming the message of the Gospel, which is what I believe I am called to do, and what the Church is called to do.” These words, apparently indisputable coming from Prevost, can however shift sharply in meaning depending on how they are interpreted. They may simply mean, “I have no fear of civil power,” thereby asserting the superiority of the Catholic Church’s spiritual authority over any earthly authority. Or, in a diametrically opposite sense, they may mean, “I have no fear of this administration” – implying that, in other instances, he deems it legitimate to feel fear and to refrain from “boldly proclaiming the message of the Gospel.” And immediately, one is reminded of how often we have seen the Vatican “fear” other administrations, both in Washington – especially when the interference of Hillary Clinton and John Podesta went so far as to block in the Vatican banking transactions via the SWIFT network – and in Beijing, where the Holy See is officially involved with the communist dictatorship, through a secret Agreement, not to “forcefully proclaim the message of the Gospel,” rubber-stamping the episcopal appointments of the Chinese Patriotic Association without them being deemed a schismatic act, unlike the Consecrations at Ecône.
In numerous other instances, Prevost, and before him Bergoglio, have seen fit to remain silent of their own accord, perhaps because their acquiescence, if not outright enthusiastic cooperation, was precisely what the Powers That Be expected from the Conciliar and Synodal Church. Indeed, no sooner had the Trump Administration cut off the stream of funds that USAID was channeling to the USCCB and various bodies of the American Catholic Church to facilitate immigration, than an open war erupted on the part of all those cardinals and bishops whom Clinton, Obama, and Biden had, until that moment, showered with money. During those years of plenty, Bergoglio and the entire American Episcopate took great care not to disrupt their idyll with the White House, thanks, in part, to the good offices of then-Cardinal McCarrick, and paid scant heed to the pro-abortion, LGBTQ+, and gender-related policies promoted by “Catholic” Democrats. The mere suggestion of excommunicating “pro-choice” politicians was deemed an intolerable intrusion by a Hierarchy that had itself made it abundantly clear it had no intention whatsoever of taking such a step.
Thus, a single phrase, extrapolated from its context – “I am not afraid of the Trump administration, nor of boldly proclaiming the message of the Gospel” – might appear entirely unobjectionable. Yet, when viewed within a broader, more coherent framework, it leaves one utterly perplexed, for it directly contradicts the very words Leo uttered on that same occasion: “We are not politicians. (…) I do not believe that the message of the Gospel should be instrumentalized, as some are currently doing.” And while there are undoubtedly those who instrumentalize “the message of the Gospel” through the pseudo-messianic delusions typical of American televangelists, there are also most certainly those the within the Vatican who do not hesitate to instrumentalize that very same Gospel to lend a veneer of legitimacy and morality to the agenda of ethnic replacement and the Islamization of the West: an agenda doggedly pursued by the globalist elite through the Agenda 2030. This is an Agenda that Trump detests entirely, but which the Holy See, Leo, the USCCB, and a host of pseudo-Catholic charities have elevated to the status of a new globalist totem within their own synodal program. Nor should we forget the doctrinal ratification that Bergoglio bestowed upon the pandemic farce and mass vaccination, just as he did for climate fraud and “sustainable development goals” with his pseudo-encyclical Laudato Si’, or the blessing that Prevost imparted to a block of ice specially shipped from Antarctica during a truly cringeworthy ceremony at Castel Gandolfo.
Despite his insistence that he is not a politician, Leo had no qualms about granting a private audience on April 9 to David Axelrod, Barack Obama’s chief strategist and former senior adviser at the White House. One question is more than legitimate: Did Axelrod perhaps come to the Vatican to dictate a specific political strategy to Leo, much as Hillary Clinton and John Podesta had previously interfered to pressure Benedict XVI into abdicating and then facilitate the election of Bergoglio?
The paradox is made manifest by Trump himself: “Leo should get his act together as Pope, use Common Sense, stop catering to the Radical left, and focus on being a Great Pope, not a politician. It’s hurting him very badly and, more importantly, it’s hurting the Catholic Church!” Which is absolutely true, more so than President Trump could possibly imagine.
While the Democratic administrations have repeatedly and improperly interfered in the governance of the Church of Rome, untimely and inappropriate interventions by the Vatican regarding Washington have hardly been lacking either. And while nobody was surprised by the invective of the Jesuit from Buenos Aires, who labeled Trump “unchristian” for declaring his intention to repatriate hordes of illegal immigrants, the pronouncements of the Augustinian from Chicago regarding immigration, and more recently concerning the war, have certainly left observers bewildered: “God blesses no conflict. Anyone who is a disciple of Christ, the Prince of Peace, never sides with those who yesterday wielded the sword and today drop bombs,” Leo said. Surely he could have elaborated, as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger did in 2003: “Given the new weapons that make possible a destruction extending far beyond groups of combatants, today we must ask ourselves whether it is still licit to admit the very existence of a just war.” Or, better yet, Leo could have recalled the words of Pius XII: “A people threatened by, or already the victim of, unjust aggression, if it wishes to act in a Christian manner, cannot remain in a state of passive indifference; moreover, the solidarity of the family of nations forbids others from behaving as mere spectators, adopting an attitude of impassive neutrality.” (Pius XII, Radio Message for Christmas, 24 December 1948)
But Prevost – and herein lies the true problem – does not speak with the voice of the Church: his words of condemnation against any war whatsoever ultimately serve to legitimize even unjust wars, thereby depriving the victim of aggression of the right to self-defense, given that even a defensive war would be deemed unjust. This error is akin to asserting that all religions are equivalent, that moral precepts must be adapted to contingent circumstances (see Amoris Lætitia and Fiducia Supplicans), or that capital punishment is contrary to the Gospel. For in these instances, too, the one who ought to serve as a point of reference in discerning Good from Evil betrays his own mandate by granting equal rights to error and to Truth, rather than assuming his moral responsibility to condemn the former and defend the latter.
Of course, if Leo ever dared to speak with the authoritative voice of the Catholic Church, he would find himself opposed not only by the pacifist Left (in whose ranks Prevost has served since the 1980s, joining the Young Augustinians movement (The resonance with the Young Turks movement, of clear Masonic aspiration (albeit perhaps unintentional), will not escape notice.), or Augustinians for Peace which was sponsored by the Italian Communist Party), but also by the “theo-con” Right, with which quite a few Catholic conservatives are dangerously aligned. The tolerance that the Conciliar Hierarchy currently enjoys is, in fact, conditional upon its acceptance and promotion not only of the globalist agenda of the U.N., the World Economic Forum in Davos, and the Council for Inclusive Capitalism With the Vatican founded by Bergoglio in collaboration with Lynn Forester de Rothschild, but also of the liberal agenda of the Anglo-Zionist lobby. In other words, it depends on two supranational powers operating on seemingly opposing fronts yet pursuing a common objective: the establishment of a New World Order, in which, regardless of which side ultimately prevails in the conflict, the sole victim of persecution will invariably be Catholicism – specifically, that Traditional Catholicism which Rome is striving by every means to destroy or subsume by “conciliarizing” and “synodalizing” it.
According to Trump’s admonition, “Leo should get his act together as Pope (…) and focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician.” Indeed, the election of an American “pope” from Chicago, steeped in heretical doctrines acquired during his years of ministry in Latin America, devoted to the cult of Pachamama, and ideologically aligned – by his own admission – with the worst progressivism of the infamous Cardinals Bernardin and Cupich, appears to have been deliberately orchestrated to serve as a counterweight to the President of the United States. If his role was intended to be – as has indeed become evident in recent months – that of continuing the conciliar and synodal revolution, it comes as no surprise that Bergoglio meticulously paved the way for his ecclesiastical ascent, ensuring that he would succeed him and not undo the twelve years of systematic dismantling of the Catholic edifice and total subservience to the globalist establishment carried out by the Argentine Jesuit. In the face of these concrete demonstrations of continuity between Bergoglio and Prevost, the silence of the sparse, moderately conservative minority within the College of Cardinals confirms their complicity and inadequacy.
The unanimous chorus of the mainstream media and the neo-papists serves as proof that Leo is not speaking as a pope but rather as a standard-bearer for anti-Trumpism, so to speak. This is because the accolades come from figures – both within and outside the ecclesial body – who possess nothing of the Catholic spirit, and who would be the very first to crucify Prevost were he to dare express even the slightest doubt regarding the untouchable “dogmas” of the radical Left. Furthermore, this defense of Prevost is motivated precisely by the fact that the “pope” has chosen to play the politician, thereby demonstrating a partisanship that discredits both the Papacy and the Catholic Church in the eyes of the world. For this reason, Leo truly ought to “get his act together as Pope” – a task that is, however, exceedingly difficult for someone like him, who was chosen precisely because his support for the globalist agenda would be not merely coerced, but spontaneous and convinced; and because Leo is being kept under close watch by the emissaries of those Powers who have absolutely no intention of relinquishing the positions they have secured within the Catholic Church, now that they stand so tantalizingly close to the finish line.
When Our Lord Jesus Christ is recognized as King of the Nations, no Antichrist will dare to claim the title of Messiah. And when He is recognized as King and High Priest within the Church, no Vicar of His will dare to subvert His teaching or demolish His Church. If this is happening today, before our very eyes, it is because we are living in eschatological times in which Our Lord has been dethroned from His Divine Kingship by the Nations, and from His Eternal Priesthood by His own Ministers. Therefore, in judging present events, let us not allow ourselves to be beguiled by abstract speculations, nor let us attempt to alter reality to suit our own illusions. Let us view all that is unfolding through a supernatural lens, for this is the only way to preserve, amidst our present tribulations, that peace of soul which the world neither knows how to give, nor can give (Jn 14:27).
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America
Viterbo, 17 April MMXXVI
S.cti Aniceti Papæ et Martyris
|
|
|
| IDF admits photo of Israeli soldier smashing statue of Our Lord is real |
|
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 12:02 PM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
IDF admits photo of Israeli soldier smashing statue of Our Lord is real
A photo of an Israeli soldier smashing the head of a statue of the crucified Jesus in Lebanon has gone viral, leading to outrage among Christians.
![[Image: shutterstock_1917131027-e1776691635195.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/shutterstock_1917131027-e1776691635195.jpg)
Bumble Dee/Shutterstock.com
Apr 20, 2026
(LifeSiteNews) — The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have confirmed that a photograph of an IDF soldier smashing the head of a statue of Jesus Christ is authentic and announced an investigation into the matter.
Over the weekend, a photo of an Israeli soldier smashing the head of a statue of the crucified Jesus in Lebanon went viral online and led to outrage among Christians. On Sunday, the IDF confirmed the picture was authentic and said, “Appropriate measures will be taken against those involved in accordance with the findings.”
“Following the completion of an initial examination regarding a photograph published earlier today of an IDF soldier harming a Christian symbol, it was determined that the photograph depicts an IDF soldier operating in southern Lebanon,” the statement by the IDF reads.
“The IDF views the incident with great severity and emphasizes that the soldier’s conduct is wholly inconsistent with the values expected of its troops. The incident is being investigated by the Northern Command and is currently being addressed through the chain of command.”
“Furthermore, the IDF is working to assist the community in restoring the statue to its place. The IDF is operating to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure established by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, and has no intention of harming civilian infrastructure, including religious buildings or religious symbols,” the IDF concluded.
According to the Times of Israel, the photo was taken in the Christian village of Debel in southern Lebanon.
Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar called the smashing of the statue a “shameful action” and offered an apology to every Christian whose feelings were hurt.
On Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also published a statement on the matter, writing on X, “Yesterday, like the overwhelming majority of Israelis, I was stunned and saddened to learn that an IDF soldier damaged a Catholic religious icon in southern Lebanon. I condemn the act in the strongest terms. Military authorities are conducting a criminal probe of the matter and will take appropriately harsh disciplinary action against the offender.”
“While Christians are being slaughtered in Syria and Lebanon by Muslims, the Christian population in Israel thrives unlike elsewhere in the Middle East,” he continued.
“Israel is the only country in the region that the Christian population and standard of living is growing. Israel is the only place in the Middle East that adheres to freedom of worship for all. We express regret for the incident and for any hurt this has caused to believers in Lebanon and around the world,” Netanyahu said.
Israel has increased its military attacks in Lebanon against Hezbollah since the start of the Iran war in late February, including hundreds to thousands of airstrikes. These strikes have killed at least 1,500 people (combatants and civilians), injured thousands more, and displaced over one million people. Many civilians, including Christians, have chosen to stay in their homes despite the risks, for fear of Islamic militants taking over their property once they leave.
|
|
|
|
| ‘Mirror of the Blessed Virgin Mary’ by St. Bonaventure |
|
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 09:45 AM - Forum: Our Lady
- No Replies
|
|
‘Mirror of the Blessed Virgin Mary’ by St. Bonaventure
Chapter III, ‘THE MEANINGS OF THE NAME MARY’ pages 13-15; part 2
[Saint Bonaventure – XIII Century AD: Civita di Bagnoregio, Papal States/Lyon, Kingdom of Burgundy-Arles; (aged 52-53);
Cardinal, Bishop, Doctor of the Church, Seraphic Doctor, Teacher of the Faith, Writer, Philosopher]
Taken from here.
![[Image: h02a699mm8cwar7v7mps3fm08rzc5xjo5wrkewc?...1776836619]](https://seedus2043.gloriatv.net/storage1/h02a699mm8cwar7v7mps3fm08rzc5xjo5wrkewc?secure=2WgDxEG7Qm7egKtaQFrNcw&expires=1776836619)
Image: Cosimo Rosselli ~ ‘Madonna and Child Enthroned with Angels, St Nicholas and St Anthony the Abbot’
“First consider that Mary is a most pure star by living purely and without sin. Therefore doth Wisdom say of her: "She is more beautiful than light, than the sun, and above all the arrangement of the stars, and being compared to light, she is found more pure." Some read here, "before" instead of "more pure," but either phrase is fitted to our Star. For Mary is indeed prior, or before, that is, she is most worthy, most great; Mary is purer than the sun, and the stars, and the light. For both in dignity and purity she surpasses the sun, the stars, and the light, yea, even every spiritual and angelic creature, of whom it is said: "God divides light from darkness," that is, the angels who stood firm from those who fell. Mary is prior to and purer than this angelic light. Hence Saint Anselm exclaims: "O Blessed among women, who surpassest the angels in purity, and the saints in piety!" Behold how Mary is a most pure Star by the purity of her life.
Secondly, consider that Mary is a most radiant star by emitting eternal light and bringing forth the Son of God. For she is that star of whom it is said in Numbers: "A star shall rise out of Jacob, and a rod shall arise in Israel." The rod is the Son of God, who is the ray of Mary, our star; this is that ray of whom it is sung: "As the ray of a star." St. Bernard says: "A ray from a star does not diminish its brightness, neither does the Son of the Virgin lessen the virginity of His Mother." O most truly blessed, O most truly radiant Star, Mary, whose ray has penetrated not only the world, but also Heaven, and even hell, as St. Bernard says: "She is that glorious and beautiful Star arisen out of Jacob, whose ray illuminateth the whole world, whose splendor shines forth in the highest, and penetrates even into hell." As Mary was a most pure star, by living most purely, so is she a most radiant one, by bringing forth the Son of God.
Thirdly, consider that Mary is a most useful star, by guiding us to our heavenly country, by leading us through the sea of this world to the grave of her Son, as to the gates of Paradise. She is as that radiant star which led the Magi most surely to Christ. Mary is that star which in the waves of the present life is most necessary to us. St. Bernard says: "Turn not away thine eyes from the splendor of this star, if thou wilt not be overwhelmed by storms. If the winds of temptation arise, if thou strikest on the rocks of temptation, tribulation, look upon the star, call on Mary." Therefore, lest thou shouldst be submerged in the sea of this world, follow the star, imitate Mary. It is the safest of paths to follow her, as St. Bernard says: "Following her, thou strayest not, praying to her, thou shalt never despair; thinking of her, thou shalt never err; if she upholdeth thee, thou shalt not fall; under her protection thou shalt not fear; if she is thy guide, thou shalt not grow weary; with her favor thou shalt attain thy end; and so in thyself thou shalt experience how truly it is said: And the name of the virgin was Mary."
Mary is also interpreted illuminatrix or lightgiver. For this virgin was wonderfully illuminated by the presence of the Lord, according to that word of the Apocalypse: "I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great power, and the earth was enlightened by the glory of him.... The Son of God is the Angel of Great Counsel; the earth illuminated by the glory of Him is Mary, who, as she was illuminated by His grace in the world, is now illuminated by His glory in Heaven, that, being thus illuminated, she may become a lightgiver in the world and in Heaven. Therefore, we must consider that Mary, the illuminated, is a light-giver by her example, her benefits, and her rewards. She giveth light by the example of her life, by the benefits of her mercy, and by the rewards of her glory.
Mary is the light-giver by the example of her most luminous life. For it is she who by her glorious life giveth light to the world. She it is whose glorious life enlightens all the churches. She is the lamp of the Church, enkindled by God for this very purpose that by her the Church might be enlightened against the darkness of the world. Let the Church, therefore, pray, let the faithful soul pray: "For Thou lightest my lamp, O Lord, my God, enlighten my darkness." The Lord hath lit this lamp most radiantly, and by this light he puts to flight the darkness of our souls. St. Bernard felt this when he said: "O Mary, by the magnificent example of thy virtues thou stirrest us up to the imitation of thee, and thus dost enlighten our night. For he who walketh in thy ways, walketh not in darkness, but has the light of life."
Secondly, consider how Mary is light-giver by the benefits of her gracious mercy, by which so many in the night of this world are spiritually illuminated, as the Israelites in olden days were by a pillar of fire, according to the Psalm: "Thou didst lead them forth in a pillar of cloud." Mary is to us a pillar of cloud, for she protects us like a cloud from the fiery heat of the divine indignation. She also protects us from the heat of diabolical temptation, as it is also said in the Psalm, "He spread a cloud."
Mary is a pillar of fire. What would become of us wretched beings, so full of darkness, in the light of this world, if we had not so lucid a lamp, so luminous a pillar ? What would become of the world without the sun ? St. Bernard says: "Take away this lightsome body, the sun, what will give light to the world, and where is day? Take away Mary, this Star of the Sea, and what remains save an enveloping cloud, the shadow of death, and the densest darkness?" Thou hast seen how Mary is a lightgiver by her most transcendently luminous life, thou shalt now see how Mary is an illuminatrix by her most resplendent mercy.
Thirdly, consider that Mary is also illuminatrix by her most resplendent glory, which illuminates the whole of Heaven, as the sun doth the world, according to Ecclesiasticus: "The sun giving light hath looked upon all things, and full of the glory of the Lord is his work" (XLII, 16.) The work of the Lord is full of His glory; the most excellent work of the Lord is Mary. This work, as it was full of the grace of the Lord in this world, is full of the glory of the Lord in Heaven. Thus, therefore, Mary, giving light by her glory, hath looked upon all things, because through all the angels and all the saints she spreadeth the illumination of her glory. What wonder if the presence of Mary illuminates the whole of Heaven, who also doth illuminate the whole earth? For St. Bernard saith . "The presence of Mary lights up the whole world, and the very heavenly country itself glows more brightly from being irradiated by the splendor of that virginal lamp." So thou seest how Mary is illuminatrix by her light-giving life and also by her resplendent glory.”
|
|
|
|
| Tribal Leader Makes Case for Polygamy in Cathedral - Leo XIV Remains Silent But Catholics React |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-18-2026, 01:00 PM - Forum: Pope Leo XIV
- No Replies
|
|
Tribal Leader Issues Polygamy in Cathedral - Leo XIV Remains Silent But Catholics React
![[Image: 1e6lsm6fmmruts5dliko4y8ybm0anbfj1xa6cz7?...1776655883]](https://seedus3932.gloriatv.net/storage1/1e6lsm6fmmruts5dliko4y8ybm0anbfj1xa6cz7?secure=13Af-WQNhwROtEYgbPCT0Q&expires=1776655883)
gloria.tv | April 18, 2026
On April 16, during the visit of Pope Leo XIV to Bamenda, Cameroon, Fon Fru Asaah Angwafor IV, the tribal leader of the Mankon community, spoke about polygamy. He made the remarks during an interreligious peace meeting in the cathedral.
He is the hereditary "king" of the Mankon people and rules over culture and spiritual tradition. He presides over pagan rites, such as important funerals and ancestral ceremonies. During these events, he wears ceremonial attire alongside elders. He also identifies as 'Catholic'.
In his speech at the cathedral, the tribal leader stated that 'some cultural practices continue to pose challenges' and cited polygamy as an example.
He expressed gratitude that, within the framework of the 2023 and 2024 Synod, African bishops had been tasked with conducting a study on polygamy and its place in the life of the Church.
The tribal chief went on to say that adulterers in polygamous relationships should be able to fully integrate into the Church without being 'judged or rejected'.
Leo XIV did not respond.
However, some of the faithful in attendance reacted with boos.
|
|
|
|
| Cardinal Fernández says Pope Leo XIV is continuing Francis’ legacy, not undoing it |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-17-2026, 10:57 AM - Forum: Pope Leo XIV
- No Replies
|
|
Cardinal Fernández says Pope Leo XIV is continuing Francis’ legacy, not undoing it
Cardinal Fernández pushed back on claims of a hard break with the direction of Pope Francis,
saying Leo XIV has asked bishops ‘to continue to receive the magisterium of Francis.’
![[Image: shutterstock_2698415899.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/shutterstock_2698415899.jpg)
Pope Leo XIV
Riccardo De Luca - Update/Shutterstock
Apr 16, 2026
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — Senior Vatican Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández has said Pope Leo XIV is continuing the legacy of Pope Francis.
On April 13, Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, stated in an interview given to Italian newspaper Il Giornale that it is inaccurate to claim Pope Leo XIV intends to overturn his predecessor’s pontificate, emphasizing instead continuity through specific initiatives and teachings promoted within the Church. The interview marked the approaching first anniversary of Pope Francis’s death, on April 21.
“Every pope has his own personal style and priorities, but to say that Pope Leo wants to erase what was done during the pontificate of Francis is dishonest,” Fernández said.
According to the Argentine cardinal, “One year later, Francis is not yet underground,” and his legacy is more relevant than ever. Pope Leo XIV asks the entire Church to “follow the lesson of humility” that Francis would have imparted with his life and his papacy.
When asked about “a decision or a text” by Francis that, according to Fernández, “changed the way of living the Church,” the cardinal replied: “The fact of applying the hierarchy of truth not only to ecumenism, but to all preaching and evangelization.”
The so-called “hierarchy of truth” is a theological interpretation of the Decree on Ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio of the Second Vatican Council (no. 11), according to which all the truths of the Catholic faith derive from the same divine source, but not all would have the same weight in relation to the core of the Gospel.
Unitatis Redintegratio asserts that “the whole doctrine must be clearly presented in its entirety” and that “nothing is more foreign to ecumenism than that false irenicism, which distorts the purity of Catholic doctrine and obscures its genuine and precise meaning.” Moreover, the decree recalls that, “When comparing doctrines it should be remembered that there exists an order or hierarchy in the truths of Catholic doctrine, by reason of their different relation to the foundation of the Christian faith.”
In the traditional sense, this means that Catholic dogmas proceed from the fundamental articles of the Creed as conclusions proceed from their premises.
In the neo-modernist sense, adopted by Francis, this concept has been interpreted to mean that some truths would be fundamental and necessary, others less so. This interpretation was condemned under the name of “latitudinarianism” by Pope Pius IX in his 1864 encyclical Quanta cura and in the Syllabus of Errors.
According to what Francis wrote in Evangelii Gaudium, the Church should not “be obsessed with the disjointed transmission of a multitude of doctrines,” but should focus on what is “more beautiful, greater, more necessary”: the kerygma, the Christian proclamation, which – according to the late pope – reduces to the fact that “God loves all men.”
In this sense, Francis extended the concept of the hierarchy of truths, applying it not only to relations with non‑Catholics but also to relations among Catholics themselves.
Amid the interview, Fernández decried “traditionalist groups” who he said “resist” Pope Francis’s “condemnation of the death penalty.” Even with this, regarding the danger of erasing or forgetting what was taught by Francis, the cardinal said there would be no risk under Leo:
Quote:Pope Leo has expressed in various ways the need to continue to receive the magisterium of Francis. For example, to us cardinals, before the consistory, he asked us to read Evangelii gaudium again, and then invited us to reflect on its application. Now he has convened the presidents of the Episcopal Conferences to resume the reception of Amoris laetitia. Certainly, for those who rejected all his teaching or for those who received it only in appearance, [Francis’s] pontificate will have been only a bad parenthesis (forgetting the hermeneutic of continuity).
However, the concept of a “hermeneutic of continuity” developed by Pope Benedict XVI serves to avoid a reading of the Second Vatican Council as a rupture with respect to the standing Tradition. Fernández, instead, employed the expression in a different way, that is, to describe a supposedly necessary pastoral continuity and magisterial direction between Francis and Leo.
Again, according to Fernández, the point from which to begin again in order to communicate the faith anew in a secularized society would be “the experience of a friendship with Christ that enlightens, offers meaning, with the certainty of being loved.” The concept of experience and feeling as foundations of religious life, superior to faith and Tradition, are among the fixed points of modernism, as set forth and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in the encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis (1907).
|
|
|
|
| Pope Leo XIV calls Algiers mosque ‘space proper to God,’ makes silent prayer with imam |
|
Posted by: Stone - 04-14-2026, 10:38 AM - Forum: Pope Leo XIV
- Replies (1)
|
|
Pope Leo XIV calls Algiers mosque ‘space proper to God,’ makes silent prayer with imam
Pope Leo XIV touched down in Algeria on April 13, becoming the first pope ever to make an apostolic visit to the country, opening with silent prayer at the world’s third largest mosque.
![[Image: Untitled-9-810x500.png]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Untitled-9-810x500.png)
Pope Leo XIV presides over the Prayer Vigil for Peace at St Peter's Basilica, on April 11, 2026, in Vatican City
Photo by Antonio Masiello/Getty Images
Apr 14, 2026
ALGIERS, Algeria (LifeSiteNews) — Pope Leo XIV visited the third largest mosque in the world in Algiers, Algeria, and paused in silent prayer with the imam. During his last journey in Istanbul, he did not pray in the Blue Mosque.
On April 13, Pope Leo began his apostolic journey in Africa, with the first stop in Algeria – the first papal visit in the country’s history. During his stopover at the Mosque of Algiers, the Pope took off his shoes as required by protocol and paused in silent prayer together with Imam Mohamed Mamoun al Qasimi, showing a change of attitude compared to what he had done at the Blue Mosque in Istanbul during a prior apostolic voyage.
Pope Leo’s recent journey began with a visit to the Islamic place of worship, which ranks as the third largest mosque in the world, after those of Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia.
According to Vatican News, the Pope – after removing his shoes to enter, as required by protocol – remained inside for just under ten minutes, several of which were spent in “silent reflection” beside the imam and before the mihrab, the niche carved into the wall that indicates the direction of Mecca. It is toward this direction that Muslims orient themselves during prayer. According to Islamic tradition, the mihrab symbolizes the presence of God and the centrality of prayer.
Accompanying the Pope were two cardinals: George Jacob Koovakad, prefect of the Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue, and Jean-Paul Vesco, Archbishop of Algiers.
As reported by the same Vatican outlet, the Pope then withdrew for a private moment of dialogue with the rector of the mosque, where he expressed “gratitude for being in a place that represents the space proper to God.”
Although the Pope, the imam, the cameramen, and the other operators closest to him had removed their shoes, other people farther from the cameras were visibly inside the mosque wearing footwear, which makes the visit seem more like a staged media display than a sincere gesture of religious reverence.
In November 2025, during his first apostolic journey in Turkey, Pope Leo visited the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. According to several sources, he took off his shoes as required by protocol, visited the mosque in silence and with respect, but declined the imam’s invitation to join in prayer.
The Vatican had initially announced that there would be a “brief moment of silent prayer” during the Istanbul visit, but later clarified that the Pontiff had chosen to experience the visit as a moment of listening and learning, rather than formal prayer. Later, Leo XIV explained that he prefers to pray in a Catholic church, before the Blessed Sacrament, and that his gesture was not meant to be interpreted as a sign of disrespect toward Islam.
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fanastpaul.com%2Fwp-cont...007bac2136]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fanastpaul.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2023%2F04%2Fjohn-16-17-a-little-while-and-you-shall-not-see-me-what-he-calls-a-little-while-st-augustine-30-april-2023.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e8b894822a32bdff9cf748309e5d56de8359112b34fa65905dd22a007bac2136)
![[Image: a7f05267-f185-fbaf-ce46-de3b7cef0b71.jpg]](https://mcusercontent.com/76ce784d87af5db75a3164d6a/images/a7f05267-f185-fbaf-ce46-de3b7cef0b71.jpg)
