BELLUM CONTRA HÆRÉTICOS

Card. Prevost elected by conclave as Leo XIV—Who is he?

Leo XIV, Cardinal Prevost, has been elected by the Conclave. He is thus a true successor of Paul VI: but is he a successor of St Peter?

https://www.wmreview.org/p/leo-xiv-prevost

Some info on 'Leo XIV'

https://novusordowatch.org/2025/05/habent-papam-new-pope-leo-14/

Non habemus papam.

He's a "moderate" now, since Francis destroyed so much. He would have been a heretic in the 50s, and burnt at the stake in the Middle Ages.

https://collegeofcardinalsreport.com/cardinals/robert-francis-prevost/ —> pro-Amoris Laetitia but apparently a little less pro-LGBT than Francis. Cards close to his chest regarding the traditional Mass and blessing sodomitical unions

https://www.thetablet.co.uk/features/next-pope-papabile/ —> directed removal of Bp Strickland

Also head of Augustianians and prefect of dicastery for bishops

General profile: https://web.archive.org/web/20250502030654/https://cruxnow.com/papal-transition/2025/05/papabile-of-the-day-cardinal-robert-francis-prevost

https://angelusnews.com/news/vatican/cardinals-prevost/ —> Some issues re. sexual abuse

Overall picture: seen as continuity Francis but not in style. Maybe less off the cuff

Not one man currently in the Sistine Chapel is a real cardinal. This is, therefore, an illegitimate election.

It is possible, however, that by a miracle of God's infinite mercy, a real Catholic could somehow receive the requisite two thirds of votes and be elected, and his subsequent recognition by the virtual unanimity of the Church would legitimize his elevation to the Papacy. (That's without thinking of the Cassiciacum Thesis.)

Let us pray that such a miracle occur.

Kyrie eleison.

Cue jokes: "We're all sedevacantists now."

How funny. But no, "we're" not. Sedevacantism is predicated not just on a vacant see, but the Church's teaching on the papacy and her own constitution.

Many who are chortling about how "we're sedevacantists now" will accept whoever's elected—even Pope Susan:

https://www.wmreview.org/p/susanvacantism

Francis is dead, RIP

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, whom many know as 'Pope Francis,' has gone to his reward.

What next?
https://www.wmreview.org/p/francis-is-dead-rip

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has died.

He showed the Catholic world the poisonous fruits of Vatican II in an obvious fashion leading to a surge of Catholics to seek out more traditional groups and forms of worship to reject the Modernist's concoctions. So much so, that towards the latter years of his papacy, he attempted to suppress various indult groups and TLM associations. However, his attempts merely managed to foster a spirit of rebellion.

Bergolio was known to cause confusion with every official statement and especially informal interviews. First, by the ambiguous text or wording, then by the strange responses, or lack of, when questioned on such teachings and thirdly by the actions that he allowed to go unchallenged by his bishops. Examples include, Amoris Laetitia, which allowed open adulterers to receive communion. The Document on Human Fraternity For World Peace and Living Together which states that God wills a diversity of religions and the more recent "gay blessing" scandal, with many, many more examples. It is immeasurable the loss of faith, confusion and division that he has caused.

We should hope that he has made peace with God before his final moments and that He has mercy on him.

Eternal rest grant onto him, O Lord, and perpetual light shine upon him. May his soul and the souls of all the faithful departed, rest in peace. Amen.

Linking Satanism with religious liberty triggered outrage—here's why

Follow-up to the drama over this issue. Here's the thing: we either accept that liberalism pervades the very air we breathe, or we live in denial.

https://www.wmreview.org/p/trigger-warning

The outrage at suggesting that Vatican II’s doctrine of religious liberty extends even to Satanists reveals something deeper.

Broadly speaking, there are two types of people among us.

The first recognises that we live in a world saturated with naturalism and liberalism—and that he himself is not exempt. When he uncovers yet another layer of these errors within his own thinking, actions, or assumptions, he is glad: for now the rot can be named and cut out. The work of restoration advances.

The second remains in denial about how deeply these errors have shaped him. He cannot bear to admit that any of his treasured views might spring from the poisoned wells of liberalism and naturalism. When this is pointed out, the persona he has constructed of the perfect, moderate conservative is threatened—so he rushes to defend it, either by justifying the error, denying its implications, or shooting the messenger.

There are some who have long defended Vatican II and its teaching on religious liberty—and who have or seek a place at the table of the establishment—and who are heavily invested in making sure that everything appears coherent.

Not all such men fall into the second camp. There are honest men who really believe that these far-fetched solutions are the truth. You can tell who these honest men are, because they do not get worked up or aggressive/defensive about the suggestion that they might be wrong: they just disagree, state their reasons, and maintain charity and respect with those who disagree.

But the danger of ideological thinking is very real. May we be preserved from it.

We have never lost so many email subscribers from one article as this.

Not dozens—but noticeable.

And while we are sorry to see people go, we are not going to back down on this.

In fact, it's time to double down.

Because it is better to lose subscribers over telling the truth, than it is to keep them by silence.

Here are the facts:

- Vatican II's doctrine of religious liberty is a denial of the Catholic doctrine, and there are no coherent reasons why this liberty does not extend to the adherents of polytheistic religions, devil-worshippers and so on
- It is a tacit denial of Christ's Kingship over society and the duties that civil society owe to him
- It is rooted in agnosticism and naturalism, and is a chief doctrine of the religion of man
- As such, this enlightenment and revolutionary imposture is properly styled as promethean and even luciferian.
- All the "orthodox" phrases in Vatican II do not change this reality; in fact, they are there simply to make people swallow this false doctrine and others.

We are sorry if people are attached to ideas of religious liberty and are offended by this—but don't shoot the messenger.

This is why Vatican II is a robber council and must go.

These points have already been proven by others more ably than we can, but stay tuned for more on this important topic.

https://www.wmreview.org/p/religious-liberty-extent

This is Father Gilchrist.

Please support the YouTube channel. If we get to 50 subscribers, we will then be eligible to do livestreams. This means we can begin live-streaming the rosary.

I will try to upload a sermon as often as possible throughout this Lenten period for you all.
God bless you.

https://youtube.com/@thomisticteaching?si=WegYIAdAg-hcTp-3

Requiem æternam dona ei, Domine,
Et lux perpetua luceat ei,
Requiescat in pace.
Amen

Bishop Richard Williamson died tonight at 11.23pm GMT. His final agony was only a matter of minutes.

The Bishop is in extremis. Please pray hard for him.