7: The Vatican II “Popes”

Chapter 7

The Vatican II “Popes”

Heresy, Apostasy, and Moral Compromise

The papacy, established by Christ to safeguard and guide His Church, has traditionally served as a bulwark against heresy and error. The pope is not merely a figurehead but a divinely appointed guardian of the faith, entrusted with the sacred duty of preserving doctrine and safeguarding souls. However, since Vatican II, the papal office has been occupied by men who, despite being materially elected, were disqualified from true papal authority due to their heretical beliefs and actions.

The Vatican II “Popes”:

1. John XXIII (Angelo Roncalli),

2. Paul VI (Giovanni Montini),

3. John Paul I (Albino Luciani),

4. John Paul II (Karol Wojtyła),

5. Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger),

6. Francis (Jorge Bergoglio), and

7. Leo XIV (Robert Prevost)

   embraced modernism, ecumenism, and religious pluralism, ideologies long condemned by the Church. This chapter will demonstrate how their pre-papacy and post-election actions disqualified them from the papacy and how their heretical positions resulted in latae sententiae excommunication from the Catholic Church.

The Errors of Modernism, Ecumenism, Globalism, and Other Ideologies in Relation to the Church

The Church’s Role in the World

The primary role of the Catholic Church, as established by Christ, is to be the Ark of Salvation for souls, guiding them toward eternal life through the sacraments, doctrine, and the teaching of the Gospel. The pope, as the Vicar of Christ, is entrusted with preserving the Church’s mission of salvation by defending and upholding divine truth. The Church is not a secular organization or a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) tasked with improving the world based on human principles of peace, tolerance, or environmental concerns detached from God’s moral law. The Church’s sole mission is supernatural: the salvation of souls through the teachings of Christ.

However, since the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II), the Church has increasingly aligned itself with ideologies that are not focused on salvation but rather on human-centered objectives. This chapter explores the errors of modernism, ecumenism, globalism, environmentalism (specifically the man-made global warming narrative), religious indifferentism, and communism and highlights how each of the Vatican II popes has shown support for or sympathy toward these ideologies, leading the Church astray from its divine mission.

Modernism

Modernism was condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907) as “the synthesis of all heresies.” It is an ideology that seeks to reinterpret the Catholic faith to align with modern philosophical, scientific, and political ideas, undermining the eternal truths of the Church. Modernism rejects the idea of immutable dogma, instead proposing that doctrine should evolve to fit contemporary human experiences and societal changes. This mindset corrupts the Church’s teaching authority and compromises the deposit of faith.

Vatican II Popes and Modernism

John XXIII (Angelo Roncalli): Even before his election, Roncalli had modernist leanings, as evidenced by his removal from his teaching position in 1925 due to his associations with known modernists. His calling of Vatican II was rooted in the desire to "open the windows" of the Church to the modern world, which led to a departure from many traditional doctrines.

Paul VI (Giovanni Montini): Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae upheld the Church’s teaching on contraception, but his broader theological leanings were modernist. He reformed the Mass with the Novus Ordo Missae, which watered down the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist, introducing a liturgy more aligned with Protestant sensibilities.

Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger): As a key theological advisor during Vatican II, Ratzinger played a role in reshaping the Church’s stance on religious liberty and ecumenism. His book Introduction to Christianity (1968) expressed doubts about traditional doctrines such as the Resurrection, reflecting modernist tendencies of questioning core beliefs.

Francis (Jorge Bergoglio): “Pope” Francis has embraced modernist principles throughout his papacy, often emphasizing the importance of dialogue with the modern world. His encyclical Fratelli Tutti leans heavily into themes of human fraternity based on universalist principles, rather than the exclusive path of salvation through Christ.

Leo XIV (Robert Prevost): As a long-time supporter of the post-conciliar vision of the Church, Leo XIV has deepened the modernist trajectory initiated by his predecessors. Rooted in the spirit of Vatican II, his emphasis on "accompaniment" and synodality often blurs doctrinal clarity in favor of pastoral inclusivity. Leo XIV has openly advocated for re-examining moral teachings in light of "lived experience," a hallmark of modernist relativism. His openness to interreligious dialogue and calls for a more "listening Church" reflect the Council’s problematic embrace of ecumenism and religious pluralism, which critics argue undermines the Church’s claim to be the one true path to salvation.

Modernism’s Error

It shifts the focus of the Church from defending immutable truth to adapting and evolving with societal trends, weakening the Church’s claim to hold the eternal truths of salvation.

Ecumenism

Ecumenism seeks to create unity between Christian denominations and even non-Christian religions by focusing on shared values rather than the unique and exclusive truths of the Catholic faith. True Catholic ecumenism should seek to convert others to the one true faith; however, the post-Vatican II ecumenical movement has fostered a spirit of compromise, where conversion is no longer the goal, but rather "dialogue" and coexistence.

Vatican II Popes and Ecumenism

John XXIII: His convocation of Vatican II initiated an unprecedented openness to dialogue with non-Catholic religions. This resulted in the documents Unitatis Redintegratio and Nostra Aetate, which promoted a positive view of non-Christian religions, a departure from the Church’s traditional stance of “extra Ecclesiam nulla salus” (outside the Church, there is no salvation).

John Paul II (Karol Wojtyła): John Paul II’s Assisi interfaith prayer gatherings in 1986 and 2002 represented one of the most visible acts of religious indifferentism in the Church’s history. These gatherings brought together leaders of various non-Christian religions, including animists and pagans, to pray for peace. Such actions gave the impression that all religions were equally valid paths to God.

Francis: “Pope” Francis has taken ecumenism even further. In 2019, he signed the Document on Human Fraternity with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, which states that God wills a diversity of religions. This is a direct contradiction to the Catholic teaching that Christ is the only way to the Father.

Leo XIV (Robert Prevost): Continuing in the spirit of his predecessors, "Pope" Leo XIV has embraced and advanced the ecumenical agenda rooted in Vatican II’s revolutionary departure from traditional ecclesiology. Under his leadership, the Church has intensified its participation in interreligious initiatives that place Catholicism on equal footing with non-Christian faiths. Leo XIV has publicly praised the “spiritual richness” of other religions and supported joint worship services and declarations with leaders of Protestant and non-Christian communities. By doing so, he promotes the heresy of religious indifferentism, implicitly denying the dogma that salvation is found solely in the Catholic Church. His approach echoes and amplifies the errors of Unitatis Redintegratio and Nostra Aetate, suggesting a unity based on human fraternity rather than conversion to the one true Faith.

Ecumenism’s Error

It implies that the Catholic Church is merely one valid path among many, undermining the Church’s exclusive role as the Ark of Salvation.

Globalism

Globalism seeks to unite nations under shared political and economic frameworks, often with the goal of creating a one-world government or a supranational authority. While global cooperation in some areas can be positive, globalism often promotes secular humanism, which is incompatible with the Church’s supernatural mission. Globalism tends to push for policies that favor secularism, materialism, and moral relativism.

Vatican II Popes and Globalism

Paul VI: In his encyclical Populorum Progressio (1967), Paul VI supported the idea of global development, which included cooperation with international organizations like the United Nations. He praised the UN’s efforts, despite the organization’s secular and often anti-Catholic policies, such as its promotion of population control.

John Paul II: Although a critic of Communism, John Paul II was a supporter of the European Union and its aim to create a united Europe, despite the EU’s secular and anti-Christian foundation. His support of globalist institutions revealed an openness to secular collaboration that downplayed the need for the Church to defend its independence from secular powers.

Francis: “Pope” Francis is perhaps the most vocal supporter of globalism. His encyclical Laudato Si’ promotes environmentalism, urging a global response to climate change, often aligned with secular globalist agendas. He has spoken at the United Nations, promoting human fraternity, climate action, and the redistribution of wealth, which are key tenets of globalism.

Leo XIV: Following in the footsteps of his predecessors, “Pope” Leo XIV has continued to champion globalist ideals under the guise of social justice and economic equity. He has publicly endorsed initiatives spearheaded by the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, praising their goals of sustainable development, global governance, and economic restructuring. By aligning the Vatican with corporate-backed global agendas such as ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) frameworks and the so-called “Great Reset,” Leo XIV further erodes the Church’s supernatural mission, replacing it with a technocratic vision rooted in humanism and centralized control. His frequent calls for multilateral cooperation and digital inclusivity echo the language of secular institutions rather than the Gospel, revealing an increasing subservience of the Vatican to global elites and their anti-Christian worldview.

Globalism’s Error

It shifts the Church’s focus from saving souls to building a secular utopia based on human fraternity and environmentalism, sidelining the importance of God’s grace and salvation.

Man-Made Global Warming

The narrative of man-made global warming has become a major political and cultural issue in recent decades. While the Church has always called for stewardship of the earth, the modern environmental movement often excludes God and places humanity at the center of creation. Furthermore, the climate change agenda is often used to justify population control, abortion, and other anti-life policies.

Vatican II Popes and Environmentalism

Paul VI: In Octogesima Adveniens (1971), Paul VI mentioned the need for environmental awareness, but his successors have amplified this concern.

Francis: “Pope” Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si’ (2015) is entirely devoted to environmentalism and the dangers of climate change. While the document acknowledges God as Creator, it often presents environmental concerns in a secular framework, aligned with the political agenda of global organizations like the UN. Laudato Si’ has been criticized for promoting environmentalism at the expense of the Church’s mission to save souls.

Leo XIV: “Pope” Leo XIV has deepened the Vatican’s commitment to the climate change agenda, fully embracing the narrative of man-made global warming as a moral imperative. He has intensified the rhetoric of Laudato Si’ by endorsing global carbon regulation, green taxation, and climate finance schemes championed by secular institutions. Rather than calling the faithful to repentance and spiritual renewal as the true solution to natural and societal disorder, Leo XIV promotes climate action as a primary moral duty, often in partnership with organizations that promote abortion, contraception, and global population control. His approach effectively reframes environmentalism as a pseudo-religion, displacing the Church’s divine mission with a technocratic, man-centered quest to "save the planet" at the cost of defending the faith and preserving moral truth.

Man-Made Global Warming’s Error: It transforms the Church into a promoter of secular environmentalism, focusing on saving the planet rather than saving souls.

Religious Indifferentism and Tolerance of False Beliefs

Religious indifferentism is the belief that all religions are equally valid paths to God. This is directly contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church, which holds that salvation is only possible through Christ and His Church. Tolerating or endorsing false beliefs weakens the Church’s mission to lead all people to the truth.

Vatican II Popes and Religious Indifferentism

John Paul II: The Assisi prayer meetings and his kissing of the Quran in 1999 were clear examples of religious indifferentism. These actions implied that all religions are valid ways to worship God, contradicting Catholic doctrine.

Francis: Francis’ 2019 Document on Human Fraternity and his 2024 statement in Singapore that “all religions are paths to God” represent the most extreme endorsement of religious indifferentism. These actions directly contradict the Church’s teaching, reaffirmed by the Council of Florence, that salvation is only through the Catholic Church.

Leo XIV: “Pope” Leo XIV has continued and intensified the promotion of religious indifferentism under the banner of “interfaith dialogue” and “mutual respect.” He regularly hosts joint prayer events with leaders of non-Christian religions, offers public blessings alongside pagans and heretics, and refers to the world’s major religions as “complementary revelations of the divine.” In speeches and official documents, Leo XIV avoids affirming the necessity of conversion to the Catholic faith, instead emphasizing a vague universal brotherhood rooted in shared values rather than shared truth. By equating the moral teachings of false religions with the Gospel, and by encouraging Catholics to “learn from other faith traditions,” he fosters the illusion that salvation can be found outside the Church—an idea condemned by countless popes and councils. His approach erases the Church’s missionary mandate and blurs the line between truth and error, leading countless souls into confusion and spiritual danger.

Religious Indifferentism’s Error

It denies the uniqueness of Christ as the only Savior of mankind, leading people to believe they can be saved through false religions.

Communism

Communism, a political ideology that denies the existence of God and seeks to establish a classless society through the abolition of private property, has been condemned by the Church as inherently atheistic and immoral. Communism promotes materialism and class warfare, directly opposing the Church’s teachings on human dignity, private property, and the family.

Vatican II Popes and Communism

Paul VI: Paul VI’s policy of Ostpolitik sought to engage with Communist regimes rather than condemn them outright. This policy of appeasement weakened the Church’s stance against the evils of Communism, which had been consistently condemned by pre-Vatican II popes.

John Paul II: Although John Paul II played a role in the fall of Communism in Eastern Europe, his approach to the Communist Party in Italy was more conciliatory. His reluctance to condemn certain socialist policies revealed an underlying sympathy for elements of the socialist agenda.

Leo XIV: “Pope” Leo XIV has further blurred the Church’s opposition to Communism by promoting economic and social policies rooted in Marxist principles, often under the guise of social justice and equity. He frequently criticizes wealth inequality and calls for the redistribution of resources, not merely as charitable acts but as structural imperatives enforced through state intervention. Leo XIV praises socialist governments for their focus on “the common good,” while remaining silent on their repression of religious freedom, promotion of atheism, and destruction of the traditional family. His language mirrors that of leftist revolutionary ideologies, framing poverty as a product of capitalism rather than sin, and offering political collectivism as a solution to spiritual and moral crises. In doing so, he lends moral legitimacy to systems long condemned by the Church, betraying the social doctrine of the papacy and aligning the Vatican with forces hostile to both faith and freedom.

Communism’s Error

It promotes atheism, materialism, and the destruction of social and moral structures. The Church’s failure to condemn Communism outright during the Vatican II era undermines its moral authority.

The True Role of the Church: The Ark of Salvation

The Catholic Church’s mission is fundamentally supernatural: to save souls by leading them to Christ through the sacraments, teaching, and moral guidance. The pope, as the Vicar of Christ, is responsible for guarding this mission, ensuring that the Church remains faithful to its purpose. The Church is not a human institution seeking merely to promote peace, social justice, or environmental sustainability detached from the Gospel. These human-centered goals are secondary to the divine mission of salvation.

The Church’s Mission vs. Vatican II Ideologies

The Church is not an Non-Governmental Agency (NGO) concerned primarily with making the world a better place through human effort alone. The ideologies embraced by the Vatican II popes—modernism, ecumenism, globalism, environmentalism, religious indifferentism, and tolerance of Communism—have shifted the Church’s focus from its divine mission of salvation to secular, political, and worldly concerns.

The Nature of Papal Election: Material vs. Formal Pope

In 1979, French Dominican theologian and Traditional Catholic bishop Michel-Louis Guérard des Lauriers (1898 – 1988) developed the Cassiciacum Thesis, a critical framework for understanding how a pope can be materially elected (holding the title in name) but not receive formal authority (the spiritual grace conferred by God) if he holds heretical beliefs. A heretic cannot receive divine grace, and thus, these individuals are material popes—occupying the office without truly fulfilling its divine mandate.

This theological distinction is based on the principle articulated by St. Robert Bellarmine:

“A manifest heretic automatically ceases to be pope and can be judged by the Church.” Pope Innocent III affirmed this when he declared, “The pope can be judged by no one unless he is found to have deviated from the faith.” 

This teaching is crucial for evaluating the Vatican II popes, who, despite their formal election, are disqualified from holding the papacy due to their heretical beliefs and actions, both before and after their election.

Pre-“Papacy” Beliefs and Actions of Each Vatican II “Pope”

The pre-”papacy” beliefs and actions of each Vatican II pope reveal a consistent pattern of deviation from traditional Catholic teaching. These actions, rooted in modernist heresy, disqualify them from the papal office and excommunicate them from the Church before their election.

What is an Antipope?

The classical definition of an antipope — "one who, in opposition to the one canonically elected, sets himself up as pope" — indeed presumes that a valid pope already exists.

What if there is no valid pope at all?

In such a case, according to traditional Catholic theology and common reasoning:

An antipope can still exist even if there is no true pope — provided someone publicly claims the papacy illegitimately, without the conditions required for valid election and papal authority.

In other words:

A man becomes an antipope not only by opposing a true pope, but also by falsely claiming the papacy when the chair of Peter is vacant, especially if he is canonically disqualified (e.g., due to public heresy).

Theological & Canonical Basis

1. Pope Paul IV’s Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio (1559):

   • Declares that any heretic who attempts to be elected pope is null and void, even if no pope is reigning.

   • Such a man is not pope at all, and his claim is fraudulent — making him an antipope by the nature of the false claim.

2. St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice II, 30:

   • A manifest heretic is ipso facto deposed from all office, and cannot validly be elected pope.

   • If he claims the papacy anyway, he is an antipope, even if there is no valid pope currently on the throne.

3. Canonical understanding (1917 Code):

   • A usurper of ecclesiastical authority, especially of the supreme pontificate, is a public intruder and schismatic, even in an interregnum.

Analogy:

Just as someone pretending to be a judge while the court is empty is still an impostor, so too someone pretending to be pope during an interregnum is still an antipope, if his claim is invalid.

Conclusion:

Even if no true pope exists, a false claimant to the papacy is still an antipope. The absence of a valid pope does not make a heretical usurper legitimate. Instead, his public claim to the papal office — while lacking the conditions for valid succession — makes him an antipope in the fullest traditional sense, regardless of whether opposition to a reigning pope exists.

A. Angelo Roncalli (John XXIII)

Antipope from 28 October 1958 – 3 June 1963 (4 years, 218 days)

Pre-“Papacy” Actions:
Angelo Roncalli, later “Pope” John XXIII, was heavily involved with modernist thinkers long before his election. In 1925, he was removed from his teaching position at the Lateran University due to his suspected involvement with modernist theologians like Ernesto Buonaiuti, whose ideas were condemned by Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907). Modernism, described by Pope St. Pius X as “the synthesis of all heresies,” seeks to reconcile Catholic doctrine with secular philosophies, which fundamentally undermines the Church’s authority and unchangeable teachings.

Roncalli’s support for religious pluralism and his advocacy for ecumenical dialogue with non-Catholics further illustrated his departure from Catholic tradition. Pope Pius IX, in his Syllabus of Errors (1864), condemned the notion that the Church should reconcile with modern civilization or accept religious indifferentism, which Roncalli supported even before becoming pope.

Post-“Papacy” Actions:
As “Pope” John XXIII, Roncalli’s decision to convene the Second Vatican Council solidified his modernist agenda. His opening address, Gaudet Mater Ecclesia (1962), called for aggiornamento—the updating of the Church to engage with the modern world. This marked a radical departure from the Church’s historical role of defending timeless truths against the errors of the world.

Fr. Francisco Radecki emphasizes,

“John XXIII’s decision to call Vatican II was the catalyst for the eventual collapse of traditional Catholicism. His modernist agenda opened the floodgates for the infiltration of heresy.”

Roncalli’s pre-”papacy” modernist views, compounded by his actions as pope, demonstrate his automatic excomm- unication from the Church, which rendered his election invalid and disqualified him from holding the papal office.

B. Giovanni Montini (Paul VI)

Antipope from 21 June 1963 – 6 August 1978 (15 years, 46 days)

Pre-”Papacy” Actions:
Before his “election”, Giovanni Montini’s modernist sympathies were evident through his promotion of liturgical reform and his involvement in diplomatic relations with Communist regimes (Ostpolitik). Montini’s close ties to Jacques Maritain, a liberal Catholic philosopher, revealed his embrace of modernist ideas that sought to harmonize Catholic doctrine with secular humanism. His support for early liturgical changes to make the Mass more acceptable to Protestants marked a departure from the traditional understanding of the Mass as a sacrifice, as upheld by the Council of Trent.

Montini’s Ostpolitik policy, which involved softening the Church’s stance on Communism, was in direct opposition to Pope Pius XI’s clear condemnation of Communism in Divini Redemptoris (1937). Montini’s willingness to engage with and tolerate atheistic materialism foreshadowed the dangerous compromises he would later make as pope.

Post-”Papacy” Actions:
As “Pope” Paul VI, Montini’s most significant act of heresy was the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae in 1969. The New Mass, developed with the assistance of Protestant advisors, removed many of the traditional elements of the Mass that emphasized its sacrificial nature.

Bishop Donald Sanborn remarks,

“Paul VI’s New Mass represents a liturgical rupture with the past, designed to appeal to Protestants and downplay the sacrificial character of the Eucharist.”

Paul VI’s commitment to religious indifferentism, seen in his interfaith dialogues and his promotion of ecumenism, further demonstrated his break with the Church’s teaching that salvation is found only within the Catholic Church. His willingness to compromise on core doctrinal issues, both before and after his papacy, automatically disqualified him from the papal office.

C. Albino Luciani (John Paul I)

Antipope from 26 August 1978 – 28 September 1978 (33 days)

Pre-”Papacy” Actions:
Albino Luciani, who would later become “Pope” John Paul I, showed a dangerous ambiguity on key moral teachings, particularly on contraception. Luciani suggested openness to revisiting the Church’s position on artificial birth control, a position already definitively condemned by Pope Pius XI in Casti Connubii (1930). His willingness to compromise on this essential moral issue disqualified him from safeguarding the Church’s immutable teachings.

Post-”Papacy” Actions:
Though John Paul I’s “papacy” lasted only 33 days, his pre-”papacy” leanings indicated a potential trajectory toward further moral compromises. Romano Amerio writes,

“John Paul I’s brief pontificate left unresolved concerns about his potential to undermine traditional moral teachings, particularly regarding contraception.”

Luciani’s pre-”papacy” moral ambiguity disqualified him from the papacy, as it reflected a willingness to compromise on the Church’s doctrinal integrity.

D. Karol Wojtyła (John Paul II)

Antipope from 16 October 1978 – 2 April 2005 (26 years, 168 days)

Pre-”Papacy” Actions:
As Archbishop of Kraków, Karol Wojtyła was an advocate of ecumenical dialogue, promoting unity between Catholics and non-Catholics without requiring conversion. His early theological works, such as Love and Responsibility (1960), advanced a subjective understanding of morality that emphasized human dignity but downplayed the objective moral law. This approach contradicted the Church’s traditional teaching on the necessity of conversion to the Catholic faith, as stated by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos (1928):

“The union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ.”

Post-”Papacy” Actions:
As “Pope” John Paul II, Wojtyła’s actions further demonstrated his adherence to religious indifferentism. His infamous gesture of kissing the Quran in 1999 scandalized Catholics by symbolizing his acceptance of Islam as a legitimate path to God. His hosting of interfaith prayer gatherings in Assisi in 1986 and 2002, where representatives of non-Christian religions were invited to pray, represented a profound betrayal of Catholic teaching on the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation.

Fr. Anthony Cekada comments,

“John Paul II’s willingness to engage in interfaith dialogue and his public gestures of reverence toward false religions undermined the Church’s teaching on the exclusive path to salvation through Christ.”

John Paul II’s pre-papacy and post-papacy actions firmly placed him outside the bounds of Catholic orthodoxy, disqualifying him from the papacy.

E. Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI)

Antipope from 19 April 2005 – 28 February 2013 (7 years, 315 days)

Pre-”Papacy” Actions:
Before becoming Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger was a prominent theological advisor during Vatican II, playing a significant role in shaping the council’s documents on religious liberty and ecumenism. His writings, especially Introduction to Christianity (1968), revealed his modernist tendencies, as he expressed doubts about central Catholic doctrines, such as the physical Resurrection of Christ and the nature of Christ’s divinity. These positions marked a clear break from traditional Catholic teaching.

Post-”Papacy” Actions:
As Pope Benedict XVI, Ratzinger’s actions reflected his continued commitment to ecumenism and religious relativism. His participation in a prayer service at the Blue Mosque in Istanbul in 2006, where he prayed alongside Muslim clerics, symbolized his acceptance of Islam as a legitimate path to God. His efforts to reconcile with the Eastern Orthodox Church without requiring their acceptance of Catholic dogma further demonstrated his willingness to compromise on essential Catholic teachings.

Fr. Dominic Radecki asserts,

“Though Benedict XVI appeared conservative, his actions consistently revealed a modernist mindset that sought to bridge the gap between Catholicism and other religions at the expense of doctrinal truth.”

Ratzinger’s pre-papacy modernism and his post-papacy actions show that he was already disqualified from holding the papal office, as his beliefs placed him outside the true Church.

F. Jorge Bergoglio (Francis)

Antipope from 13 March 2013 –21 April 2025 (12 years, 39 days)

Pre-“Papacy” Actions:
Before becoming “Pope” Francis, Jorge Bergoglio was a vocal supporter of Liberation Theology, a Marxist-influenced movement that prioritizes social justice and political activism over the Church’s supernatural mission. As Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio often focused on secular concerns such as poverty and climate change, while neglecting the Church’s primary mission of saving souls. His pre-papacy support for ecumenism and religious pluralism demonstrated his rejection of the Catholic doctrine that salvation is found only in the Church.

Post-“Papacy” Actions:
As “Pope” Francis, Bergoglio’s papacy has been marked by numerous shocking statements and actions that directly contradict traditional Catholic teaching. His infamous statement, “Who am I to judge?” in 2013 regarding homosexual individuals marked a dramatic departure from the Church’s clear moral teachings on homosexuality. While the Church teaches that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered, Francis’ ambiguous stance created confusion among the faithful and suggested a softening on moral issues long held by the Church.

Francis has further supported the blessing of homosexual couples, an action that directly contradicts the Church’s teachings on marriage and the nature of human sexuality. The Church has consistently taught that marriage is a sacred covenant between a man and a woman, and any blessing of relationships outside this framework undermines Catholic doctrine. By promoting these blessings, Francis has signaled his willingness to compromise on core moral teachings.

In addition to these actions, Francis participated in the 2019 Amazon Synod’s Pachamama ceremony, during which a pagan idol was placed on the high altar of St. Peter’s Basilica. This act of syncretism shocked many Catholics, as the placement of a pagan idol in the heart of Catholicism represented a blatant violation of the First Commandment. The scandal of the Pachamama idol worship demonstrated Francis’ complete departure from the Church’s condemnation of idolatry.

In 2024, Francis went further by declaring in Singapore that “all religions are paths to God,” a statement that directly contradicts the dogma of extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church, there is no salvation), as affirmed by the Council of Florence in Cantate Domino (1442). This declaration effectively undermines the Church’s teaching on the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation.

Bishop Donald Sanborn comments,

“Francis’ embrace of religious pluralism, his participation in Pachamama worship, and his softening on homosexuality mark the culmination of the modernist heresy introduced by Vatican II. His papacy is leading the Church deeper into apostasy.”

Bergoglio’s pre-”papacy” alignment with Liberation Theology and his post-papacy actions confirm that he is not only disqualified from the papacy but also excommunicated from the Catholic Church.

Jorge Bergoglio participates publicly in, and promotes, non-Catholic & Pagan worship

Jorge Bergoglio endorsed Gross Immorality and Elevated those who Promote It

Jorge Bergoglio Agreed with Heretic Martin Luther on Justification and Promoted Modernism in Various Ways

Jorge Bergoglio Promotes the Heresy of Indifferentism - Where all paths lead to God

G. Robert Prevost (Leo XIV)

Antipope from 8 May 2025 –present

Pre-“Papacy” Actions:
Before his elevation to the “papacy” as Leo XIV, “Cardinal” Robert Francis Prevost had already demonstrated a public record of doctrinal compromise, modernist orientation, and dereliction of duty—making him canonically unqualified and theologically disqualified from holding the papal office.

1. ❌ Invalid Ordination under the 1968 Rite

Prevost was “ordained” a priest in 1982 using the post-Vatican II rite of Holy Orders promulgated by Paul VI in 1968. This new rite—heavily revised in form and intention—has been condemned by traditional theologians and clergy as doubtful at best, and likely invalid. Without valid ordination, he is not a true priest, bishop, or cardinal, and therefore incapable of receiving the papal office, even materially (Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae; Canon Law 188 §4).

2. ❌ Sex Abuse Cover-Up and Scandal in Peru

As “Bishop” of Chiclayo, Peru, Prevost was directly involved in mishandling multiple cases of clerical sex abuse. Victims who came forward were met with silence or inaction, and no canonical trials or proper investigations were initiated under his leadership. Notably, Prevost was also closely associated with the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae (SCV)—an organization plagued by abuse scandals. His tepid response to the Figari case and other victims points to a pattern of concealment and indifference, placing institutional reputation above justice and truth.

3. ❌ Promotion of Heresy and Ecclesiastical Subversion

After some basic research it can be seen that Prevost:

• Failed to publicly profess the Catholic faith amid grave threats to doctrine and morals

• Promoted “synodality” in a way that undermines the bishop’s duty to teach, rule, and sanctify

• Minimized doctrine, speaking of bishops as “servants” while avoiding clear governance and teaching roles

• Dismissed traditional teachings, showing disdain for “answers from the past”

• Participated in the removal of “Bishop” Strickland, a defender of orthodoxy, while promoting liberal figures like Robert McElroy

• Reinterpreted Church unity in ecumenical terms explicitly rejected by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos

• Refused to uphold the visible, doctrinal unity of the Church, instead pushing a “pastoral” relativism

These are not isolated misjudgments—they form a coherent picture of a man thoroughly aligned with the heresies of Vatican II, and who professes a new religion fundamentally different from the Catholic Faith handed down from the Apostles.

4. ❌ Public Embrace of the Synodal/Globalist Agenda

In his first public address as “pope,” Leo XIV:

• Praised the “Synodal Church,” completely dropping even the “Conciliar” label

• Referred to humanity in universalist, humanist terms devoid of any call to conversion or submission to Christ

• Emphasized building “bridges” through dialogue rather than proclaiming the one true Faith

• Failed to mention sin, the true Church, the Cross, or the need for salvation—thus offering a naturalistic gospel of peace and fraternity rooted in human effort, not divine grace

5. ❌ Canonical and Theological Consequences: He Cannot Be Pope

As The WM Review correctly concludes:

“A man whose visible membership in the Church is itself in serious doubt can only be doubtfully elected to the papacy, even if the conclave is unanimous. […] A doubtful pope is no pope at all.”

By publicly adhering to heresy and failing to profess the faith whole and entire—as required by divine law and canon law (Canon 188 §4; Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio)—Leo XIV is outside the Church and therefore incapable of receiving the papacy, validly or licitly.

🔴 Conclusion

Leo XIV is not a successor of St. Peter, but only of Paul VI and the post-Vatican II apostasy. His ordination is invalid, his record is stained by abuse cover-up and doctrinal betrayal, and his elevation is null. Catholics owe him no obedience. He is a manifest heretic and antipope, continuing the revolution of Vatican II under a new, softer tone—but with the same goal: the replacement of the Catholic Church with a false globalist, synodal religion.

Excommunication for Heresy: When a Catholic Is No Longer Catholic

Catholic teaching holds that heresy results in latae sententiae excommunication, meaning that the individual excommunicates themselves automatically by their actions, without needing formal condemnation. Pope Pius XII confirmed this in Mystici Corporis Christi (1943):

“Those who depart from the faith or reject Church teaching excommunicate themselves.”

Each of the Vatican II “popes”, through their heretical pre-papacy and post-”papacy” actions, has placed themselves outside the Church. Their promotion of modernism, ecumenism, and religious pluralism not only disqualifies them from the papal office but also results in their automatic excommunication. They are material popes only—occupying the office in name but lacking the divine grace to lead the Church.

Conclusion and Call to Action

The Church, as the Ark of Salvation, cannot compromise its teachings in order to align with the modern world. The Vatican II popes’ sympathies toward modernist ideologies have led the Church away from its true mission, jeopardizing the salvation of souls.

The pre-“papacy” beliefs and post-election actions of the Vatican II “popes”—John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis—demonstrate their disqualification from being true successors of St. Peter. Their embrace of modernism, religious pluralism, and secular ideologies renders their papacies invalid, and their actions have excommunicated them from the Catholic Church.

As Fr. Francisco Radecki explains,

“The faithful must reject these false popes and return to the traditional teachings of the Church. Only by adhering to the unchangeable truths of the faith can Catholics protect their souls and remain in communion with the true Church of Christ.”

The time has come for Catholics to reject the errors of Vatican II and return to the authentic faith of the Church, which has been preserved by a small but faithful remnant. The path forward is clear: to reject heresy, embrace traditional teachings, and seek refuge in the unchanging truths of the Catholic faith.