Yes, Jorge Really Lives On in the "Ministry" of Pachamama, Pacifist Bob Prevost

Although some in the commentariat class believed that Victor Manuel Fernandez’s recent interview with Il Giornale Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is continuing the wretched legacy of the late but nevertheless insidious little demon named Jorge Mario Bergoglio represented a “bombshell” (please, spare us the “bombshell” headlines!), Prevost/Leo XIV, who stated recently that the Argentine Apostate had his “birth into heaven” when he died on Easter Monday, April 21, 2026 (“private revelation?”; “internal locution”?; simple ideological delusion?), the fact is that that Pachamama and Pacifist Bob Prevost explained shortly after his “election” on Thursday, May 8, 2025, that “Call Me Jorge’s” Evangelii Gaudium, November 24, 2013, was going to serve as the roadmap for his own antipapal presidency (see (see  An Evangelii Gaudium Primer (or Understanding Robert Francis Prevost's Having Made Jorge's Magna Carta His Very Own) and  An Evangelii Gaudium Primer (or Understanding Robert Francis Prevost's Having Made Jorge's Magna Carta His Very Own), part two), and he was not joking about that at all.

How, then, is Victor Manuel Fernadnez’s statement that “Francis is still with us” is some kind of “bombshell”?

Indeed, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV used his Christmas address on Monday, December 22, 2025, to the conciliar curia to reemphasize his commitment to a “missionary church” that is not “closed in on itself” and that is need of “conversion”:

Taking inspiration from his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, I would like to reflect on two fundamental aspects of the Church’s life: mission and communion.

By her very nature, the Church is outward-looking, turned toward the world, missionary. She has received from Christ the gift of the Spirit in order to bring to all people the good news of God’s love. As a living sign of this divine love for humanity, the Church exists to invite and gather all people to the festive banquet that the Lord prepares for us. In this gathering, every person can discover their identity as a beloved child, a brother or sister to their neighbor, and a new creation in Christ. Transformed by this discovery, they become witnesses to truth, justice and peace.

Evangelii Gaudium encourages us to make progress in the missionary transformation of the Church, who draws her inexhaustible strength from the mandate of the Risen Christ. “Jesus’ command to ‘go and make disciples’ echoes in the changing scenarios and ever new challenges to the Church’s mission of evangelization, and all of us are called to take part in this new missionary ‘going forth’” (no. 20) (Christmas Greetings of the Holy Father to the Roman Curia.)

This was conciliarspeak for reimaging what is thought to be the Catholic Church away from traditional structures, practices, and beliefs so as to “discover” herself anew according to the direction of the “Holy Spirit,” Who, we are supposed to believe, now wants the Catholic Church to consider the word “missionary” as referring to matters of social justice and not the conversion of non-Catholics to the Holy Faith nor to the sanctification of Catholics by means of prayer, mortification, and fasting. To believe that the Catholic Church has “all the answers” on matters pertaining to Faith and Morals is to have a church that “closed in on itself” and that is not open to the “newness” of the world around us.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio spoke about this endlessly, and Robert Francis Prevost has been continuing the claptrap that encapsulates every shopworn and molding conciliar clichés, which are nothing other than relabeled precepts of Modernism and its cousin, the “New Theology,” that stand condemned by Pope Saint Pius X and Pope Pius XII, respectively.

Additionally, despite continued silence from the likes of Raymond Leo Burke (of “Sister” ‘Julie’ Green fame, see Mutilating All Truth, and Gerhard Muller, who does not believe in the bodily Resurrection of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ nor in the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, see Deft? Daft Is More Like It, part two) about “Pope Leo’s” constant praise of Jorge Mario Bergoglio while telling us over and over again that it his duty to continue his “legacy” in their belief, it would appear, that their “strategic silence” can purchase Prevost/Leo’s support for the lifting of some of Bergoglio’s restrictions on the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition laid down in Traditiones Custodes, July 16, 2021, the Commemoration of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV has personally praised Amoris Laetitia, March 19, 2016, the Feast of Saint Joseph, and reaffirmed his support for the “blessing” of sodomite “couples as outlined in his predecessor’s Fiducia Supplicans, December 18, 2021:

Verena Stefanie Shälter, Ard Rundfunk:

Holy Father, congratulations on your first papal trip to the Global South. We have seen much enthusiasm and even euphoria; I imagine it has also been very moving for you. I would like to know your assessment of the decision by Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Munich and Freising, to grant permission in that diocese for the blessing of same-sex couples. In light of the different cultural and theological perspectives, especially in Africa, how do you intend to preserve the unity of the universal Church on this particular issue?

Pope Leo XIV:

First of all, I think it's very important to understand that the unity or division of the Church should not revolve around sexual issues. We tend to think that when the Church speaks of morality, the only moral issue is sexuality. And, in reality, I think there are much more important issues, such as justice, equality, the freedom of men and women, and religious freedom, that would take precedence over this specific topic. The Holy See has already communicated with the German bishops. The Holy See has made it clear that we do not agree with the formalized blessing of couples—in this case, same-sex couples, as you asked, or couples in irregular situations—beyond what Pope Francis specifically permitted when he said that all people can receive a blessing. When a priest gives a blessing at the end of Mass, when the Pope gives a blessing at the end of a major celebration like the one we had today, these are blessings for all people. Pope Francis's well-known expression, " Tutti, tutti, tutti " [Everyone, everyone, everyone], is an expression of the Church's conviction that everyone is welcome; everyone is invited; everyone is invited to follow Jesus, and everyone is invited to seek conversion in their lives. Beyond that, I believe the issue can cause more division than unity, and that we should seek ways to build our unity centered on Jesus Christ and what Jesus Christ teaches. This is how I would answer that question. (Anti-Apostolic Journey to Algeria, Cameroon, Angola and Equatorial Guinea: Press Conference on the Return Flight to Rome (Antipapal Flight, April 23, 2026.)

There are two aspects to Prevost/Leo’s answer that I will discuss separately.

First, the false “pontiff’s” statement that “there are more important matters” than conjugal morality recalls to mind Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s repeatedly saying sins against Holy Purity were the “least of sins.”

Bergoglio’s disparagement of the gravity of both and unnatural even sins against Holy Purity as the “least of sins” despite a reservoir of teaching from Catholic saints on the gravity of such sins was a hallmark of his dirty twelve year, forty days of serving as the sixth in the current line of antipopes, and he did so during one of his own  inflight interviews when he said that he accepted the resignation of the conciliar “archbishop” of Paris, Michael Aupetit, on the “altar of hypocrisy” after it had been revealed that the supposed “prelate” had engaged in what he, Aupetit, called “ambiguous” behavior with a woman, including revealing what was not known previously: that Aupetit had been “massages” to his personal secretary:

Pope Francis: Before answering I will say: do the investigation, eh, do the investigation … because there is a danger of saying: he was condemned. Who condemned him? Public opinion, gossip. But what did he do? We don’t know, something … If you know why, say so, otherwise I cannot answer and you will not know why. Because it was his failure, a fault against the sixth commandment — but not total — of small caresses and massages that he gave to the secretary, so stands the accusation. This is sin, but it is not of the most serious sins, because the sins of the flesh are not the most serious. The gravest sins are those that are more angelic: pride, hatred. These are graver. So Aupetit is a sinner, as am I — I don’t know if you are aware ... but probably — as was Peter, the bishop on whom Jesus Christ founded the Church.

Why did the community of that time accept a sinful bishop, and with sins of such an angelic nature as denying Christ! But it was a normal Church, it was accustomed to everyone always being sinful, it was a humble Church. You can see that our Church is not used to having a sinful bishop. We pretend to say my bishop is a saint. … not this red hat … we are all sinners. But when the gossip grows, grows, grows, and takes away the reputation of the person. He will not be able to lead because he has lost the reputation, not because of his sin, which is sin — like Peter’s, like mine like yours — but because of the gossip of the people responsible for reporting things, a man who has lost his reputation so publicly cannot govern. And this is an injustice and that is why I accepted Aupetit’s resignation, not on the altar of truth, but on the altar of hypocrisy. This is what I want to say. (Full text: Bergoglio’s in-flight press conference from Greece.)

The Jorge Mario Bergoglio committed unspeakable blasphemy against Saint Peter, our first pope, as Saint Peter’s triple denial of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as He underwent His trial by the Jewish high priests on the morning of Good Friday was forgiven by Our Lord Himself, not by the “community,” and that triple denial was undone by Saint Peter’s triple profession of love when he received the official commission from Our Lord to “feed his lambs” and “tend his sheep”:

[16] He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. [17] He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep. [18] Amen, amen I say to thee, when thou wast younger, thou didst gird thyself, and didst walk where thou wouldst. But when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and lead thee whither thou wouldst not. [19] And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had said this, he saith to him: Follow me. (John 21: 16-19.)

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ had promised the spiritual primacy of Saint Peter and his legitimate successors  as recorded in the Gospel of Saint Matthew and the promise was fulfilled when Saint Peter made His triple profession of love for Him to undo his cowardly triple denials that Our Lord had prophesied at the Last Supper that he would make. Saint Peter was forgiven by Our Lord, not by the “community.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio just could not help but to blaspheme Our Lord, Our Lady, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and any other saint in his quest to turn sanctity on its head in his ceaseless efforts to indemnify others for their sinful behavior.

Now, insofar as sins of the flesh being the least of sins, which Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV has now told us himself is what he believes,  it is necessary to point out that there are differences between sins of passion, although most of these are the result of people placing themselves into the near occasions of sin, and sins of malice committed by those who have planned to sin and to persist in its state with no contrition and without any desire to reform their lives.

This having been noted, however, sins against Holy Purity, although less grave than sins of heresy and blasphemy in the hierarchy of evils, are nevertheless grave, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s dismissive view of them was dealt with as follows by Saint Alphonsus de Liguori:

THE man who indulges in impurity is like a person labouring under the dropsy. The latter is so much tormented by thirst, that the more he drinks the more thirsty he becomes. Such, too, is the nature of the accursed vice of impurity; it is never satiated. "As," says St. Thomas of Villanova, “the more the dropsical man abounds in moisture, the more he thirsts; so, too, is it with the waves of eternal pleasures." I will speak Today of the vice of impurity, and will show, in the first point, the delusion of those who say that this vice is but a small evil; and, in the second, the delusion of those who say, that God takes pity on this sin, and that he does not punish it.  

First Point. Delusion of those who say that sins against purity are not a great evil.  

1. The unchaste, then, say that sins contrary to purity are but a small evil. Like “the so wallowing in the mire" ("Sus lota in volutabro luti” 2 Pet. ii. 22) , they are immersed in their own filth, so that they do not see the malice of their actions; and therefore they neither feel nor abhor the stench of their impurities, which excite disgust and horror in all others. Can you, who say that the vice of impurity is but a small evil can you, I ask, deny that it is a mortal sin? If you deny it, you are a heretic; for as St. Paul says: "Do not err. Neither fornicators, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, etc., shall possess the kingdom of God." (1 or. vi. 9.) It is a mortal sin; it cannot be a small evil. It is more sinful than theft, or detraction, or the violation of the fast. How then can you say that it is not a great evil? Perhaps mortal sin appears to you to be a small evil? Is it a small evil to despise the grace of God, to turn your back upon him, and to lose his friendship, for a transitory, beastly pleasure?  

2. St. Thomas teaches, that mortal sin, because it is an insult offered to an infinite God, contains a certain infinitude of malice. "A sin committed against God has a certain infinitude, on account of the infinitude of the Divine Majesty." (S. Thom., 3, p., q. 1, art. 2, ad. 2.) Is mortal sin a small evil? It is so great an evil, that if all the angels and all the saints, the apostles, martyrs, and even the Mother of God, offered all their merits to atone for a single mortal sin, the oblation would not be sufficient. No; for that atonement or satisfaction would be finite; but the debt contracted by mortal sin is infinite, on account of the infinite Majesty of God which has been offended. The hatred which God bears to sins against purity is great beyond measure. If a lady find her plate soiled she is disgusted, and cannot eat. Now, with what disgust and indignation must God, who is Purity itself, behold the filthy impurities by which his law is violated? He loves purity with an infinite love; and consequently he has an infinite hatred for the sensuality which the lewd, voluptuous man calls a small evil. Even the devils who held a high rank in heaven before their fall disdain to tempt men to sins of the flesh.  

3. St. Thomas says (lib. 5, de Erud. Princ., c. li.), that Lucifer, who is supposed to have been the devil that tempted Jesus Christ in the desert, tempted him to commit other sins, but scorned to tempt him to offend against chastity.  Is this sin a small evil? Is it, then, a small evil to see a man endowed with a rational soul, and enriched with so many divine graces, bring himself by the sin of impurity to the level of a brute?” Fornication and pleasure," says St. Jerome,” pervert the understanding, and change men into beasts." (In Oseam., c. iv.) In the voluptuous and unchaste are literally verified the words of David;” And man, when he was in honour, did not understand: he is compared to senseless beasts, and is become like to them." (Ps. xlviii. 13.) St. Jerome says, that there is nothing more vile or degrading than to allow oneself to be conquered by the flesh. ” Nihil vilius quam vinci a carne." Is it a small evil to forget God, and to banish him from the soul, for the sake of giving the body a vile satisfaction, of which, when it is over, you feel ashamed?  Of this the Lord complains by the Prophet Ezechiel;” Thus saith the Lord God: Because thou hast forgotten me, and has cast me off behind thy back” (xxiii. 35.) St. Thomas says, that by every vice, but particularly by the vice of impurity, men are removed far from God. “Per luxuriant maxime recedit a Deo." (In Job cap. xxxi.)  

4. Moreover, sins of impurity, on account of their great number, are an immense evil. A blasphemer does not always blaspheme, but only when he is drunk or provoked to anger. The assassin, whose trade is to murder others, does not, at the most, commit more than eight or ten homicides. But the unchaste are guilty of an unceasing torrent of sins, by thoughts, by words, by looks, by complacencies, and by touches; so that, when they go to confession they find it impossible to tell the number of the sins they have committed against purity. Even in their sleep the devil represents to them obscene objects, that, on awakening, they may take delight in them; and because they are made the slaves of the enemy, they obey and consent to his suggestions; for it is easy to contract a habit of this sin. To other sins, such as blasphemy, detraction, and murder, men are not prone; but to this vice nature inclines them. Hence St. Thomas says, that there is no sinner so ready to offend God as the votary of lust is, on every occasion that occurs to him.” Nullus ad Dei contemptum promptior." The sin of impurity brings in its train the sins of defamation, of theft, hatred, and of boasting of its own filthy abominations. Besides, it ordinarily involves the malice of scandal. Other sins, such as blasphemy, perjury, and murder, excite horror in those who witness them; but this sin excites and draws others, who are flesh, to commit it, or, at least, to commit it with less horror.  

5. “Totum hominem," says St. Cyprian,” agit in triumphum libidinis." (Lib. de bono pudic.) By lust the evil triumphs over the entire man, over his body and over his soul; over his memory, filling it with the remembrance of unchaste delights, in order to make him take complacency in them; over his intellect, to make him desire occasions of committing sin; over the will, by making it love its impurities as his last end, and as if there were no God. "I made," said Job, “a covenant with my eyes, that I would not so much as think upon a virgin. For what part should God from above have in me?" (xxxi. 1, 2.) Job was afraid to look at a virgin, because he knew that if he consented to a bad thought God should have no part in him. According to St. Gregory, from impurity arises blindness of understanding, destruction, hatred of God, and despair of eternal life.” De luxuria cœcitas mentis præcipitatio, odium Dei, desperatio futuri sæculi generantur." (S. Greg., Mor., lib. 13.) St. Augustine says, though the unchaste may grow old, the vice of impurity does not grow old in them. Hence St. Thomas says, that there is no sin in which the devil delights so much as in this sin; because there is no other sin to which nature clings with so much tenacity. To the vice of impurity it adheres so firmly, that the appetite for carnal pleasures becomes insatiable.” Diabolus dicitur gaudere maxime de peccato luxuriæ, quia est maximæ adhœrentia: et difficile ab eo homo eripi potest; insatiabilis est enim delectabilis appetitus." (1, 2, qu. 73, a. 5, ad. 2.) Go now, and say that the sin of impurity is but a small evil. At the hour of death you shall not say so; every sin of that kind shall then appear to you a monster of hell. Much less shall you say so before the judgment-seat of Jesus Christ, who will tell you what the Apostle has already told you: "No fornicator, or unclean, hath inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God." (Eph. v. 5.) The man who has lived like a brute does not deserve to sit with the angels.  

6. Most beloved brethren, let us continue to pray to God to deliver us from this vice: if we do not, we shall lose our souls. The sin of impurity brings with it blindness and obstinacy. Every vice produces darkness of understanding; but impurity produces it in a greater degree than all other sins.” Fornication, and wine, and drunkenness take away the understanding." (Osee iv. 11.) Wine deprives us of understanding and reason; so does impurity. Hence St. Thomas says, that the man who indulges in unchaste pleasures, does not live according to reason.” In nullo procedit secundum judicium rationis." Now, if the unchaste are deprived of light, and no longer see the evil which they do, how can they abhor it and amend their lives? The Prophet Osee says, that being blinded by their own mire, they do not even think of returning to God; because their impurities take away from them all knowledge of God.” They will not set their thought to return to their God; for the spirit of fornication is in the midst of them, and they have not known the Lord." (Osee v. 4.) Hence St. Lawrence Justinian writes, that this sin makes men forget God.” Delights of the flesh induced forgetfulness of God." And St. John Damascene teaches that “the carnal man cannot look at the light of truth." Thus, the lewd and voluptuous no longer understand what is meant by the grace of God, by judgment, hell, and eternity.” Fire hath fallen upon them, and they shall not see the sun." (Ps. Ivii. 9.) Some of these blind miscreants go so far as to say, that fornication is not in itself sinful. They say, that it was not forbidden in the Old Law; and in support of this execrable doctrine they adduce the words of the Lord to Osee: “Go, take thee a wife of fornication, and have of her children of fornication." (Osee i. 2.) In answer I say, that God did not permit Osee to commit fornication; but wished him to take for his wife a woman who had been guilty of fornication: and the children of this marriage were called children of fornication, because the mother had been guilty of that crime. This is, according to St. Jerome, the meaning of the words of the Lord to Osee.” Ideirco," says the holy doctor, “Fornicationis appelandi sunt filii, quod sunt de meretrice generati." But fornication was always forbidden, under pain of mortal sin, in the Old, as well as in the New Law. St. Paul says: “No fornicator or unclean, hath inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God." (Eph. v. 5.) Behold the impiety to which the blindness of such sinners carry them! From this blindness it arises, that though they go to the sacraments, their confessions are null for want of true contrition; for how is it possible for them to have true sorrow, when they neither know nor abhor their sins?  

7. The vice of impurity also brings with it obstinacy. To conquer temptations, particularly against chastity, continual prayer is necessary.” Watch ye, and pray, that ye enter not into temptation." (Mark xiv. 38.) But how will the unchaste, who are always seeking to be tempted, pray to God to deliver them from temptation? They sometimes, as St. Augustine confessed of himself, even abstain from prayer, through fear of being heard and cured of the disease, which they wish to continue. "I feared," said the saint, "that you would soon hear and heal the disease of concupiscence, which I wished to be satiated, rather than extinguished." (Conf., lib. 8, cap. vii.) St. Peter calls this vice an unceasing sin.” Having eyes full of adultery and sin that ceaseth not." (2 Pet. ii. 14.) Impurity is called an unceasing sin on account of the obstinacy which it induces. Some person addicted to this vice says: I always confess the sin. So much the worse; for since you always relapse into sin, these confessions serve to make you persevere in the sin. The fear of punishment is diminished by saying: I always confess the sin. If you felt that this sin certainly merits hell, you would scarcely say: I will not give it up; I do not care if I am damned. But the devil deceives you. Commit this sin, he says; for you afterwards confess it. But, to make a good confession of your sins, you must have true sorrow of the heart, and a firm purpose to sin no more. Where are this sorrow and this firm purpose of amendment, when you always return to the vomit? If you had had these dispositions, and had received sanctifying grace at your confessions, you should not have relapsed, or at least you should have abstained for a considerable time from relapsing. You have always fallen back into sin in eight or ten days, and perhaps in a shorter time, after confession. What sign is this? It is a sign that you were always in enmity with God. If a sick man instantly vomits the medicine which he takes, it is a sign that his disease is incurable.  

8. St. Jerome says, that the vice of impurity, when habitual, will cease when the unhappy man who indulges in it is cast into the fire of hell. “Infernal fire, lust, whose fuel is gluttony, whose sparks are brief conversations, whose end is hell." The unchaste become like the vulture that waits to be killed by the fowler, rather than abandon the rottenness of the dead bodies on which it feeds. This is what happened to a young female, who, after having lived in the habit of sin with a young man, fell sick, and appeared to be converted. At the hour of death she asked leave of her confessor to send for the young man, in order to exhort him to change his life at the sight of her death. The confessor very imprudently gave the permission, and taught her what she should say to her accomplice in sin. But listen to what happened. As soon as she saw him, she forgot her promise to the confessor and the exhortation she was to give to the young man. And what did she do? She raised herself up, sat in bed, stretched her arms to him, and said: Friend, I have always loved you, and even now, at the end of my life, I love you: I see that, on your account, I shall go to hell: but I do not care: I am willing, for the love of you, to be damned. After these words she fell back on the bed and expired. These facts are related by Father Segneri (Christ. Istr. Bag., xxiv., n. 10.) Oh! how difficult is it for a person who has contracted a habit of this vice, to amend his life and return sincerely to God! O how difficult is it for him not to terminate this habit in hell, like the unfortunate young woman of whom I have just spoken.  

Second Point. Illusion of those who say that God takes pity on this sin.  

9. The votaries of lust say that God takes pity on this sin; but such is not the language of St. Thomas of Villanova. He says, that in the sacred Scriptures we do not read of any sin so severely chastised as the sin of impurity.” Luxuriæ facinus præ aliis punitum legimus." (Serm. iv., Dom. 1, Quadrag.) We find in the Scriptures, that in punishment of this sin, a deluge of fire descended from heaven on four cities, and, in an instant, consumed not only the inhabitants, but even the very stones." And the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven. And he destroyed these cities, and all things that spring from the earth." (Gen. xix. 24.) St. Peter Damian relates, that a man and a woman who had sinned against impurity, were found burnt and black as a cinder.  

10. Salvian writes, that it was in punishment of the sin of impurity that God sent on the earth the universal deluge, which was caused by continued rain for forty days and forty nights. In this deluge the waters rose fifteen cubits above the tops of the highest mountains; and only eight persons along with Noah were saved in the ark. The rest of the inhabitants of the earth, who were more numerous then than at present, were punished with death in chastisement of the vice of impurity. Mark the words of the Lord in speaking of this chastisement which he inflicted on that sin: “My spirit shall not remain in man for ever; because he is flesh." (Gen. vi. 3.) "That is," says Liranus, "too deeply involved in carnal sins." The Lord added: “For it repenteth me that I made man." (Gen. vi. 7.) The indignation of God is not like ours, which clouds the mind, and drives us into excesses: his wrath is a judgment perfectly just and tranquil, by which God punishes and repairs the disorders of sin. But to make us understand the intensity of his hatred for the sin of impurity, he represents himself as if sorry for having created man, who offended him so grievously by this vice. We, at the present day, see more severe temporal punishment inflicted on this than on any other sin. Go into the hospitals, and listen to the shrieks of so many young men, who, in punishment of their impurities, are obliged to submit to the severest treatment and to the most painful operations, and who, if they escape death, are, according to the divine threat, feeble, and subject to the most excruciating pain for the remainder of their lives. “Thou hast cast me off behind thy back; bear thou also thy wickedness and thy fornications." (Ezec. xxiii. 35.) (Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost, “On Impurity”.)

For the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio to have contended repeatedly and that Prevost/Leo has now made his own, namely, that sins against Holy Purity are the “least of sins” is to ignore the plain words of Sacred Scripture, every word of which was written under the Divine inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Holy Trinity, God the Holy Ghost:

[13] If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death: their blood be upon them. [14] If any man after marrying the daughter, marry her mother, he hath done a heinous crime: he shall be burnt alive with them: neither shall so great an abomination remain in the midst of you. [15] He that shall copulate with any beast or cattle, dying let him die, the beast also ye shall kill. (Leviticus 20: 13-15.)

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them. (Romans 1: 18-32.)

[9] Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, [10] Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6: 9)

[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.)

There are no “loopholes” in these passages. 

Indeed, the prince of darkness and the master of lies has long tried to convince weak vessels of clay that sins of impurity are not grave and can be engaged in wantonly without fear of Divine justice being visited upon them.

As the words of Holy Writ quoted above prove beyond any question, the false beliefs of both the dead and buried Bergoglio (oh, I forgot, he is in heaven) and the man who succeeded him, Robert Francis Prevost, make them mortal enemies of Our Lord and of His true Church, thus making them mortal enemies of the souls for whom Our Divine Redeemed shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday to redeem.

Pope Pius XI, writing to condemn German national socialism, which arose, of course, as the direct consequence of Martin Luther’s overthrowing of the Social Reign of Christ the King in various of the German states five hundred  eight and one-half years ago explained that we are bound to the “conscientious observation of the Ten Commandments”:

29. It is on faith in God, preserved pure and stainless, that man's morality is based. All efforts to remove from under morality and the moral order the granite foundation of faith and to substitute for it the shifting sands of human regulations, sooner or later lead these individuals or societies to moral degradation. The fool who has said in his heart "there is no God" goes straight to moral corruption (Psalms xiii. 1), and the number of these fools who today are out to sever morality from religion, is legion. They either do not see or refuse to see that the banishment of confessional Christianity, i.e., the clear and precise notion of Christianity, from teaching and education, from the organization of social and political life, spells spiritual spoliation and degradation. No coercive power of the State, no purely human ideal, however noble and lofty it be, will ever be able to make shift of the supreme and decisive impulses generated by faith in God and Christ. If the man, who is called to the hard sacrifice of his own ego to the common good, loses the support of the eternal and the divine, that comforting and consoling faith in a God who rewards all good and punishes all evil, then the result of the majority will be, not the acceptance, but the refusal of their duty. The conscientious observation of the ten commandments of God and the precepts of the Church (which are nothing but practical specifications of rules of the Gospels) is for every one an unrivaled school of personal discipline, moral education and formation of character, a school that is exacting, but not to excess. A merciful God, who as Legislator, says -- Thou must! -- also gives by His grace the power to will and to do. To let forces of moral formation of such efficacy lie fallow, or to exclude them positively from public education, would spell religious under-feeding of a nation. To hand over the moral law to man's subjective opinion, which changes with the times, instead of anchoring it in the holy will of the eternal God and His commandments, is to open wide every door to the forces of destruction. The resulting dereliction of the eternal principles of an objective morality, which educates conscience and ennobles every department and organization of life, is a sin against the destiny of a nation, a sin whose bitter fruit will poison future generations. 

30. Such is the rush of present-day life that it severs from the divine foundation of Revelation, not only morality, but also the theoretical and practical rights. We are especially referring to what is called the natural law, written by the Creator's hand on the tablet of the heart (Rom. ii. 14) and which reason, not blinded by sin or passion, can easily read. It is in the light of the commands of this natural law, that all positive law, whoever be the lawgiver, can be gauged in its moral content, and hence, in the authority it wields over conscience. Human laws in flagrant contradiction with the natural law are vitiated with a taint which no force, no power can mend. In the light of this principle one must judge the axiom, that "right is common utility," a proposition which may be given a correct significance, it means that what is morally indefensible, can never contribute to the good of the people. But ancient paganism acknowledged that the axiom, to be entirely true, must be reversed and be made to say: "Nothing can be useful, if it is not at the same time morally good" (Cicero, De Off. ii. 30). Emancipated from this oral rule, the principle would in international law carry a perpetual state of war between nations; for it ignores in national life, by confusion of right and utility, the basic fact that man as a person possesses rights he holds from God, and which any collectivity must protect against denial, suppression or neglect. To overlook this truth is to forget that the real common good ultimately takes its measure from man's nature, which balances personal rights and social obligations, and from the purpose of society, established for the benefit of human nature. Society, was intended by the Creator for the full development of individual possibilities, and for the social benefits, which by a give and take process, every one can claim for his own sake and that of others. Higher and more general values, which collectivity alone can provide, also derive from the Creator for the good of man, and for the full development, natural and supernatural, and the realization of his perfection. To neglect this order is to shake the pillars on which society rests, and to compromise social tranquillity, security and existence. (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)

It is important to highlight the following sentences from the the first paragraph quoted above:

If the man, who is called to the hard sacrifice of his own ego to the common good, loses the support of the eternal and the divine, that comforting and consoling faith in a God who rewards all good and punishes all evil, then the result of the majority will be, not the acceptance, but the refusal of their duty. The conscientious observation of the ten commandments of God and the precepts of the Church (which are nothing but practical specifications of rules of the Gospels) is for every one an unrivaled school of personal discipline, moral education and formation of character, a school that is exacting, but not to excess. A merciful God, who as Legislator, says -- Thou must! -- also gives by His grace the power to will and to do. (Pope Pius XI, Mit Brennender Sorge, March 17, 1937.)

Pope Pius XI reminded us that there is a God who actually rewards the good and punishes all evil, and that the "conscientious observation of the ten commandments and the precepts of the Church (which are nothing but the practical specifications of rules of the Gospels) is for every one an unrivaled school of personal discipline, moral education and formation of character, a school that is exacting, but not to excess. A merciful God, who as Legislator, says --Thou must! -- also give by His grace the power to will do so."

No one who understands the Catholic Faith can claim that sins of the flesh are the “least of sins”  as is the sins of the flesh that led Martin Luther to invent his own religion of “faith by salvation alone” to justify all manner of theological relativism, starting with divorce, which has resulted over time in more sins against the flesh, abandoned wives and children, many of whom became maladjusted over the lack of what God positively wills for children—a stable family characterized by a desire to foster the selfless love of each member of the Holy Family of Nazareth, and then contraception, which led to more divorce, more family instability, more lost and embittered souls, and, of course, the surgical execution of the preborn as well as the proliferation of perverse sins against nature that have undeniably direct deleterious effects upon the right ordering of the souls of men and thus of their nations.

This all reminds me of the March 22, 1931, editorial in The Washington Post that I have quoted many times on this site:

The Federal Council of Churches in America some time ago appointed a committee on "marriage and the home," which has now submitted a report favoring a "careful and restrained" use of contraceptive devices to regulate the size of families. The committee seems to have a serious struggle with itself in adhering to Christian doctrine while at the same time indulging in amateurish excursions in the field of economics, legislation, medicine, and sociology. The resulting report is a mixture of religious obscurantism and modernistic materialism which departs from the ancient standards of religion and yet fails to blaze a path toward something better.

The mischief that would result from an an attempt to place the stamp of church approval upon any scheme for "regulating the size of families" is evidently quite beyond the comprehension of this pseudo-scientific committee. It is impossible to reconcile the doctrine of the divine institution of marriage with any modernistic plan for the mechanical regulation of human birth. The church must either reject the plain teachings of the Bible or reject schemes for the “scientific” production of human souls. Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee’s report if carried into effect would lead to the death-knell of marriage as a holy institution, by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality. The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be “careful and restrained” is preposterous. If the churches are to become organizations for political and 'scientific' propaganda they should be honest and reject the Bible, scoff at Christ as an obsolete and unscientific teacher, and strike out boldly as champions of politics and science as substitutes for the old-time religion. ("Forgetting Religion," Editorial, The Washington Post, March 22, 1931.)

There is no degrading practice that is beyond the capacity of the likes of Bergoglio and Prevost see as inconsonant with personal sanctity. What matters is “love” even though their conception of “love” is pure sentimentality having nothing to do with the nature of God’s love for us, which is why I am going to reprise a list that I have used so many scores of times before as a means of helping the reader who is relatively new to this site to understand how far the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Robert Francis Prevost, and their pal James Martin and his pals have been from any knowledge of authentic Catholic Faith and Morals:

1) God's love for us is an act of His divine will, the ultimate expression of which is the salvation of our immortal souls.

2) Our love for others must be premised on willing for them what God wills for us: their salvation.

3) We love no one authentically if we do or say anything, either by omission or commission, which reaffirms him in a life of unrepentant sin.

4) God hates sin. He wills the sinner to repent of his sins by cooperating with the graces He won for them on the wood of the Holy Cross.

5) Sin is what caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer unspeakable horrors on the wood of the Holy Cross and caused His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to be thrust through with Seven Swords of Sorrow.

6) No one can say that he loves Our Lord or Our Lady if he persist in sin unrepentantly and/or celebrates the commission of sin in public acts of defiance against the binding precepts of the Divine positive law and the Natural Law.

7) Each sin darkens the intellect and weakens the will, inclining us all the more to sin and sin again. We must, therefore, resolve never to sin again and to do penance for our sins as Our Lady herself implored us to do when she appeared in th Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, ninety years ago.

8) It is therefore forbidden for anyone of this parish or diocese to participate or support, whether morally or financially, any event whatsoever that celebrates any sin, whether natural or unnatural, and/or encourages people to persist in sin as a legitimate "lifestyle."

9) One of the Spiritual Works of Mercy is to admonish the sinner. We have an obligation to admonish those who are in lives on unrepentant sin to turn away from their lives of sin and to strive to pursue the heights of sanctity.

10) God has compassion on all erring sinners, meaning each one of us. He understands our weakness. He exhorts us, as He exhorted the woman caught in adultery, to "Go, and commit this sin no more."

11) It is not an act of "love" for people to persist in unrepentant sins with others.

12) It is not an act of "judgmentalness" or "intolerance" to exhort people who are living lives of unrepentant sin to reform their lives lest their souls wind up in Hell for eternity.

13) Mortal Sins cast out Sanctifying Grace from the soul. Those steeped in unrepentant mortal sin are the captives of the devil until they make a good and sincere Confession.

14) Certain sins cry out to Heaven for vengeance. Sodomy is one of the four sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.

15) Those engaged in natural or unnatural acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments do not "love" the individuals with whom they are sinning. Authentic love cannot exist in a soul committed to a life against the Commandments of God and the eternal welfare of one's own soul, no less the souls of others.

16) Those engaged in natural or unnatural acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments are not fit to adopt children.

17) Those engaged in natural or unnatural acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments are not fit to adopt children because their very sinful lives put into jeopardy the eternal of the souls of the children they seek to adopt. It is not possible for people who are sinning unrepentantly to teach children to hate sin as God hates sin. They are immersed in sin. Pope Pius XI put it this way in Casti Connubii, December 31,1930:

But Christian parents must also understand that they are destined not only to propagate and preserve the human race on earth, indeed not only to educate any kind of worshippers of the true God, but children who are to become members of the Church of Christ, to raise up fellow-citizens of the Saints, and members of God's household, that the worshippers of God and Our Savior may daily increase. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31,1930.)

18) Those engaged in unnatural, perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments are further unfit to adopt children because they have no right in the Divine positive law or the natural law to live together as a "couple."  Once again, Pope Pius XI's Casti Connubii:

Nor must We omit to remark, in fine, that since the duty entrusted to parents for the good of their children is of such high dignity and of such great importance, every use of the faculty given by God for the procreation of new life is the right and the privilege of the married state alone, by the law of God and of nature, and must be confined absolutely within the sacred limits of that state. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31,1930.)

19) Those engaged in unnatural, perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandment have no right in the Divine positive law or the natural law to present a "model" of parenthood that is from the devil himself. The words that Saint Paul wrote about perversity in Rome in his own day are quite apropos of our own:

Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use against which is their nature.

And in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.

And as they liked not to  have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy.

Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.  (Romans 1: 24-32)

20) Matrimony was elevated to a Sacrament by Our Lord at the wedding feast in Cana. The Holy Sacrament of Matrimony is entered into by one man and by one woman to achieve these ends: the procreation and education of children, the mutual good of the spouses, a remedy for concupiscence. Pope Pius XI noted this in Casti Connubii:

This conjugal faith, however, which is most aptly called by St. Augustine the "faith of chastity" blooms more freely, more beautifully and more nobly, when it is rooted in that more excellent soil, the love of husband and wife which pervades all the duties of married life and holds pride of place in Christian marriage. For matrimonial faith demands that husband and wife be joined in an especially holy and pure love, not as adulterers love each other, but as Christ loved the Church. This precept the Apostle laid down when he said: "Husbands, love your wives as Christ also loved the Church,"[24] that Church which of a truth He embraced with a boundless love not for the sake of His own advantage, but seeking only the good of His Spouse.[25] The love, then, of which We are speaking is not that based on the passing lust of the moment nor does it consist in pleasing words only, but in the deep attachment of the heart which is expressed in action, since love is proved by deeds. This outward expression of love in the home demands not only mutual help but must go further; must have as its primary purpose that man and wife help each other day by day in forming and perfecting themselves in the interior life, so that through their partnership in life they may advance ever more and more in virtue, and above all that they may grow in true love toward God and their neighbor, on which indeed "dependeth the whole Law and the Prophets." For all men of every condition, in whatever honorable walk of life they may be, can and ought to imitate that most perfect example of holiness placed before man by God, namely Christ Our Lord, and by God's grace to arrive at the summit of perfection, as is proved by the example set us of many saints.

This mutual molding of husband and wife, this determined effort to perfect each other, can in a very real sense, as the Roman Catechism teaches, be said to be the chief reason and purpose of matrimony, provided matrimony be looked at not in the restricted sense as instituted for the proper conception and education of the child, but more widely as the blending of life as a whole and the mutual interchange and sharing thereof. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930.)

21) It is never permissible to put even one child into spiritual, if not physical, jeopardy by claiming that so many others would be helped if the Church did not cooperate with an unjust law. Our Lord said that it would be better for one to have a millstone thrown around his neck and thrown into a lake than to lead one of his little ones astray. He was not joking.

22) Sinners must repent of the evil they have done in order to live lives of penance and mortification worthy of Saint Francis of Assisi.

A Catholic priest would not hesitate to make these points. Alas, men such as James Martin, who is not himself a validly ordained priest, is not a Catholic, which is why Jorge Mario Bergoglio personally selected him to speak at the “World Day for Families” in Ireland in 2018 just several months after the Irish voted in favor of perverted “marriage.”

Holy Mother Church has long taught that we must perform the Spiritual Works of Mercy by admonishing and that there are nine ways by which we can become accessories to the sins of others. Here is a little review for you:

                                                        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.

Finally, for Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV to reaffirm Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s and Victor Manuel Fernandez’s Fiducia Supplicans is to ignore entirely the warnings about the eternal fate of fornicators, the effeminate, and sodomites found in the very words of Sacred Scripture quoted above and it is to make a mockery of the constituent elements of personal sanctity as Holy Mother Church has never and will never “bless,” whether “formally or “informally,” those who are living in sin as, guided infallibly by God the Holy Ghost, to do would give the appearance that perverse sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance are not impediments to the sanctification and salvation of the souls of unrepentant sinners. Unrepentant sinners need to be exhorted to convert and make a good, integral Confession of their sins, not reaffirmed in their willful persistence in that which offends God and is contrary to their own eternal salvation.

Victor Manuel Fernandez’s Fiducia Supplicans, therefore, is simply the manifestation of his fellow Argentine’s desire to make sodomites, lesbians, mutants, and others feel “included” even though their Mortal Sins exclude them from the life of Sanctifying Grace in their immortal souls and from eternal life in Heaven if they persist in these wretched sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance until the point of their deaths. All the document’s flowing words about the importance of blessings in stirring up graces within souls mean nothing as those who receive blessings must be willing to conform their lives to God’s laws.

Despite all the protestations to the contrary within the text of Fiducia Supplicans, the very fact that what purports to be the Catholic Church has seen fit to administer extra-liturgical, non-ritualized “blessings” to those who are said to be in “loving relationships” does indeed convey some kind of inherent “goodness” in that which is odious in the site of God as it perverts His love into an empty-headed concept of pure sentimentality. Ferndandez’s protestations that Fiducia Supplicans does not convey equate “same-sex” relationships with the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony are about as absurd as the repeated statements made by the likes of Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself that conciliarism’s embrace of false ecumenism and interreligious prayer services are not an embrace of religious indifferentism. The converse is true, of course, with respect to the “blessings” of practicing sodomites, mutants, et al., as it is true about the claims that false ecumenism is not religious indifferentism when it is precisely that.

Furthermore, if “blessings” were so important to “Pope Francis” (Tutti, Tutti, Tutti),  why did he not impart them to journalists shortly after his bogus election in 2013 nor to individuals gathered to greet him below the balcony of the United States Capitol building on Thursday, September 24, 2015, the Feast of Our Lady of Ransom?

As if to show himself a complete pagan, Bergoglio stepped out on the balcony of the United States Capitol to greet the crowd that had gathered in the area below. Here is an account of what transpired when House Speaker John Boehner (R-West Chester, Ohio) led him out to the balcony:

In improvised remarks made from the balcony of the American Congress to huge crowds gathered in the National Mall in Washington, Pope Francis asked God to bless all the people of America, especially the children and their families. Speaking in his native Spanish, he asked the crowds to pray for him too, adding that “if there are among you any who do not believe or cannot pray, I ask you please to send good wishes my way”.

The Pope's impromptu greeting came after his address inside Congress to a joint meeting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Before taking his leave of the cheering crowds lining the Mall, the Pope said in English “Thank you very much – and God bless America!” (Bergoglio gives impromptu greeting to crowds in Washington Mall.)

It is as though Jorge said, "Hey, baby, send me some good vibes." To quote a friend of ours, "What a jerk."

I do not have “good wishes” to send your way, Senor Bergoglio. I offer prayers for your conversion as, objectively speaking, you are leading men and their nations to the eternal hellfire that awaits you if your persist in your apostasy to the moment you die. “Time” will be judge you then. Christ the King will do so, and you are deceiving yourself if you think that you’ve got it made.

Obviously, none of us have it “made,” which is why we must accept all penances with joy as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits. (From Polluting the Atmosphere With the Smoke of Antichrist, part three.)

In plain English, of course, Fiducia Supplicans uses doublespeak to clumsily suggest that those who have no desire to reform their lives want God’s assistance to “live better lives” even while continuing to sin unrepentantly. The real fact of the matter is that the sodomites, lesbians, and mutants have long desired these “blessings” as they convey precisely what Victor Manuel Fernandez says that they do; not: namely, “blessings” that connote God’s favor upon their lives.

God hates sin.

God’s love for us is an act of His Holy Will, which is directed at the sanctification and salvation our immortal souls, and no one truly loves another if he does or says anything that contrary to the sanctification and salvation of his immortal soul. You and I know this, of course, but Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Victor Manuel Fernandez do not believe that sodomy excludes one from the Kingdom of God or hereafter. They are blasphemous heretics.

God does not suborn sin.

God does not bless sin, and He does not bless those who are intent of living in Mortal Sin.

It is that simple.

Blessings do indeed convey approval and/or permission. Jorge Mario Bergoglio knows this, and so does Victor Manuel Fernandez. They have tried to cloak their malice with a veneer of Catholicism, but we must always remember the following words of Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, and of Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).

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

The need of this divinely instituted means for the preservation of unity, about which we speak is urged by St. Paul in his epistle to the Ephesians. In this he first admonishes them to preserve with every care concord of minds: "Solicitous to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph. iv., 3, et seq.). And as souls cannot be perfectly united in charity unless minds agree in faith, he wishes all to hold the same faith: "One Lord, one faith," and this so perfectly one as to prevent all danger of error: "that henceforth we be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive" (Eph. iv., 14): and this he teaches is to be observed, not for a time only - "but until we all meet in the unity of faith...unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ"). But, in what has Christ placed the primary principle, and the means of preserving this unity? In that - "He gave some Apostles - and other some pastors and doctors, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"." (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)

18. This will appear more clearly to anybody who studies the conduct of Modernists, which is in perfect harmony with their teachings. In their writings and addresses they seem not unfrequently to advocate doctrines which are contrary one to the other, so that one would be disposed to regard their attitude as double and doubtful. But this is done deliberately and advisedly, and the reason of it is to be found in their opinion as to the mutual separation of science and faith. Thus in their books one finds some things which might well be approved by a Catholic, but on turning over the page one is confronted by other things which might well have been dictated by a rationalist. When they write history they make no mention of the divinity of Christ, but when they are in the pulpit they profess it clearly; again, when they are dealing with history they take no account of the Fathers and the Councils, but when they catechize the people, they cite them respectfully. In the same way they draw their distinctions between exegesis which is theological and pastoral and exegesis which is scientific and historical. So, too, when they treat of philosophy, history, and criticism, acting on the principle that science in no way depends upon faith, they feel no especial horror in treading in the footsteps of Luther and are wont to display a manifold contempt for Catholic doctrines, for the Holy Fathers, for the Ecumenical Councils, for the ecclesiastical magisterium; and should they be taken to task for this, they complain that they are being deprived of their liberty. Lastly, maintaining the theory that faith must be subject to science, they continuously and openly rebuke the Church on the ground that she resolutely refuses to submit and accommodate her dogmas to the opinions of philosophy; while they, on their side, having for this purpose blotted out the old theology, endeavor to introduce a new theology which shall support the aberrations of philosophers. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

The Sacred Tribunal of Penance is where those who want to receive God’s favor must humbly accuse themselves and then promise to amend their lives and sin no more. Anyone who insists that God loves people the “way they are” are blasphemers as, though He wills the good of all men, He does not and cannot love sin and will never suborn it in the lives of the rational creatures for whom His Co-Equal, Co-Eternal Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem. It is that simple.

Father Henry James Coleridge explained in a sermon delivered one hundred forty-five years ago that those who ignore God’s warnings, including those given by His Co-Equal, Co-Eternal Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, bring themselves and their nations to destruction:

With regard to the antediluvian world, there is this feature besides, that God undoubtedly warned the race of mankind that His judgments were about to come on them. It appears from the Scripture account that the ark took a hundred years to build, and that during that time Noe was a preacher of repentance. We know but little indeed of those marvellous days, when human life, as the Scripture tells us, was so long, but if that were so, it would be quite enough to account for the forgetfulness of the things of God and of the soul, and for the extreme profligacy of which we also read of the anteldiluvian. Alas! So it is. If life in our days could be prolonged for twice or thrice its ordinary span, it would more probably be for the greater misery that for the greater happiness of mankind. And when we are told, as we are times told in Scriptures, that God has shortened the days of the ordinary human lifetime, it is certain that He has done so in pity rather than in anger. Then also, the antediluvians seem to have dwelt in the very fairest region of the earth, they seem to have been more full of natural knowledge and of acquired skill in the use of the resources of enjoyment and physical wellbeing that those who came after them, and it is very likely indeed that their numbers were not such as to cause that struggle for existence which is now the lot of the populations of so many countries of the world, in which the great enjoyment of the good things of the earth is not yet the free inheritance of the many. At all events, they were so fearfully and outrageously corrupt, morally and socially, that the sacred writer tells us that their wickedness was so great, that it made God repent in His heart that He had created them. Such was the population of the earth, or of those parts of it then inhabited by man, on whom the great destruction of the Flood came like a thief in the night.

As to the other period and generation of which our Lord speaks, and to which, in its heedlessness and unwatchfulness, He compares the men of the last days, why need I speak? Sodom and Gomorrha, the Cities of the Plain – the very name is synonymous with everything that is most foul and licentious, even to the degradation of our human nature. The land in which they dwelt was one of unexampled beauty and fertility. We are told in the book of Genesis, that “the country about Jordan was watered throughout before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrha, as the paradise of the Lord, and like Egypt as when one comes to Segur.” (Gen. Xiii. 10)  And as the Flood had been brought on by list, so also was it with the destruction of these fair cities and their wicked inhabitants. Here, then, we find also these two features, immense material enjoyment and the most intense moral degradation. We are not told that the people of these cities were directly warned of the chastisement which they were bringing on themselves, but, at all events, they had had for some time resident among them a chosen servant of God Lot, the sister's son of Abraham, of whom St. Peter speaks as if he had been a witness to virtue and morality, “oppressed by the injustice and lewd conversation of the wicked, for in sight and hearing he was just, dwelling among them, who day by day vexed the just soul with ungodly works.” (2 St. Peter ii 7, 8.)  So that if they had not a direct warning, they had the witness of a holy life among them to reproach them for their profound foulness of lust. And we may daily suppose that if they were not warned by any more direct signs or predictions of their coming destruction, it was because they were so deeply engrossed in their sensuality as not to be capable of conversation, or of arousing, by any such means, as it is indeed the characteristic of men who are given to those enormous sins of lust, to be incapable of compunction, and beyond the reach of the most startling warnings of Providence.   (Father Henry James Coleridge, S.J.. Discourses on the Latter Days, 1883, pp. 77-91. Published by St. Pius X Press.)

We have arrived at the days of the sort that Father Coleridge did not believe existed in his time. Indeed, we have exceeded the lusts of the pagan Romans and the statism of its Caesars, and we are making Sodom and Gomorrah look like the Victorian England in which Father Coleridge lived all but the first fifteen years of his life.

Pope Leo XIII warned us not to have any contact with those who masquerade until the banner of tolerance by using it as a cloak for evil:

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

Our Lady herself explained there is no compromise between her Divine Son and Belial and that the source of every error, deceit and blasphemy none other than the adversary himself, which should teach us that nothing being taught by the conciliar authorities can come from Holy Mother Church, she who is the infallible, inerrant and spotless teacher of Faith and Morals:

229. Guard thyself, therefore, my dearest, against this deplorable error of the children of men, and disengage thy faculties so thou mayest clearly see the difference between the service of Christ and that of Belial. Greater is that difference than the distance between heaven and earth. Christ is the true light, the way, and eternal life (Jn. 14:6); those who follow Him He loves with imperishable love, and He offers them his life and his company, and with it an eternal happiness such as neither eyes have seen, nor ears have heard, nor ever can enter into the heart of man (Is. 64:4). Lucifer is darkness itself, error, deceit, unhappiness and death; he hates his followers and forces them into evil as far as possible, and in the end inflicts upon them eternal fire and horrid torments. Let mortals give testimony whether they are ignorant of these truths, since the holy Church teaches them and calls them to their minds every day. If men give credence to these truths, where is their good sense? Who has made them insane? Who drives from their remembrance the love which they ought to have for themselves? Who makes them so cruel to themselves? O insanity never sufficiently to be bewailed and so little considered by the children of Adam! All their life they labor and exert themselves to become more and more entangled in the snares of their passions, to be consumed in deceitful vanities, and to deliver themselves over to an inextinguishable fire, death, and everlasting perdition, as if all was a mere joke, and as if my most holy Son had not come down from heaven to die on a cross in order to merit for them this rescue! Let them but look upon the price and consider how much God himself paid for this happiness, He who knew the full value of it.

230. The idolaters and heathens are much less to blame for falling into this error, nor is the wrath of the Most High enkindled so much against them as against the faithful of his Church, who have such a clear knowledge of this truth. If the minds of men in our present age have grown forgetful of it, let them understand this happened by their own fault because they have given free reign to their enemy Lucifer. With tireless malice he labors to overthrow the barriers of restraint, so forgetful of the last things and of eternal torment men might give themselves over like brute beasts to sensual pleasures, and unmindful of themselves consume their lives in the pursuit of apparent good until, as Job says (21:13), in a moment they go down to hell, as in truth happens to an infinite number of fools who hate this science and discipline. Do thou, my daughter, allow me to instruct thee. Keep thyself free from such harmful deceit and from this forgetfulness of worldly people. Let the despairing groans of the damned, which begin at the end of their lives and the beginning of their eternal damnation, ever resound in thy ears: O we fools, who esteemed the life of the just as madness! O how are they numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints! Therefore we have erred from the way of truth and justice. The sun has not arisen for us. We wearied ourselves in the ways of iniquity and destruction; we have sought difficult paths, ignoring by our own fault the way of the Lord. What hath pride profited us? What advantage hath the boasting of riches brought us? All those things are passed away from us like a shadow. O that we had never been born! This, my daughter, thou must fear and ponder in thy heart, so before thou goest to that land of darkness (as Job said [10:21]) and eternal dungeons, from whence there is no return, thou mayest provide against evil and avoid it by doing good. During thy mortal life and out of love do thou now perform that of which the damned in their despair are forced to warn thee by the excess of their punishment. (New English Edition of The Mystical City of God: Book Five: The Transfixion, Chapter XX.)

We must not have anything to do with a false church whose teachings are so unstable that they open to mockery within a very short space of time by those who succeed them. Despite our own sins and failings and mistakes, we must stand for the truths of the Holy Faith in all of their holy integrity no matter what anyone says about us or causes us to suffer. Period.

May our daily fidelity to praying as many Rosaries as our state-in-life permit as we pray the Litany of Loreto in her honor and that of Saint Joseph so that we can, despite our sins and failings, plant the seeds for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the flowering once again of the true Catholic Faith in the hearts, minds and souls of everyone on the face of the earth.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Andrew the Apostle, 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 Peter Canisius, S. J., pray for us.

Appendix

From the Divine Office on the Feast of Saint Peter Canisius, S. J.

Peter Canisius was born at Nijmegen in Gelderland, the Netherlands, in the very year in which Luther openly rebelled against the Church in Germany, and in which Ignatius Loyola in Spain gave up earthly warfare to fight the battles of the Lord; God thus shewed what adversaries he was to encounter, and under whose leadership he was to fight. He made his studies at Cologne, where he took a vow to God of perpetual chastity, and shortly afterwards entered the Society of Jesus. After his ordination as priest, he began at once to defend the Catholic faith against the wiles of the innovators by missions, sermons, and writing books. His eminent wisdom and experience caused the Cardinal of Augsburg and the papal legates to invite him to the Council of Trent, and he was present at its sittings more than once. Moreover, by the authority of the Supreme Pontiff, Pius IV, he was entrusted with the charge of making its decrees known in Germany and carrying them into effect. Paul IV sent him to the Diet of Petrikau, and Gregory XIII entrusted him with the carrying out of other missions, all of which he undertook with an eager spirit, never conquered by any difficulties, and carried the most important affairs of religion through all the crises of this present life to a successful end.

Inflamed with the heavenly fire of charity, which he had once received in the Vatican basilica from the sanctuary of the Heart of Jesus, and intent only on increasing the glory of God, it is almost impossible to describe how, for more than forty years, he took upon himself laborious tasks, and endured hardship, that he might defend very many cities and provinces of Germany from the contagion of heresy, or restore to the Catholic faith those that were infected with heresy. At the Diets of Ratisbon and Augsburg, he exhorted the princes of the Empire to defend the rights of the Church and reform the lives of their subjects. At Worms he reduced the insolent teachers of impiety to silence. St. Ignatius made him prefect of the province of Upper Germany, where he founded houses and colleges in many places. He used every effort to advance and enlarge the German College founded at Rome; he restored the study of sacred and profane learning in academies, which had fallen into a wretched condition. He wrote two excellent volumes against the Centuriators of Magdeburg; and he edited a summary of Christian doctrine, which has been thoroughly approved by the judgment of theologians and by common use everywhere for three centuries, as well as very many other works useful for public instruction in the vulgar tongue. For all these reasons he was called the Hammer of the Heretics, and the Second Apostle of Germany, and is rightly thought to have been worthy of having been chosen by God to protect religion in Germany.

In these activities he was accustomed to unite himself to God by frequent prayer and assiduous meditation on heavenly things, often bathed in tears and sometimes with his soul rapt in ecstasy. He was held in great honor by men of rank, or of most distinguished holiness, and by four of the Supreme Pontiffs, but he thought so humbly of himself, that he spoke of and held himself as the least of all. He refused the bishopric of Vienna no less than three times. He was most obedient to his superiors, and ready at their mere nod to stop or to undertake all labors, even at the risk of his health and life. He guarded his chastity with perpetual voluntary self-mortification. At length, at Fribourg in Switzerland, where during the last years of his life he had labored much for the glory of God and the salvation of souls, he passed to God on the 21st day of December, 1597, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. This zealous champion of Catholic truth was adorned with the heavenly honors of the blessed by Pope Pius IX; and, as fresh miracles added to his renown, the Supreme Pontiff Pius XI, in the year of the Jubilee, included him among the Saints, and at the same time declared him a Doctor of the Universal Church. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Peter Canisius, S. J., April 27. For a fuller account of the life of Saint Peter Canisius, who was beatified in 1864 by Pope Pius IX and canonized in 1925 by Pope Pius XI, fifty years after the death of Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., which is why there is no account of his life in The Liturgical Year, please see Blessed Peter Canisius: Foremost Champion of the Church Against Protestantism in Germany, Francis Betten, S.J., 1921.pdf.)