I NOTICED in the news that “Pope” Leo XIV took time from his busy schedule to meet with families of the devastating fire at a ski resort bar on New Year’s Eve in Crans-Montana, Switzerland.
Forty young people were killed and more than 100 experienced severe injuries in the most horrible way after the bar exploded into flames. A sparkler held high by a young waitress sitting on someone’s shoulders touched the ceiling and all of the bar’s flammable materials ignited at once. Here is a news story that is all too tragically true. The faces of the families cannot hide their real grief. The photos of the victims are not professionally staged. There is no government political agenda or call to disarm citizens.
Presumably Leo was offering genuine sympathy, not conspicuous compassion for the cameras. Though a true pope, in the case of a tragedy such as this, would presumably offer private and not public sympathies, given the nature of the bar celebration, I do not doubt the sincerity of Leo’s sympathy. He is generally a restrained and dignified figure, especially in comparison to the scattershot vulgarity and coarseness of his predecessor, Francis.
There was nothing objectionable in Leo’s consoling remarks to the families of victims. Well, wait a minute, yes, there was:
Dear brothers and sisters, nothing will ever be able to separate you from the love of Christ (cf. Rom 8:35), nor your loved ones who suffer or whom you have lost.
On this score, “Pope” Leo is not one to offer consolation. He and his brothers in theological revolution have caused incalculable harm to souls and separation from the love of Christ. Apostasy, heresy and other sins against divine commandments can separate us from the love of Christ. While it is not true that there was no hope for these young victims, the conciliar revolutionaries who have taken over the Catholic Church have made that hope much less realistic for people the world over, as the graces that flowed from the Catholic Church’s teachings and Holy Sacraments have been lost to them.
So far, Leo’s brief tenure has been a series of unconvincing assurances that the revolution has been good. In this regard, as Thomas Droleskey points out, he is similar to the late Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev in his address to the 26th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) on February 23, 1981.
Leo has uttered all the familiar revolutionary slogans, all expressed in banal, Communist-style bureaucratese.:
In this regard, I would like us to renew together today our complete commitment to the path that the universal Church has now followed for decades in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Francis masterfully and concretely set it forth in the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, from which I would like to highlight several fundamental points: the return to the primacy of Christ in proclamation (cf. No. 11); the missionary conversion of the entire Christian community (cf. No. 9); growth in collegiality and synodality (cf. No. 33); attention to the sensus fidei (cf. Nos. 119-120), especially in its most authentic and inclusive forms, such as popular piety (cf. No. 123); loving care for the least and the rejected (cf. No. 53); courageous and trusting dialogue with the contemporary world in its various components and realities (cf. No. 84; Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, 1-2). [Leo’s address to “cardinals” on Saturday, May 10, 2025) [emphasis added]
In fact, the revolution has been a failure and that, except to the multitude immersed in spiritual blindness, will be even more clear in the years ahead. Leo has pledged to be even more “welcoming.” He fully supports the moral relativism of this new, false religion. He fully supports its degradation of worship and loss of reverence; its “evolution” of dogma; its false ecumenism, which is nothing more than a universal brotherhood of institutionalized contradiction. He fully supports, despite his lack of authority to implement anything, the diminution of the papacy in a “synodal” church; a feminized religion of activist, bossy women and emasculated men; and the replacement of the majesty and beauty of Catholic culture with sentimentality, banality and outright ugliness. He supports the Church of Everybody, the necessary counterpart to Judeo-Masonic world government.
Make no mistake about it, despite his more conservative bearing and his perhaps entirely sincere devotion to this revolution, he objectively has no more loving care for the “least and the rejected” than did Jorge Bergoglio or any of the conciliar “popes” who have caused so much division, so much spiritual loss, so much estrangement from truth and from ultimate happiness in heaven. They have not created a “civilization of love” with all their love talk, but a civilization of indifferentism and practical atheism, of general moral decay, of narcissism and cruelty, of socialist tyranny, of economic oppression and of eradicated national borders, which Leo’s “bishops,” in scandalous contravention to the laws of this country and others, cheer on.
What the poor, the bereft and the rejected need more than anything else is supernatural hope. I realize Leo was trying to offer just that in his remarks to these families. But the conciliar revolutionaries who have taken over the Catholic Church have made that hope much less realistic for people the world over, as the graces that flowed from Church teachings and Holy Sacraments have been lost to them. Only his public abandonment of this false religion and this general apostasy could offer true consolation to anyone. And even then, we would not have a lawful successor to the Chair of Peter.
.
