EDSA Anniversary Celebrates Apostasy, Not Catholic Triumph

The article from EWTN News reports on the 40th anniversary of the Philippines’ 1986 EDSA “People Power Revolution,” honoring the late “Cardinal” Jaime Sin for his role in ousting President Ferdinand Marcos. It frames the event as a faith-driven, peaceful democratic movement led by the Catholic Church, with current “Archbishop” Socrates Villegas and “Father” Jerome Secillano praising Sin’s “prophetic” leadership. The piece also links the historic revolution to contemporary anti-corruption protests organized by “Caritas Philippines.” The core thesis presented is that the Catholic Church, through figures like Sin, is a moral force for democratic change and human rights.

This narrative is a profound and dangerous apostasy, a deliberate rewriting of Catholic history and social doctrine to celebrate a modernist revolution that directly contradicts the Kingship of Christ and the immutable Social Teachings of the Church. The event is not a Catholic triumph but a stark manifestation of the post-conciliar church’s full embrace of the very errors condemned by Pius IX and Pius X.

The Revolution’s Heretical Foundation: Rejection of Christ the King

The entire EDSA narrative rests on the modernist, naturalistic principle of “people power” and popular sovereignty. This is a direct repudiation of the Catholic doctrine of the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, so clearly defined by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas. Pius XI taught that Christ’s reign “encompasses all men” and that “rulers and governments have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him,” for “all power in heaven and on earth is given to Christ the Lord.” The state must order all its laws and administration on “the basis of God’s commandments and Christian principles.”

The article’s celebration of a popular uprising to depose a head of state—no matter his faults—is the precise antithesis of this doctrine. It promotes the Syllabus of Errors’ condemned propositions:
* **Error 63:** “It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel against them.”
* **Error 77:** “In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.” The revolution enshrined this pluralistic, indifferentist principle in the Philippine constitution.
The article’s silence on the duty of a Catholic ruler to govern according to Catholic law, and the duty of subjects to obey even a defective ruler unless he commands sin, is deafening. It substitutes the Catholic doctrine of authority with the masonic principle of the sovereignty of the people.

“Cardinal Sin”: The Personification of Conciliar Apostasy

The article’s hero, “Cardinal” Jaime Sin, is presented as a prophetic moral leader. This is a grotesque inversion. Sin was a leading architect of Vatican II’s “new church.” He was a firm advocate of the council’s “pastoral” approach, which in practice meant capitulating to the world. His most famous act—the Radio Veritas broadcast—was not a call to Catholic resistance but an invocation of “Our Blessed Lady” in vague, ecumenical terms to support a coalition of military rebels and political opposition figures, many of whom were non-Catholic or anti-Catholic. This is the “hermeneutics of discontinuity” in action: using religious language to sanctify a purely political, secular revolution.

His theology was modernist. He embraced the council’s “religious liberty” (Dignitatis Humanae), which Pius IX condemned as “error” (Syllabus, Error 15). He promoted ecumenism and interreligious dialogue, which Pius XI in Quas Primas identified as a fruit of removing Christ from public life. The article’s portrayal of him as a defender of the faith is a lie; he was a primary agent in the church’s surrender to the secular world, making the “Church” a participant in the very “secularism” Pius XI lamented.

The “Church” as a Political NGO: Reduction to Naturalistic Humanism

The article explicitly states the post-conciliar church’s new mission: “The Catholic Church played a central role in the country’s struggle for democracy.” This is a complete abandonment of the Church’s supernatural mission. As Pius XI taught, the Church’s role is to lead souls to eternal salvation, not to manage political transitions. The “Church” here is reduced to a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) concerned with “human dignity,” “democracy,” and “accountability”—the vocabulary of the United Nations, not of the Decretals or the Council of Trent.

The mention of the “Trillion Peso March” against corruption seals this. The “Church” now protests the inefficiencies and scandals of the very secular, pluralistic state it helped create. This is the logical endpoint of the “preferential option for the poor” liberation theology: the church becomes a permanent opposition party within a system it has already accepted as legitimate. It has no Catholic social program to replace the system, only a plea for better management. This is the “spiritual and temporal bankruptcy” of the conciliar sect.

Omission of the Supernatural: The Mark of Modernism

The article’s gravest sin is what it leaves out. There is **zero** mention of:
* The **Immaculate Conception** or any true Marian doctrine (only a vague “Our Blessed Lady”).
* The **Real Presence** of Christ in the Eucharist.
* The **sacrifice of the Mass** as the true, unbloody sacrifice of Calvary.
* The **state of grace**, mortal sin, or the **Four Last Things** (Death, Judgment, Hell, Heaven).
* The **duty of the state to profess the Catholic Faith** and prohibit public worship of false religions.
* The **sin of schism and heresy** that defines the current “hierarchy.”
* The **authority of the true, pre-1958 Magisterium** over the novel teachings of Vatican II.

This silence is not accidental; it is doctrinal. It is the hallmark of the Modernism condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis and Lamentabili Sane Exitu. The revolution is presented as a purely natural, political event. The supernatural—the only true source of grace and order—is systematically excluded. This exposes the “faith” invoked as a mere humanistic sentiment, not the Catholic Faith.

The “EDSA Shrine”: Profanation and Idolatry

The article refers to the “National Shrine of Mary, Queen of Peace” as the site of the Mass. This is a profound sacrilege. A shrine dedicated to “Mary, Queen of Peace” is used to celebrate a revolution that overthrew a (flawed) civil authority. This inverts the proper order. The article notes that “fresh flowers adorn the tomb of Cardinal Jaime Sin at the Manila Cathedral crypt.” This is idolatrous veneration of a modernist “bishop” who promoted the very errors that destroyed the Church’s social authority. The “Manila Cathedral” is occupied by a false hierarchy; its use for this celebration is a mockery of the true House of God.

Conclusion: A Celebration of the Abomination of Desolation

The 40th anniversary of EDSA, as reported, is not a Catholic milestone. It is a celebration of the conciliar church’s full embrace of the Modernist, naturalistic, and masonic principles it was designed to promote. The “Cardinal” honored was an enemy of the integral Faith. The “revolution” celebrated was an act of rebellion against divinely-ordained authority (Romans 13:1-7) and a triumph of the “spirit of the world” (1 John 2:15-17). The “Church” leading it is the post-conciliar sect, the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place (Matthew 24:15), blessing what God has cursed and cursing what God has blessed.

The only legitimate Catholic response is one of absolute condemnation. The true Catholic, holding to the faith of Pius IX and Pius X, must see this event for what it is: a staged victory of the “synagogue of Satan” (Apocalypse 2:9), which Pius IX warned was behind the sects promoting these very revolutions. The faithful are called not to commemorate this apostasy but to pray for the restoration of the Social Kingship of Christ and the dissolution of the counterfeit church occupying the Vatican.

EDSA Anniversary Celebrates Apostasy, Not Catholic Triumph

The Revolution’s Heretical Foundation: Rejection of Christ the King

Error 63: “It is lawful to refuse obedience to legitimate princes, and even to rebel against them.”
Error 77: “In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.” The revolution enshrined this pluralistic, indifferentist principle in the Philippine constitution.

The article’s silence on the duty of a Catholic ruler to govern according to Catholic law, and the duty of subjects to obey even a defective ruler unless he commands sin, is deafening. It substitutes the Catholic doctrine of authority with the masonic principle of the sovereignty of the people.

“Cardinal Sin”: The Personification of Conciliar Apostasy

The “Church” as a Political NGO: Reduction to Naturalistic Humanism

Omission of the Supernatural: The Mark of Modernism

The article’s gravest sin is what it leaves out. There is zero mention of:

The Immaculate Conception or any true Marian doctrine (only a vague “Our Blessed Lady”).
The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
The sacrifice of the Mass as the true, unbloody sacrifice of Calvary.
The state of grace, mortal sin, or the Four Last Things (Death, Judgment, Hell, Heaven).
The duty of the state to profess the Catholic Faith and prohibit public worship of false religions.
The sin of schism and heresy that defines the current “hierarchy.”
The authority of the true, pre-1958 Magisterium over the novel teachings of Vatican II.

The “EDSA Shrine”: Profanation and Idolatry

Conclusion: A Celebration of the Abomination of Desolation

Source:
Church honors Cardinal Sin as Philippines marks 40th peaceful revolution anniversary (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 26.02.2026