The Spanish Bishops’ Shameful Abdication Before the Apostate “Leo XIV”
Factual Summary and Immediate Condemnation
The cited article, originating from the EWTN News English service on February 25, 2026, reports on a statement issued by the executive committee of the Spanish Bishops’ Conference (CEE) following media leaks about its November 17, 2025, meeting with the antipope “Leo XIV.” The leaks, initially published by El País, claimed “Leo XIV” warned the bishops that his greatest concern in Spain is the far right trying to “instrumentalize the Church.” Other outlets offered conflicting narratives, with some stating the issue was raised by a bishop and others claiming the pope’s real concern is evangelization. The CEE’s statement, in turn, effusively praised “Leo XIV” for his “special affection,” encouraged their “evangelizing mission,” and vaguely noted that in dialogue, the “Holy Father reflected… on the risks of subjecting faith to ideologies, without mentioning any specific group.” They concluded with expressions of “respect for and support of the pope.” This episode is a perfect microcosm of the conciliar sect’s apostasy: a hierarchy of cowards, meeting with an antipope, engaging in media spin, and utterly failing to confess the one true Faith before the onslaught of Modernism, all while using the empty, naturalistic language of “evangelization” and “communion.”
Level 1: Factual Deconstruction – A Masterclass in Euphemism and Obfuscation
The article presents a clash of “leaks” and “clarifications,” but the underlying facts are damning regardless of the precise wording exchanged. The CEE met with “Leo XIV,” an antipope who, by the very fact of his manifest heresy and his promotion of the errors of Vatican II, has ipso facto lost the papacy according to the immutable doctrine of St. Robert Bellarmine and Canon 188.4 (1917 Code). The bishops’ statement is a work of art in non-confrontation. They claim the “Holy Father” (a title inapplicable to an antipope) “reflected on the risks of subjecting faith to ideologies.” This is a grotesque inversion. The Syllabus of Errors (1864), issued by Pope Pius IX, condemns precisely the modernist ideologies that have infiltrated the post-conciliar church. Error #80 states: “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.” This is the very “ideology” being “subjected” to Faith in the conciliar sect—Faith is bent to serve the ideology of human progress, religious liberty, and ecumenism. The bishops’ silence on this fundamental error is a betrayal of their office. Furthermore, the article notes that “Leo XIV” will visit Spain in June 2026. This visit, by an antipope, to a nation whose bishops offer him “respect and support,” is a public act of schism and a scandal to the few remaining Catholics in Spain.
Level 2: Linguistic Analysis – The Vocabulary of Apostasy
The language employed is saturated with the naturalistic, psychological, and bureaucratic jargon of the Modernist “Church of the New Advent.”
- “Instrumentalize the Church”: This is a secular political term, not a theological one. It presumes the Church is a neutral NGO that can be “used” by political factions. The true Catholic doctrine, as taught by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas, is that the Church has the right and duty to guide all societies: “The Church… demands for itself… full freedom and independence from secular authority.” The concern should be the secularization of the Church by ideologies like Modernism, not the Church being “instrumentalized.”
- “Evangelizing mission” and “evangelizing communion”: These are empty slogans from the conciliar lexicon. They divorce “evangelization” from the absolute necessity of the Catholic Church as the sole dispenser of salvation, as defined by the Council of Trent and Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus (Error #16: “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation”). True evangelization is the preaching of the one true Faith and the conversion of souls to the Catholic Church, not a vague “witness” in a pluralistic society.
- “Risks of subjecting faith to ideologies”: This phrase is a masterpiece of omission. It names the symptom but not the disease. The ideology is Modernism, which Pope St. Pius X condemned in Pascendi Dominici gregis as “the synthesis of all heresies.” The “faith” being subjected is the deposit of Faith, which Modernism seeks to evolve. The bishops’ failure to name Modernism, Liberalism, or the errors of Vatican II (religious liberty, collegiality, ecumenism) is a damning admission of their complicity.
- “Special affection,” “listened to the presentations”: This is the language of a therapy session or a corporate board meeting, not of a Vicar of Christ addressing bishops. It underscores the complete humanization and naturalization of the Church’s hierarchy.
Level 3: Theological Confrontation – Doctrines Betrayed by Silence
Every omission in the bishops’ statement is a denial of Catholic dogma.
1. The Social Kingship of Christ the King. Pope Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), established the feast of Christ the King precisely to combat the “secularism of our times, so-called laicism.” He states: “The Church… demands for itself by a right belonging to it, which it cannot renounce, full freedom and independence from secular authority.” He further declares that rulers have the duty to “publicly honor Christ and obey Him.” The CEE’s discussion, reduced to a concern about a political faction “instrumentalizing” the Church, is a direct contradiction. They ignore the Syllabus’s condemnation of the separation of Church and State (Error #55: “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church”) and Pius XI’s command that all human legislation must be ordered to the “laws of the Divine Kingdom.” Their silence on the public, social reign of Christ is a repudiation of this fundamental doctrine.
2. The Nature of the Church and Her Liberty. The Syllabus (Errors 19-37) systematically demolishes the liberal, secularist notion of the State’s supremacy over the Church. Error #19 denies the Church’s inherent rights; Error #20 subjects ecclesiastical power to civil government; Error #24 denies the Church’s temporal power. The bishops’ willingness to meet with an antipope who promotes Dignitatis Humanae (religious liberty) and the errors of Vatican II’s Gaudium et Spes (which subjugates the Church to the “signs of the times”) makes them complicit in these condemned errors. They do not defend the Church’s “proper and perpetual rights” but instead seek a “dialogue” with the powers that be.
3. The Duty of Public Confession. The bishops’ statement is a private, media-managed communiqué. It contains no public condemnation of the heresies rampant in Spain (abortion, “gay marriage,” secularism). It offers no call for the conversion of the Spanish nation back to Catholic unity. Pius XI in Quas Primas exhorts: “If all the faithful understood that they must fight bravely and always under the banner of Christ the King, then with apostolic zeal they will strive diligently to reconcile stray and unenlightened souls with the Lord.” Instead, the bishops engage in damage control for their own reputation, not the salvation of souls.
4. The Schism of Recognizing an Antipope. By referring to “Leo XIV” as “Holy Father” and expressing “respect and support,” the CEE commits formal schism. The theology of St. Robert Bellarmine, cited in the provided file on Sedevacantism, is clear: a manifest heretic loses his office ipso facto. To recognize such a person as pope is to deny the Catholic doctrine on the papacy and to place oneself outside the Church. Canon 188.4 (1917) states an office becomes vacant by “publicly defects from the Catholic faith.” “Leo XIV,” by his every act, publicly defects. The bishops’ support is therefore an act of apostasy from Catholic unity.
Level 4: Symptomatic Analysis – The Fruit of the Conciliar Tree
This incident is not an anomaly; it is the logical fruit of the Second Vatican Council’s apostasy.
- The Hermeneutics of Continuity in Action: The bishops’ statement embodies the “hermeneutics of continuity”—the idea that Vatican II is a “new Pentecost” that develops Tradition. In reality, Vatican II’s documents on religious liberty (Dignitatis Humanae) and the Church’s relationship with the modern world (Gaudium et Spes) are direct repudiations of the Syllabus of Errors. The bishops’ silence on these contradictions proves their allegiance to the conciliar revolution, not to Catholic Tradition.
- Naturalism and the Loss of the Supernatural. The entire discussion is framed in natural, sociological, and political terms (“far right,” “instrumentalize,” “evangelization”). There is not a single mention of sin, grace, the Sacraments, the state of souls, the duty to make the Sign of the Cross in public, the Immaculate Heart of Mary, or the final judgment. This is the hallmark of the “Church of the New Advent”: a purely natural, humanistic organization. Pius XI in Quas Primas warns that when “God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The bishops are debating the management of a foundation that has already been destroyed.
- The Cult of the Person over the Doctrine. The focus is on the “affection” of “Leo XIV” and the “encouragement” he gave. The content of his “reflection” is irrelevant; the fact of his “paternal” meeting is what matters. This is the personality cult of the “pope” that replaced the cult of Christ the King. The bishops’ primary concern is their relationship with the man in the Vatican, not their fidelity to the Faith he betrays.
- Media Management over Martyrdom. The CEE’s immediate response is a press release to manage the narrative. Where is the public, courageous confession of Faith that would risk persecution? Where is the willingness to be “called before governors and kings” (Matt 10:18) for Christ’s sake? Their action is the antithesis of the prophetic witness demanded by Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu, which condemns the “pursuit of novelty” and the “abandoning all restraint” in sacred sciences. They are managing a PR crisis, not defending the Faith.
Conclusion: A Hierarchy of Apostates
The Spanish Bishops’ Conference, in this episode, has demonstrated itself to be a body of apostates. They:
- Recognize and support an antipope, thereby committing schism.
- Employ the naturalistic, ideological language of Modernism, in direct opposition to the clear condemnations of the Syllabus of Errors.
- Omit any reference to the Social Kingship of Christ, the exclusive salvific role of the Catholic Church, or the necessity of public confession of the Faith.
- Prioritize media image and institutional “communion” with the conciliar sect over the salvation of souls and the glory of God.
- Reduce the Church’s mission to a vague “evangelization” compatible with a secular, pluralistic state, thus betraying the teaching of Quas Primas that “the Church… cannot depend on anyone’s will.”
Their statement is not a clarification; it is a manifesto of the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place (Matt 24:15). They speak of “evangelizing communion” while fostering a communion of apostasy with the very powers that “wish to do without God” (Pius XI). There is no “concern” for the far right or the far left; there is only one concern: the total rejection of the one true Faith by the hierarchy itself. The only appropriate response from any Catholic is to have “no part” in such a “council” (cf. Pius X, Pascendi), to flee from these modernists, and to hold fast to the unchanging Faith of the pre-1958 Church, which alone can lead souls to salvation.
Source:
Spanish bishops speak out after leaks of their meeting with Leo XIV (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 25.02.2026