Summary: The EWTN News article of April 1, 2026, features an interview with Father Edgard Iván Rimaycuna, personal secretary to the current occupier of the Vatican, “Pope Leo XIV.” Rimaycuna praises his superior’s unchanged personality—approachability, serenity, listening skills—and his Latin American warmth, framing his pontificate as a continuation of his Peruvian episcopate. The article presents this as a positive, focusing on human qualities and pastoral style while omitting any reference to doctrine, the supernatural, or the catastrophic state of the “Church” under his leadership. The thesis is clear: this piece glorifies the very apostasy that defines the post-conciliar sect, celebrating a man who, by manifest heresy, cannot hold the papacy and whose “service” advances the revolution against the Kingship of Christ.
The Apostasy of “Pope Leo XIV” Celebrated Through Humanistic Profiling
1. Factual Deconstruction: A Portrait of Naturalistic Clericalism
The article constructs an image of “Pope Leo XIV” based solely on natural, psychological, and sociological traits. Father Rimaycuna states:
“The only things that have changed are his attire, which is now white, and his responsibilities; otherwise, the man we have all come to know remains exactly the same: approachable, calm, an excellent listener, and always available.”
This is a calculated reduction of the papacy to a mere human office of management and personality. The “responsibilities” mentioned are those of the head of the conciliar sect, not the Vicar of Christ. The focus on “approachability” and “listening” mirrors the modernistic pastoral model that replaces authoritative teaching with therapeutic dialogue. The secretary’s role is framed not as assisting a supreme pontiff in defending the Faith, but as “protecting” him so he can carry out duties in a “peaceful atmosphere”—a language of administrative security, not spiritual warfare.
2. Linguistic & Rhetorical Analysis: The Tone of Apostate Approval
The tone is one of uncritical admiration, employing the vocabulary of corporate leadership (“role,” “responsibilities,” “duties”) and therapeutic psychology (“approachable,” “serene,” “capacity for listening”). Rimaycuna’s inspiration in St. Joseph and St. John the Baptist is perverted: St. Joseph’s silence was one of faithful obedience to God’s law, not discreet service to a heretic; St. John the Baptist’s “He must increase, I must decrease” referred to Christ’s divine majesty, not the aggrandizement of a modernist antipope. The phrase “Latin American warmth” is a euphemism for the emotionalism and informality that characterize the post-conciliar Church’s abandonment of sacred solemnity and hierarchical reverence. The article’s silence on doctrine, sin, grace, or the sacraments is deafening—it is a pure exercise in naturalistic humanism.
2. Theological Confrontation: The Omission of Christ’s Kingship and the Reality of Heresy
The article’s gravest sin is its complete omission of the Kingship of Christ over individuals, families, and nations—a dogma defined by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas and condemned by the Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX. Pius XI taught:
“It is necessary to spread among the people as much as possible the knowledge of the royal dignity of our Savior… For if men were ever to recognize Christ’s royal authority over themselves, both privately and publicly, then unheard-of blessings would flow upon the whole society.”
The “Pope Leo XIV” and his secretary operate within a framework that explicitly rejects this, as seen in the Syllabus’s condemnation of 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.” The article celebrates a pontificate that embodies this condemned error, promoting a “cordial” and “approachable” leader while the world sinks into the “seeds of discord” and “flames of envy” Pius XI attributed to the rejection of Christ’s reign.
Furthermore, the article ignores the theological reality of automatic deposition. As St. Robert Bellarmine taught, a manifest heretic “by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head.” The entire pontificate of “Leo XIV” is built upon the modernist errors condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu, such as proposition #65: “The doctrine that Christ has raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament cannot be at all tolerated,” or #80: “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.” A man who promotes such errors, as “Leo XIV” does, is a manifest heretic and cannot be pope. The secretary’s praise of his “unchanged” nature is thus praise for an unrepentant heretic.
3. Symptomatic Analysis: The Fruit of the Conciliar Revolution
This article is a perfect symptom of the neo-church’s apostasy. It replaces the mysterium tremendum of the papacy with a celebrity profile. The focus on “discretion” and “taking second place” for the secretary is a mockery of true humility; in reality, it serves to shield the antipope from doctrinal scrutiny while his “cordial gestures” advance the ecumenical and naturalistic agenda. The mention of Spain’s “historical contribution” is a nod to the modernist project of re-writing history to downplay the Catholic kings and the Inquisition, aligning with the Syllabus’s error #38: “The Roman pontiffs have, by their too arbitrary conduct, contributed to the division of the Church into Eastern and Western.”
The article’s silence on the sacraments, the state of grace, the final judgment, and the necessity of the Catholic Church for salvation is not accidental; it is the hallmark of the post-conciliar sect, which has exchanged the supernatural for the sociological. The “closeness to the people” extolled here is the same “option for the poor” that leads to liberation theology and the dilution of dogma. Pius XI in Quas Primas warned that when Christ is removed from public life, “the entire human society had to be shaken, because it lacked a stable and strong foundation.” The article celebrates the very architect of this shaking.
4. The “Secretary” as Symbol of the New Clericalism
Father Rimaycuna’s role is presented as one of discreet service, but it is in fact the role of a modern clerical functionary in a bureaucratic, personality-driven sect. His invocation of St. Joseph is particularly grotesque: St. Joseph protected the True God made Man and His True Mother; Rimaycuna protects a manifest apostate who blasphemes the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and promotes idolatry. The “Latin American warmth” is the same spirit that produced the “theology of the people” and the embrace of pagan rituals in the Amazon Synod. This is not Catholicity; it is the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15).
Conclusion: A Portrait of the Antichurch’s Leadership
This article does not describe a pope; it profiles the perfect leader of the conciliar sect: a man whose personality is “approachable” and “listening” precisely because he has no immutable doctrine to defend; a man whose “prudence” consists in never condemning error; a man whose “closeness” is a substitute for the grace of the sacraments. It is a celebration of the spiritual bankruptcy that has replaced the Catholic Church. The “unchanged” man from Peru is unchanged in his apostasy, and his secretary’s testimony is a stark reminder that the structures occupying the Vatican are dedicated to the destruction of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the propagation of the Modernist errors condemned by Pius IX, Pius X, and every true pope before the usurper John XXIII. The only appropriate response is total rejection and a return to the integral Catholic faith as it existed before the revolution of 1958.
Source:
Pope Leo’s personal secretary: ‘He hasn’t changed; he’s still the same’ since his time in Peru (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 01.04.2026