Angelus News reports that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, under the direction of Archbishop José H. Gomez, has designated 15 pilgrimage sites for the 2026 “Jubilee Year of St. Francis,” proclaimed by the antipope Leo XIV. The article promotes plenary indulgences, public veneration of the saint’s relics, and vague appeals to “peace,” “care for creation,” and “reconciliation”—all framed within the post-conciliar paradigm of social activism devoid of supernatural urgency. What is presented as a spiritual commemoration is, in reality, a textbook example of the neo-church’s systematic replacement of Catholic doctrine with modernist sentimentalism, ecumenical syncretism, and bureaucratic ritualism. The entire apparatus—from the selection of sites to the language used—reveals not a call to holiness, but a carefully curated performance of religious theater designed to sustain the illusion of continuity while advancing the agenda of the abomination of desolation.
The Indulgence Industry: Sacramental Mechanics Without the Supernatural
The article’s central promise—that pilgrims may obtain a plenary indulgence—is presented with breathtaking superficiality. It states only that such an indulgence “removes the time a person might have spent in purgatory due to his or her sins, which have already been forgiven by God.” This is not merely incomplete; it is doctrinally dangerous. The Church has always taught that a plenary indulgence requires, beyond the prescribed works (pilgrimage, prayer, etc.), three conditions: confession, communion, and prayer for the Pope’s intentions—all performed within a state of grace, with all attachment to sin, even venial sin, renounced (cf. *Enchiridion Indulgentiarum*, 1968 norms, though even these are suspect post-1958). Yet the article omits any mention of the necessity of being in the state of sanctifying grace, of detesting sin, or of the absolute requirement of sacramental confession. Why? Because the conciliar sect operates on the assumption that everyone is already “saved” or at least “on the path,” rendering repentance optional and the sacraments mere formalities.
Moreover, the very concept of indulgences has been hollowed out since Vatican II. The 1967 *Indulgentiarum Doctrina* of Paul VI redefined indulgences in terms of “communion of saints” and “temporal punishment” stripped of its juridical precision, reducing them to vague spiritual benefits. In practice, the post-church treats indulgences like spiritual loyalty points—earned through attendance, not contrition. The article’s silence on the moral and sacramental prerequisites is not accidental; it reflects the modernist conviction that God’s justice is essentially benign, that purgatory is a metaphor, and that hell is an embarrassment.
St. Francis Rebranded: From Penitent to Eco-Pacifist Icon
The article reduces St. Francis of Assisi—a saint who received the stigmata, who wept blood over the sins of the world, who saw Christ crucified and was transformed into His living image—to a gentle eco-social worker. Gomez is quoted as saying the year should “deepen our love for Jesus Christ, strengthen our care for creation, and renew our commitment to peace.” Note the order: love of Christ is mentioned first only as a rhetorical flourish, but the real emphasis falls on “care for creation” and “peace”—the twin idols of the post-conciliar pantheon.
This is not the Francis of history. The real St. Francis sought not “reconciliation among neighbors” in the bland, interfaith sense, but conversion to the Catholic Faith. He preached to Sultan al-Kamil not to promote dialogue, but to convert him—and nearly died trying. He rebuilt the Portiuncula not as a community center, but as a sanctuary for penance and prayer. He begged alms not for social programs, but to repair churches desecrated by neglect and heresy. His poverty was not a lifestyle choice but a radical imitation of Christ’s kenosis, rooted in the conviction that “the world is crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14).
By contrast, the conciliar Francis is a mascot for Laudato Si’ environmentalism, UN-style peace initiatives, and feel-good multiculturalism. The article’s invocation of “care for creation” is a direct echo of Leo XIV’s predecessor Bergoglio’s encyclical, which subordinated the redemption of souls to the salvation of the planet. This is not Catholicism; it is pantheism dressed in Franciscan robes—precisely the error condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (Proposition 1): “There exists no Supreme, all-wise, all-provident Divine Being, distinct from the universe, and God is identical with the nature of things.”
Relic Veneration Without Reverence: The Cult of Bones
The article notes with approval that the remains of St. Francis were exhumed and displayed for public veneration in Assisi from February 22 to March 22, calling it a “rarity” and highlighting the “hundreds of thousands” who waited in line for an “up-close and personal view.” The tone is that of a museum exhibit or celebrity autopsy, not a sacred act of faith. Where is the awe? Where is the fear of God? Where is the reminder that these are the bones of a man who bore the wounds of Christ, who trembled at the thought of sin, who called his body “Brother Ass”?
The post-conciliar treatment of relics has shifted from adoration to exhibition. Relics are no longer signs of the communion of saints and the resurrection of the body, but artifacts of historical curiosity or tourist attraction. The Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels in Los Angeles—a building widely criticized for its modernist architecture and lack of sacred art—boasts a relic of Francis “sealed into” its altar. But what does this mean in a church where the Holy Sacrifice is often reduced to a communal meal, where tabernacles are hidden in corners, and where the Real Presence is treated as one symbol among many? A relic without the true Mass is a corpse without a soul.
The Franciscan Order: From Apostles of Penance to Agents of Apostasy
The article proudly lists several Franciscan-linked sites: Mission San Gabriel (founded by Junípero Serra), the Poor Clares, the Capuchins at St. Lawrence of Brindisi Church. But it fails to mention that the Franciscan Order, like virtually all religious orders, has been devastated by the conciliar revolution. The original charism of St. Francis—radical poverty, strict obedience, fidelity to the Magisterium—has been replaced by social work, psychological counseling, and interfaith activism.
Father Jonathan St. Andre of Franciscan University of Steubenville is quoted as calling the jubilee “remarkable.” But Steubenville itself is a product of the post-conciliar renewal: its charismatic emphasis, its praise-and-worship liturgies, its focus on “personal relationship with Jesus” over doctrinal precision—all hallmarks of the neo-church. The fact that such a figure is presented as a voice of Franciscan authenticity reveals how thoroughly the order has been co-opted.
Even the mention of St. Junípero Serra is problematic. While Serra was a genuine Franciscan missionary, his legacy has been weaponized by the conciliar sect to promote a narrative of “inculturation” and “social justice” that distorts his true mission: the conversion of pagans to the Catholic Faith, even at the cost of their cultural practices. The missions were not multicultural centers; they were outposts of Christendom.
The Language of Apostasy: “Peace,” “Reconciliation,” and the Erasure of Sin
The article’s rhetoric is saturated with the vocabulary of modernist apostasy. Gomez urges the faithful to “bring the Lord’s peace into all of our relationships” and to “promote reconciliation and understanding among our neighbors.” Leo XIV hopes the jubilee will “promote a spiritual calm in a world currently tormented by war, starvation, and persecution.”
But where is the call to repentance? Where is the warning that “the friendship of the world is enmity with God” (James 4:4)? Where is the acknowledgment that true peace is only possible through the triumph of the Social Kingship of Christ, as taught by Pius XI in Quas Primas: “The Kingdom of our Redeemer encompasses all men… His reign extends not only to Catholic nations… but also to all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ”?
Instead, we get the language of the United Nations: “peace,” “understanding,” “care for creation.” This is not the peace of Christ, which “surpasses all understanding” (Phil. 4:7), but the peace of the world, which is the peace of compromise with error. It is the peace of those who, as St. Pius X warned in Lamentabili, seek to reconcile the Church with “progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80)—a proposition explicitly condemned as heretical.
Conclusion: A Jubilee Without Christ
The 2026 “Jubilee Year of St. Francis” as presented by the Archdiocese of Los Angeles and the antipope Leo XIV is not a call to holiness, but a celebration of the conciliar revolution itself. It offers indulgences without repentance, relics without reverence, and peace without Christ the King. It transforms St. Francis from a fiery prophet of penance into a gentle mascot for environmentalism and interfaith dialogue. It replaces the supernatural with the social, the sacred with the sentimental, and the Catholic Faith with a vague humanitarianism that would be recognizable in any secular NGO.
This is what the abomination of desolation looks like in practice: not the destruction of religion, but its perversion. Not the denial of God, but the replacement of His justice with His absence. The true legacy of St. Francis—his love of poverty, his zeal for souls, his stigmata—is not honored by such a jubilee. It is buried beneath it.
Source:
Los Angeles Archdiocese announces pilgrimage sites, indulgences for St. Francis Jubilee (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 09.04.2026