National Catholic Register portal reports that Peruvian President José María Balcázar announced, following a nearly two-hour private audience with Leo XIV on June 18, 2026, that the antipope intends to visit five Peruvian cities — Lima, Chiclayo, Piura, Pucallpa, and Cusco — during the first half of November. The president described the meeting as “magnificent and friendly,” noting their prior acquaintance from the antipope’s time in Chiclayo, and discussed topics ranging from Peru’s electoral politics to the encyclical *Magnifica Humanitas*, artificial intelligence, human rights, and migration. The Vatican’s own readout emphasized “satisfaction” over bilateral relations and discussed “socioeconomic developments, illegal mining, the promotion of the common good and dialogue, and efforts to foster social cohesion.” What the article presents as a pastoral visit is, upon even cursory examination through the lens of integral Catholic faith, nothing more than a diplomatic and public relations exercise characteristic of the conciliar sect’s systematic reduction of the Church’s supernatural mission to naturalistic humanitarianism and political theater.
The Antipope as Head of State: The Confusion of Two Swords
The very framing of this visit reveals the fundamental inversion that has governed the structures occupying the Vatican since the death of Pius XII. Leo XIV receives a head of state in private audience for nearly two hours, discusses electoral transitions, vote counts, migration policy, and organized crime, and the entire encounter is treated as though it were a normal exercise of papal authority. But let us be clear: the Roman Pontiff, as the Vicar of Christ, does not exist to confer with presidents on the mechanics of democratic transitions or to exchange views on regional sociopolitical situations as though he were a secretary-general of the United Nations.
Pius XI, in *Quas Primas*, taught with crystalline clarity that Christ’s kingship extends over all nations and all societies, and that rulers have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him — not to negotiate with His supposed Vicar as one sovereign among many. The encyclical states: “Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ, but let them fulfill this duty themselves and with their people, if they wish to maintain their authority inviolate and contribute to the increase of their homeland’s happiness.” The entire purpose of the papal office, in its public dimension, is to demand that states conform their laws to the commandments of God. What we witness instead is an antipope discussing “social cohesion” and “dialogue” with a president whose country is mired in the same apostasy and moral collapse afflicting every nation that has rejected the Social Kingship of Christ.
The Vatican’s own communiqué — with its bureaucratic language about “matters of common interest,” “socioeconomic developments,” and “the promotion of the common good and dialogue” — is a textbook example of the naturalistic reduction of the Church’s mission. Where is the language of sin, of grace, of the necessity of baptism, of the obligation of the state to profess the Catholic Faith? It is entirely absent, because the conciliar sect long ago abandoned the supernatural order in favor of a humanitarianism indistinguishable from secular liberalism.
The Encyclical Magnifica Humanitas: A Window into Modernist Apostasy
President Balcázar specifically mentions discussing the encyclical *Magnifica Humanitas*, published on May 25, 2026, which focuses on artificial intelligence and human rights. He describes it as containing “a powerful call to the common good.” This is precisely the language of the conciliar revolution — the “common good” divorced from its proper theological foundation in the virtue of religion and the salvation of souls.
Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors, condemned the proposition that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80). Yet this is precisely what every antipope since John XXIII has done, and Leo XIV’s encyclical on artificial intelligence and human rights is merely the latest installment in this betrayal. An encyclical that addresses artificial intelligence without grounding its analysis in the absolute primacy of the supernatural order, the reality of the devil, the necessity of sanctifying grace, and the final judgment is not a Catholic document — it is a technocratic white paper dressed in ecclesiastical vestments.
The very concept of “human rights” as deployed by the conciliar sect is a modernist innovation foreign to the authentic Magisterium. Leo XIII, in *Immortale Dei*, taught that true rights flow from God and are ordered to the eternal law. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, and the conciliar sect’s embrace of it, substitutes the autonomous individual for the soul redeemed by Christ’s Precious Blood. Pius XI declared in *Quas Primas*: “We no longer belong to ourselves, for Christ has bought us with a great price; and our bodies are members of Christ.” The “human rights” framework of *Magnifica Humanitas* is the antithesis of this teaching — it is the cult of man, condemned repeatedly by the pre-conciliar Magisterium.
Migration: The Gospel of Open Borders Without Baptism
Perhaps the most revealing passage in the entire article is Balcázar’s account of the discussion on migration. He states that Leo XIV is “aware that there are criminals who migrate from one country to another” but is “even more aware that we should not persecute migrants moving from one country to another, because the world has always been marked by migration everywhere, and those migrants must be given the right to life, especially, as he emphasizes, in a very important chapter on human rights.”
Let us dissect this with the ruthlessness it deserves. The antipope’s concern is for the “right to life” of migrants — understood as their physical, temporal welfare — while there is not a single word about their eternal souls, their need for baptism, or the obligation of Catholic states to maintain the Catholic religion as the sole religion of the state. Pius IX condemned the proposition that “in the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship” (Proposition 77, Syllabus of Errors). Yet the entire migration policy of the conciliar sect is built upon this very heresy — the premise that the temporal welfare of migrants supersedes the spiritual obligation of states to protect and promote the Catholic Faith.
The authentic Catholic position on migration is not “open borders” but the recognition that every human person has dignity because they are made in the image of God and are called to the Catholic Church as the sole ark of salvation. A Catholic state has the duty to receive migrants who will be integrated into the Catholic Faith, not to facilitate the movement of peoples while remaining indifferent to their eternal destiny. The antipope’s migration teaching is not Catholic pastoral care — it is secular humanitarianism baptized with Christian vocabulary, which is the very definition of Modernism as defined by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis.
The Itinerary as Liturgical Protest: Five Cities, Zero Churches
The announced itinerary — Lima, Chiclayo, Piura, Pucallpa, and Cusco — with a possible stop in Arequipa, is described by Balcázar as an effort to “cover as many small towns as possible.” The president even proposed a helicopter trip to “the Andean area of Incahuasi and Cañaris, which is a very poor, Quechua-speaking region that he knows very well.”
This is the conciliar model of the papal visit: a whirlwind tour of geographic locations, with emphasis on poverty, indigenous communities, and “reaching the peripheries” — all the buzzwords of the Bergoglian revolution that Leo XIV has inherited and perpetuates. Where in this itinerary is the solemn proclamation of the Catholic Faith? Where is the demand for the conversion of these regions to the true Church? Where is the condemnation of idolatry, which remains rampant among Quechua-speaking populations who mix Catholic practices with pagan animism?
The pre-conciliar model of papal engagement with mission territories was radically different. When the Church evangelized Latin America, it did so by establishing the hierarchy, founding seminaries, erecting churches where the Most Holy Sacrifice would be offered, and demanding the extirpation of idolatry. The feast of Christ the King, instituted by Pius XI, was meant to remind all nations — including Peru — that they owe public obedience to Jesus Christ. Leo XIV’s helicopter tour of impoverished Andean villages, devoid of any demand for conversion or condemnation of syncretism, is not evangelization — it is tourism with a mitre.
The “Holy Father” and the Gardens: Praying Before Statues in an Apostate Structure
Balcázar mentions that after his audience, he went to the Vatican Gardens, “where he stopped to pray before the image of St. Rose of Lima, enthroned in a historic ceremony presided over by the pope in January.” This detail, presented as a pious aside, is in fact deeply revealing.
St. Rose of Lima, canonized by Clement X in 1671, is a genuine saint of the Church. But the ceremony of “enthronement” presided over by Leo XIV in January 2026 is an act performed by an antipope whose authority is null and void. The conciliar sect’s manipulation of genuine Catholic devotions — using the saints and the sacraments as instruments of its own legitimacy — is one of its most insidious tactics. By presiding over ceremonies honoring true saints, the antipopes create the illusion of continuity with the pre-conciliar Church, thereby seducing the faithful into accepting their usurped authority.
The president’s act of praying before the statue is his own affair, and God alone judges the interior dispositions of the faithful. But the article’s presentation of this detail as evidence of the antipope’s piety is a form of propaganda that serves the conciliar narrative.
The Two-Hour Audience: Familiarity as a Tool of Manipulation
Balcázar emphasizes that the private audience lasted “almost two hours” and that “we have known each other before,” referring to the antipope’s time in Chiclayo from 2015 to 2023. This personal familiarity is presented as a charming detail, but it reveals something far more troubling: the antipope operates not as the universal father of the faithful, but as a networker cultivating personal relationships with political figures.
The Roman Pontiff, as the successor of St. Peter, stands in the place of Christ for the entire world. His relationships with heads of state should be governed solely by the demands of the Faith and the salvation of souls — not by personal friendships forged during years of residence in a particular diocese. The intimacy described in this article is characteristic of the conciliar model of the papacy: the “pope” as a global celebrity, a man of the world, comfortable in the corridors of power, rather than the servus servorum Dei who fears God alone.
The Unconfirmed Itinerary: Manufacturing Consent Through Leaks
The article notes that “the Holy See has not yet officially confirmed the final itinerary,” and that Balcázar had earlier stated the visit would occur on November 10. This is a standard communications strategy of the conciliar sect: information is leaked through friendly journalists and political figures, creating public expectation and media momentum before any formal announcement. This is not the governance of the Church of Christ — it is the public relations strategy of a multinational corporation.
The pre-conciliar Church did not govern through leaks and media campaigns. When a pope acted, he acted with the full weight of apostolic authority, through formal documents — encyclicals, apostolic constitutions, motu proprios. The conciliar sect’s reliance on press conferences, leaks, and presidential announcements to communicate its plans is yet another symptom of its transformation from a divine institution into a human organization.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation Continues Its Travels
What the National Catholic Register presents as exciting news — a papal visit to Peru — is, from the perspective of integral Catholic faith, simply the latest journey of the abomination of desolation through the nations of the world. Leo XIV, the usurper on the throne of Peter, will travel to five Peruvian cities, discuss artificial intelligence and human rights with a president, pose for photographs with the poor, and return to Rome — all without once proclaiming the one thing necessary: that Jesus Christ is King, that His Church is the sole ark of salvation, and that every nation on earth owes Him public obedience and worship.
The true Church endures — not in the structures occupying the Vatican, but in the faithful who profess the integral Catholic faith, who offer the true Mass of all ages, and who reject the conciliar apostasy in all its forms. Leo XIV’s Peruvian roadshow changes nothing. The Social Kingship of Christ remains the only foundation of true peace and justice, and no amount of helicopter tours or encyclicals on artificial intelligence can substitute for the immutable truth that “there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
Source:
Pope Leo Expected to Visit 5 Peruvian Cities in November, President Says (ncregister.com)
Date: 18.06.2026