Vatican News, the official propaganda organ of the conciliar sect occupying the Vatican, publishes a hagiographic puff piece on the antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) during his November 2026 “apostolic journey” to Peru. The article, dated 14 November 2026, centers on an interview with Leidy Rimaycuna, sister of the antipope’s personal secretary, Monsignor Edgard Rimaycuna Inga. It presents a carefully curated narrative of “closeness,” “peripheries,” and humanitarian activism—oxygen plants, flood relief, warm embraces—entirely devoid of the supernatural mission of the Church. This spectacle exposes the neo-church’s reduction of the Petrine office to a global NGO management role, confirming that the See of Peter remains vacant and the structures in Rome are a paramasonic counterfeit.
The “Peripheries” Narrative: Substituting Social Work for the Salvation of Souls
The article’s leitmotif is the antipope’s alleged attentiveness to “people who were suffering” and “communities most in need.” Leidy Rimaycuna recounts how then-Bishop Prevost “helped raise funds to install oxygen plants” during the COVID-19 pandemic and “went out to see people affected by flooding.” This is the modus operandi of the Bergoglian revolution: the corporal works of mercy are absolutized while the spiritual works—converting the sinner, instructing the ignorant, admonishing the sinner—are systematically erased.
Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), teaches that Christ’s Kingdom is “primarily spiritual and relates mainly to spiritual matters” and that “He who gives the Kingdom of Heaven does not take away earthly things”—but the neo-church inverts this, giving earthly things (oxygen plants, flood relief) while withholding the Kingdom of Heaven. The Syllabus of Pius IX (1864) condemns the error that “The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well-being and interests of society” (Error 40); the conciliar sect proves the converse: its teaching is hostile to the supernatural well-being of souls because it replaces the salus animarum with temporal welfare.
The article mentions the antipope’s private visit to the “Chapel of St. Oscar Romero”—a liberation theology icon canonized by the antipope Francis. This is not a detail; it is a confession of theological alignment with Marxist-tinged liberation theology, which the Holy Office under Pius XII condemned (Decree against Communism, 1949) and which Lamentabili Sane Exitu (1907) pre-condemns in its rejection of the Modernist error that “Christ did not proclaim any specific, all-encompassing doctrine suitable for all times and peoples, but rather initiated a certain religious movement… applicable to different times and places” (Proposition 59). Romero’s “option for the poor” is the neo-church’s substitute for the option for the truth.
Linguistic Engineering: “Closeness,” “Warmth,” and “Peace” as Substitutes for Doctrine
The vocabulary is revealing. Leidy Rimaycuna uses the word “close” or “closeness” five times: “how close they were,” “stay very close to the community,” “very approachable and likes to stay close to his community,” “he welcomed us with so much gratitude, love, and generosity.” This is the language of sentimentalism, not the language of the Magisterium. Nowhere does she mention the Faith, the Mass, the Sacraments, grace, sin, judgment, heaven, or hell. The “message” she hopes Peruvians retain is “a message of peace, love, and communication, of helping our neighbors and becoming better people”—a purely naturalistic ethic that any Freemason or secular humanist could endorse.
Pius XI in Quas Primas warns that “when God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed”. The antipope’s “authority” derives entirely from media-manufactured affective popularity—”warmth,” “calm,” “approachability”—not from the potestas iurisdictionis conferred by Christ on Peter (Pastor aeternus, Vatican I). The Syllabus condemns the proposition that “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Error 80); Leo XIV’s entire persona is a reconciliation with the spirit of the world.
Theological Bankruptcy: A “Vocation” Without the Cross, a “Church” Without the King
Leidy Rimaycuna’s advice to young people discerning a vocation is telling: “They need to stay very close to God and be clear about their principles… have no fear, to listen, to learn how to listen, and to pay attention to those first stirrings.” This is Protestant subjectivism masquerading as Catholic discernment. The Council of Trent (Sess. XXIII, Can. 2) anathematizes those who say that “by the sole faith in the divine promise… the grace of the Sacrament [of Orders] is conferred” without the sacramental character and the intention of the Church. The neo-church’s “vocations” are psychological self-projections, not supernatural calls authenticated by valid bishops with apostolic succession.
The article’s silence on the Social Kingship of Christ is deafening. Pius XI instituted the Feast of Christ the King precisely to combat “the secularism of our times, so-called laicism, its errors and wicked endeavors” (Quas Primas). He declared that “His reign encompasses not only Catholic nations… but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ”. The antipope in Peru does not proclaim Christ the King; he proclaims himself a “shepherd close to the peripheries.” The Syllabus condemns the error that “The Church is not a true and perfect society, entirely free… but it appertains to the civil power to define what are the rights of the Church” (Error 19); the conciliar sect acts as a subcontractor of the globalist state, distributing oxygen plants instead of the Bread of Life.
The “Secretary” and the Simulacrum of Petrine Governance
The article highlights Monsignor Rimaycuna’s career trajectory: secretary to the bishop of Chiclayo (2015), then to the prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops (2023), now to the antipope. This bureaucratic continuity illustrates the neo-church’s nature as a corporate bureaucracy, not a divine institution. The Defense of Sedevacantism file demonstrates that a manifest heretic loses the papacy ipso facto (Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice; Canon 188.4, 1917 Code; Cum ex Apostolatus Officio). Robert Prevost, as a willing participant in the conciliar revolution—accepting Vatican II, the New Mass, religious liberty, ecumenism, and the Bergoglian magisterium—is a manifest heretic and therefore not the Pope. His “secretary” is a functionary in a paramasonic structure, not a papal aide.
The False Fatima Apparitions file exposes the “Masonic Operation ‘Fatima'” as a psychological operation to divert attention from the modernist apostasy within the Church. The current Peru spectacle serves the same function: a media distraction from the fact that the Chair of Peter has been vacant since 1958. The “joy” of the Rimaycuna family and the “pride” of Chiclayo are the opium of the people administered by the neo-church to keep the faithful asleep in the abomination of desolation.
Symptomatic Diagnosis: The Neo-Church as the “Church of the New Advent”
Every element of this article—the humanitarian focus, the therapeutic language, the liberation theology shrine, the bureaucratic careerism, the total absence of dogmatic content—is the necessary fruit of the conciliar revolution. Lamentabili Sane Exitu condemned the Modernist proposition that “The Church is incapable of effectively defending evangelical ethics, because it steadfastly adheres to its views, which cannot be reconciled with modern progress” (Proposition 63) and that “Contemporary Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true knowledge without transforming it into a certain dogmaless Christianity, that is, into a broad and liberal Protestantism” (Proposition 65). The Vatican News article is Exhibit A: a dogma-less, Protestantized, humanitarianized parody of Catholicism.
The Syllabus condemns “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Error 55); the conciliar sect does not separate—it subordinates the Church to the globalist state’s agenda (pandemic response, climate change, migration, “peripheries”). Pius XI taught that “rulers of states… have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him” (Quas Primas); the antipope honors the state by serving its humanitarian priorities.
Conclusio: This article is not news; it is liturgical propaganda for the antichurch. It presents a false pope, a false church, a false mission, and a false hope. The faithful Catholic, adhering to the integral Catholic faith of the pre-1958 Magisterium, sees in this Peru spectacle not the Vicar of Christ but the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15). The only remedy is the reconsecratio of the world to Christ the King—not to the “warmth” of a usurper in white.
Source:
Leidy Rimaycuna: Pope Leo XIV is close to his people (vaticannews.va)
Date: 14.11.2026