The NCR/CNA portal reports that the usurper Robert Prevost, styling himself “Pope Leo XIV,” returned to Chiclayo, Peru, on November 13, 2026, to the diocese he governed from 2015 to 2023 before his elevation to the prefecture of the Dicastery for Bishops by his predecessor, the antipope Francis. The article details a Novus Ordo “Mass,” meetings with “synodal teams and pastoral councils,” a visit to a chapel dedicated to the liberation theology icon Óscar Romero, and an address at the “St. Turibius of Mogrovejo Catholic University.” Prevost declared that “synodality means walking together, listening, discerning and sharing responsibility in the mission,” asserted that “before any service, office, profession or ministry, we are baptized,” and claimed authority “must be exercised as service, discernment and appreciation of charisms.” This visit is not a pastoral act but a staged manifestation of the conciliar sect’s apostasy, parading the anti-papal heresy of synodality as the new paradigm of ecclesial life while the Social Kingship of Christ the King is utterly ignored.
The Usurper’s Itinerary: A Pilgrimage to the Altars of the Neo-Church
The photographic record published by the portal reveals the liturgical and architectural face of the abomination of desolation (Matt. 24:15). The “Mass” celebrated near Chiclayo is the Novus Ordo Missae, the fabricated rite of Paul VI, which reduces the Unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary to a communal meal and excises the propitiatory nature of the Mass defined by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, can. 1-3). The “pope” processes in vestments of the new rite, faces the people (versus populum), and offers a sacrifice that is if not “just” sacrilege, then idolatry, for it simulates the Catholic liturgy while denying its theology. The presence of “Peruvian dancers” at the arrival ceremony incarnates the inculturation mandated by Sacrosanctum Concilium and the post-conciliar liturgical revolution, transforming the sacred precinct into a theater of naturalistic entertainment.
The visit to the chapel of “St. Óscar Romero” is a deliberate homage to the liberation theology martyr-cult manufactured by the conciliar sect. Romero, a bishop who substituted the regnum Christi for the regnum hominis, was “canonized” by the antipope Francis in 2018. His veneration here signals the total identification of the usurper’s “magisterium” with the Marxist-infiltrated “option for the poor” that has replaced the supernatural mission of the Church. As Pius XI taught in Quas Primas, “the Kingdom of Christ is primarily spiritual and relates mainly to spiritual matters” and “He completely refrained from exercising [temporal] authority… He left them then and leaves them today to their owners” — a far cry from the political messianism of Romero and his modernist promoters.
Synodality: The Neo-Modernist Rejection of the Monarchical Constitution of the Church
The core of Prevost’s address is the heresy of synodality, the operational principle of the “Church of the New Advent.” He defines it as “walking together, listening, discerning and sharing responsibility in the mission.” This vocabulary — walking together, listening, discerning, sharing responsibility — is the rhetorical arsenal of the democratic inversion of the Church’s constitution. It replaces the potestas iurisdictionis (power of jurisdiction) conferred by Christ on Peter and the bishops with a collegialist “shared responsibility” that dissolves the hierarchical order into a consultative assembly.
The Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX condemns the proposition: “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). Synodality applies this error internally: it subjects the divine constitution of the Church to the “sensus fidelium” manufactured by modernist “synodal teams.” Prevost’s statement that “the participation of the laity is not a concession, but an expression of their baptismal dignity” is a direct echo of the Lumen Gentium heresy of the “common priesthood of the faithful” elevated to a governance role. This contradicts the defined doctrine of Vatican I (Pastor Aeternus, Ch. 3): “The Roman Pontiff… has the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church… not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world.” Authority is not “service” in the sense of facilitation; it is potestas sacra, a sacred power to bind and loose, to teach, govern, and sanctify — not to “discern” alongside the laity.
The “Baptismal Identity” Heresy: Reduction of the Church to a “People of God” Sociological Category
Prevost declares: “Before any service, office, profession or ministry, we are baptized. Our first identity is that of sons and daughters of God and members of his People.” This is the ecclesiology of the “People of God” (Populus Dei) that displaces the Corpus Christi Mysticum and the hierarchical Church (Ecclesia docens and Ecclesia discens). By placing baptismal identity before office and ministry, he denies the sacramental character of Holy Orders as a distinct participation in the priesthood of Christ (Council of Trent, Sess. XXIII, can. 2). He reduces the ministerial priesthood to a mere “service” emerging from the common priesthood, a Protestantized error condemned by Pius XII in Mediator Dei and by the pre-conciliar Magisterium.
This language serves the democratization of the sacred. “There is no mission without communion” — but the communion proposed is not the communio hierarchica under the Roman Pontiff, but a horizontal communion of “synodal teams” and “pastoral councils” that usurp the bishop’s proper authority. The Syllabus condemns: “National churches, withdrawn from the authority of the Roman pontiff and altogether separated, can be established” (Error 37). Synodality achieves this withdrawal de facto by making the local “synodal assembly” the locus of discernment, independent of the true Roman Primacy — which, in any case, has been vacant since 1958.
The Social Gospel Substitutes the Kingship of Christ
The usurper lists the “demands of our ecclesial mission”: “Accompanying families, young people, migrants, Indigenous peoples and the poor, and working for justice, peace and the common good.” Not a word of the regnum Christi, of the conversion of nations to the Catholic Faith, of the condemnation of error, of the defense of the Church’s liberty, of the rights of Christ the King over civil society. This is the total naturalization of the Church’s mission, the immanentization of the eschaton warned against by the Fathers.
Pius XI in Quas Primas is unequivocal: “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 entire human society had to be shaken, because it lacked a stable and strong foundation.” The Syllabus condemns: “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Error 55) and “In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State” (Error 77). Prevost’s “mission” of “justice, peace and the common good” divorced from the Social Kingship of Christ is precisely the laicism (secularism) condemned as “the plague that poisons human society” by Pius XI. The “migrants” and “Indigenous peoples” become ideological tokens in a globalist agenda, not souls to be baptized and saved.
The Invalidity of the Usurper’s Office: The Sedevacantist Necessity
Robert Prevost is not the Pope. He is a manifest heretic who, by embracing the conciliar errors of religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, and the new ecclesiology, has defected from the Catholic Faith and therefore cannot hold the papal office. The theological principles are immutable:
St. Robert Bellarmine teaches: “A Pope who is a manifest heretic, by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head, just as he ceases to be a Christian and member of the body of the Church… A non-Christian in no way can be Pope… he cannot be the head of something of which he is not a member.” (De Romano Pontifice, Bk. 2, Ch. 30).
Wernz and Vidal confirm: “By notorious and publicly manifested heresy, the Roman Pontiff… is deprived ipso facto of his personal jurisdiction even before any declaratory sentence by the Church.” (Ius Canonicum).
Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code states: “Every office becomes vacant by the mere fact and without any declaration… if the cleric: 4. Publicly defects from the Catholic faith.” Fr. McDevitt clarifies: “Joining, or enrolling in, a non-Catholic sect is not required to establish the publicity which the canon demands.” Public defection occurs through formal heresy.
Pope Paul IV’s Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio decrees: “If… the Roman Pontiff… has defected from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: (i) his promotion or elevation… shall be null, void, and of no effect.”
The example of Nestorius, cited by Pope Celestine I and St. Cyril of Alexandria, proves that a heretical bishop loses jurisdiction ipso facto from the moment he preaches heresy, before any canonical sentence. Prevost, by preaching synodality, the new ecclesiology, and the social gospel, is a manifest heretic. His “election” by a conclave of cardinals created by antipopes is null and void ab origine. He is a layman occupying the See of Peter — the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15).
The “Catholic University” and the Formation of the Neo-Clergy
The visit to the “St. Turibius of Mogrovejo Catholic University” exposes the intellectual corruption of the conciliar sect. Such institutions, stripped of the Oath Against Modernism (St. Pius X, Sacrorum Antistitum, 1910) and the Thomistic philosophy mandated by Pascendi Dominici Gregis and the Code of Canon Law (Can. 1366), are seedbeds of the evolutionist heresy. The Lamentabili Sane Exitu (1907) condemned the proposition: “The organic structure of the Church is subject to change, and the Christian community… is subject to continuous evolution” (Prop. 53). Yet this evolutionism is the operating system of every “Catholic” university in the neo-church. Prevost’s “listening” there is the dialogue of the deaf, the modernist “encounter” that replaces the traditio of immutable truth.
Conclusion: The Theater of the Antichrist
The NCR/CNA article documents a carefully choreographed media event: the “hug” with a nun, the “lemon pie,” the dancers, the waves to crowds, the “synodal teams.” It is bread and circuses for the conciliar faithful, a Potemkin village of piety concealing the total apostasy of the structure. No mention of the Feast of Christ the King (instituted by Pius XI for the last Sunday of October, Quas Primas), no call for the Consecration of the Human Race to the Sacred Heart (Pius XI, Annum Sacrum), no condemnation of the errors of Peru’s socialist government, no defense of the Church’s libertas against the state. Only synodality, accompaniment, and the “common good” of the Masonic city of man.
The true Church, the Ecclesia Militans, endures in the faithful who profess the integral Catholic Faith, adhere to the pre-1958 Magisterium, and reject the conciliar sect. They know that “there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12) — not the name of “Leo XIV,” not the name of “synodality,” not the name of “Óscar Romero.” Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat. The usurper’s visit to Chiclayo is a footnote in the history of the Great Apostasy, a witness against himself that the See of Peter is vacant and the parousia of the Man of Sin approaches.
Source:
PHOTOS: Pope Leo XIV Returns to His Former Diocese of Chiclayo, Peru (ncregister.com)
Date: 14.11.2026