Vatican News portal reports on a letter dated 19 September 2026 addressed by the usurper “Pope” Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) to the “bishops” of Latin America and the Caribbean on the occasion of the third centenary of the canonization of Saint Turibius of Mogrovejo. The text presents a reflection on the “episcopal ministry” through the lens of the post-conciliar rite of welcoming a “bishop” into his cathedral, emphasizing “journeying,” “listening,” “interior life,” “Eucharistic Adoration” as “pastoral priority,” “unity in diversity,” and “clear teaching” amid “many voices.” The letter invokes a “constellation” of post-conciliar “saints” and “blesseds,” including the communist sympathizer Oscar Romero, and concludes by entrusting the mission to “Our Lady of Guadalupe.” This document is not a pastoral exhortation but a manifesto of the conciliar sect’s definitive rupture with the *munus docendi, sanctificandi, et regendi* instituted by Christ, replacing the divine hierarchy with a horizontal, psychologized, and naturalistic functionary.
The Usurped Authority: *Ipso Facto* Vacancy of the See of Peter
The very premise of the letter—a “Pope” appointing “bishops” via “Apostolic Letters” and “Papal Bulls”—is a juridical and theological fiction. As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches in *De Romano Pontifice*, 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.” The line of usurpers beginning with John XXIII has publicly professed the heresies of religious liberty, false ecumenism, collegiality, and the evolution of dogma—condemned by Pius IX in the *Syllabus of Errors* (props. 77, 78, 79, 80) and by St. Pius X in *Lamentabili sane exitu* and *Pascendi Dominici Gregis*. Consequently, the “Apostolic Letter” mentioned in the text, by which the “bishop does not confer this appointment upon himself, but receives it,” is *null, void, and of no effect* (*irritum, cassum, et nullius valoris*), as declared by Pope Paul IV in *Cum ex Apostolatus Officio*: “his promotion or elevation… shall be null, void, and of no effect.” The “bishops” addressed are not successors of the Apostles but functionaries of a paramasonic structure occupying the Vatican. Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code confirms: “Every office becomes vacant by the mere fact and without any declaration… if the cleric publicly defects from the Catholic faith.” The “bishops” of the neo-church, by their adherence to Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium, have publicly defected. They possess no jurisdiction, no mission, and no authority to “offer clear teaching” because they have abandoned the *depositum fidei*.
Reduction of the Episcopal Office to Naturalistic Humanitarianism
The letter’s anthropology is purely naturalistic. The “bishop” is portrayed as a manager of “communities,” a “journeyer” with “feet on the road” and “heart in heaven”—a sentimental metaphor replacing the *potestas ordinis* and *potestas jurisdictionis*. St. Turibius of Mogrovejo, the true Archbishop of Lima, exercised *potestas legislativa, judiciaria, et coactiva*: he convoked provincial councils, diocesan synods, established seminaries, condemned idolatry, and defended the *libertas Ecclesiae* against the civil power. The usurper’s letter reduces this to “forging bonds with his land and its people,” “listening to the flock,” and ensuring “no one feels that he can approach his shepherd only when there is a problem to be resolved.” This is the *ecclesiology of the people of God* (Vatican II, *Lumen Gentium* 9), condemned in advance by Pius XI in *Quas Primas*: “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 “bishop” of the neo-church derives his authority not from Christ through the Church, but from the “community” he “journeys through.” This is the heresy of democratic ecclesiology, the *haeresis Americana* condemned by Leo XIII in *Testem Benevolentiae*.
Silence on the Social Kingship of Christ: The Gravest Omission
The letter is utterly silent on the *regnum Christi* over nations, the duty of the State to profess the Catholic Faith, and the *jus publicum* of the Church. Pius XI in *Quas Primas* instituted the Feast of Christ the King precisely “to address the needs of the present times and provide a special remedy against the plague that poisons human society. And this plague is the secularism of our times, so-called laicism.” The “bishop” of the letter is urged to “safeguard unity” so that “the diversity of our dioceses finds its unity in Christ,” but this unity is horizontal, not the *unitas fidei* subordinated to the *regnum Christi*. The Syllabus of Errors (prop. 55) condemns: “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.” Prop. 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 letter’s invocation of “Our Lady of Guadalupe, patroness of Spanish-speaking peoples” without a call for the *conversio gentium* to the *unitas catholica* and the *regnum sociale Christi* is religious indifferentism. The “constellation” of “saints” includes Oscar Romero, a liberation theology icon beatified by the usurper Bergoglio, who died not *in odium fidei* but *in odium iustitiae socialis* as defined by Marxism. This is the “cult of man” replacing the *cultus Dei*.
False Ecumenism and Religious Indifferentism Implied in “Diversity”
The phrase “the diversity of our dioceses finds its unity in Christ” is a coded endorsement of the false ecumenism condemned by Pius XI in *Mortalium Animos* (1928): “The Church of Christ… cannot be the object of a federation of Christian communities.” The “many voices claiming authority over the consciences of the faithful” are not identified as the errors of Modernism, Protestantism, Pentecostalism, or the syncretism of *Santa Muerte* and Afro-Brazilian cults rampant in Latin America. The “clear teaching” demanded is not the *integrum depositum fidei* but a “patient and rooted” accompaniment. This is the *hermeneutic of continuity* applied to error: the “bishop” does not condemn; he “discerns.” *Lamentabili sane exitu* (prop. 58) condemns: “Truth changes with man, because it develops with him, in him, and through him.” The neo-church’s “teaching” evolves; the Catholic *magisterium* is immutable. *Tradidi quod et accepi* (1 Cor 11:23). The letter’s “clear teaching” is a contradiction in terms when uttered by one who recognizes the “validity” of non-Catholic sects and the “salvific value” of false religions (*Lumen Gentium* 16, *Nostra Aetate* 2).
The “Listening” Church vs. the Teaching Church: *Magisterium* Inverted
The letter states: “After the words of the Gospel come those of the bishop himself, who addresses his people only after receiving, contemplating, and listening.” This inverts the divine order: *Ecclesia docens* teaches; *Ecclesia discens* obeys. The “bishop” becomes a facilitator of “dialogue.” Pius X in *Vehementer Nos* (1906) condemned the *Loi de Séparation* in France which reduced the Church to a *association cultuelle* governed by lay committees. The neo-church’s “synodality” is the institutionalization of this condemnation. The “Apostolic Letter” is read not as a mandate from the Vicar of Christ (who does not exist in the neo-church) but as a “compass amid the excessive number of voices.” The true compass is the *Symbolum Nicaeno-Constantinopolitanum*, the *Catechismus Romanus*, the *Summa Theologiae*. The “bishop” who “listens” to the “voices” of the world, the flesh, and the devil is a *mercenarius* (Jn 10:12), not a *pastor*. St. Gregory the Great in *Regula Pastoralis*: “The pastor should be… a leader of the flock, not a follower of the flock.”
Eucharistic Adoration Divorced from the Propitiatory Sacrifice
The letter urges “Eucharistic Adoration” as a “pastoral priority” where “Christ always remains” while “pastors come and go.” This is the *devotio moderna* stripped of the *Sacrificium Propitiatorium*. The Council of Trent (Sess. XXII, can. 1) defines: “If anyone says that in the Mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God… let him be anathema.” The neo-church’s “Mass” (Novus Ordo Missae) is a *cena commemorativa*, a “table of assembly” (Bugnini’s *schema*), where the *Canon Romanus* is mutilated, the *Offertory* abolished, and the *Consecration* rendered invalid by the defective form (“for all” vs. *pro multis*) and the absence of *intentio faciendi quod facit Ecclesia* in “priests” ordained by the invalid *Pontificale Romanum* of 1968. Adoration of a “host” confected in a invalid rite is idolatry. St. Pius X in *Quam Singulari* (1910) and *Sacra Tridentina Synodus* (1905) linked frequent Communion to the *status gratiae* and the *Sacrificium*. The letter’s “adoration” is a Protestantized *exposition* devoid of the *latria* due to the *Victima Immaculata* perpetually offered on the altar. “Christ always remains” in the *Tabernacle* of the true Mass; in the neo-church’s “chapels,” He is not present because the *sacerdos* is not a priest and the *forma* is defective.
The “Constellation” of False Saints: Canonizations *Nulla et Irrita*
The letter proposes as models “Saints Anthony Mary Claret, Ezekiel Moreno, Raphael Guízar, and Oscar Romero, and Blesseds Juan de Palafox, Jacinto Vera, Mamerto Esquiú, Enrique Angelelli, Jesús Jaramillo, and Eduardo Pironio.” With the exception of St. Anthony Mary Claret (canonized 1950 by Pius XII) and St. Rafael Guízar Valencia (canonized 2006 by the usurper Benedict XVI), these are post-conciliar fabrications. Oscar Romero: beatified by Bergoglio (2015), canonized by Bergoglio (2018), a proponent of *theologia liberationis*, assassinated by political enemies, not *in odium fidei*. Enrique Angelelli: “bishop” of La Rioja, killed by the Argentine dictatorship, beatified by Bergoglio (2019) as a “martyr” for “social justice”—the *causa mortis* is political, not theological. Eduardo Pironio: architect of the *Cursillos de Cristiandad* and *Juventud Obrera Cristiana*, instruments of the *nouvelle théologie* and lay activism condemned by Pius XII in *Provida Mater Ecclesia* (1947). The “canonizations” of the usurpers are *nulla et irrita* because they lack the *potestas iurisdictionis* and the *assistentia Spiritus Sancti* promised to the true Successor of Peter. As the *Defense of Sedevacantism* file demonstrates, a manifest heretic cannot canonize: “A non-Christian in no way can be Pope… a manifest heretic cannot be Pope.” The invocation of this “constellation” is the *sanctorum calendar* of the antichurch, a pantheon of Modernism.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation Standing Where It Ought Not
The letter is a masterpiece of deception: it uses Catholic vocabulary—Cross, Baptism, Eucharist, Gospel, Apostolic Letters, Saint Turibius—to cloak a thoroughly Modernist, naturalistic, and democratic ecclesiology. It says nothing of *extra Ecclesiam nulla salus*, nothing of the *Social Reign of Christ the King*, nothing of the *rights of the Church* over the State, nothing of the *condemnation of error*, nothing of *Hell, Purgatory, Judgment*. It is the voice of the *Antichristus* (1 Jn 2:18) speaking through his *pseudoprophetae* (Mt 24:24). The true bishops of the Catholic Church, those few who retain valid orders and jurisdiction in the catacombs of Tradition, read this letter and see the *abominatio desolationis* (Dan 9:27; Mt 24:15) standing in the *sanctum sanctorum* of the Vatican. *Quo vadis, Domine?* The faithful must *fugere ad montes* (Mt 24:16)—flee to the Mass of All Time, the true Sacrifice, the true priesthood, the true hierarchy, outside the structures of the neo-church. *Non praevalebunt* (Mt 16:18), but the *ecclesia persecuta* must endure *donec veniat* (1 Cor 11:26).
Source:
Pope Leo: Bishops should offer clear teaching (vaticannews.va)
Date: 19.09.2026