The National Catholic Register portal (November 10, 2026) publishes an analysis by its Vatican correspondent Andrea Gagliarducci dissecting the latest appointments of the usurper “Pope” Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) to the Roman Curia. The article details the naming of Jesuit Father Giacomo Costa and “Sister” Elena Massimini as undersecretaries of the General Secretariat of the Synod, replacing “Sister” Nathalie Becquart; the appointment of Jesuit Father Avelino Chicoma Bundo Chico and Chilean theologian Claudia Leal Luna as undersecretaries of the Dicastery for Integral Human Development; the installation of “Archbishop” Filippo Iannone at the Dicastery for Bishops and “Archbishop” Anthony Randazzo at the Dicastery for Legislative Texts; the transfer of “Archbishop” Vittorio Francesco Viola from the Dicastery for Divine Worship to the archpriesthood of St. Peter’s Basilica; and the confirmation of women in key governance roles — Montse Alvarado, “Sister” Alessandra Smerilli, “Sister” Raffaella Petrini — alongside “Cardinal” Fabio Baggio. Gagliarducci frames these moves as a pragmatic search for “balance,” “continuity,” and “harmony” after twelve years of the Bergoglian revolution. This analysis is a masterpiece of ecclesiastical Kremlinology that deliberately ignores the causa formalis of the catastrophe: the man making these appointments is a manifest heretic who, by divine and canonical law (ipso facto), ceased to be a member of the Church long before he occupied the Chair of Peter.
The Paramasonic Restructuring Continues Unabated
The article presents a tableau of bureaucratic reshuffling within the “structures occupying the Vatican” as if it were a legitimate exercise of papal governance. Gagliarducci notes that Leo XIV “did not erase or disavow the system designed by his predecessor” and that the consistories under Francis were “organized according to the synodal method.” This admission is the condemnation. The “system designed by his predecessor” is the paramasonic architecture of the “Church of the New Advent”, erected in explicit contradiction to the divine constitution of the Church (divina constitutio Ecclesiae). Pope Pius IX, in the Syllabus Errorum (1864), condemned the proposition 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 “synodal method” — dividing working groups by language, appointing special relators like the arch-heretics Fernández, Roche, and Baggio — is the institutionalization of collegiality as a weapon against the monarchical primacy of Peter, a heresy condemned by Vatican I (Pastor Aeternus, Ch. 3). The “balance” Gagliarducci praises is the equilibrium of the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15).
Women in Governance: A Violation of Divine Constitution
The article highlights the “role of women” as a pillar of continuity: Montse Alvarado as “prefect” of the Dicastery for Communication, “Salesian Sister” Alessandra Smerilli as “prefect” of the Dicastery for Integral Human Development, “Franciscan Sister” Raffaella Petrini as head of the Vatican Governorate. This is not mere disciplinary novelty; it is ontological rebellion against the ordo creationis and the ordo redemptionis. St. Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, decrees: “Mulieres in ecclesiis taceant… non enim permittitur illis loqui, sed subditas esse, sicut et lex dicit” (1 Cor. 14:34-35). The 1917 Code of Canon Law (Can. 129 §2) explicitly reserves the power of jurisdiction to clerics. Pius XI, in Quas Primas, teaches that Christ’s kingdom demands that “all relations in the state be ordered on the basis of God’s commandments.” To place women in positions of potestas iurisdictionis over clerics and the faithful is to invert the hierarchy established by Christ, who chose only men as Apostles. It is the feminist heresy enthroned in the sanctuary, a signature of the “neo-church” which, as St. Pius X warned in Pascendi, “aims at such a development of dogmas as appears to be their corruption.”
Synodality: The Democratic Heresy Entrenched
Gagliarducci describes the General Secretariat of the Synod as a going concern, noting the appointment of Father Costa — “special secretary of all synodal assemblies since the 2018 Synod on Youth” — and the removal of “Sister” Becquart. The very existence of a permanent “General Secretariat of the Synod” with undersecretaries is a monstrosity unknown to Catholic tradition. It constitutes a parallel magisterium, a concilium perpetuum that usurps the immediate, universal, and ordinary magisterium of the Roman Pontiff. The “synodal method” praised by the analyst — “dividing working groups by language” — is the parliamentary procedure of the Masonic lodge transplanted into the sanctuary. The Syllabus (Error 80) condemns the proposition: “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.” Synodality is the reconciliation with modern democracy. It replaces Ecclesia docens and Ecclesia discens with a populus Dei that “listens” to itself, precisely the error condemned in Lamentabili Sane Exitu (Prop. 6): “The Church listening cooperates in such a way with the Church teaching… that the Church teaching should only approve the common opinions of the Church listening.”
The Leal Luna Appointment: Radicalism Rewarded
The article singles out the appointment of Claudia Leal Luna, a theologian who “advocated for a so-called inclusive Church” and “criticized the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s declaration Fiducia Supplicans — which stated that the ‘Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same sex.'” Let the magnitude of this sink in: a “theologian” who demands the blessing of sodomitical unions is elevated to undersecretary of a dicastery and the International Theological Commission. Fiducia Supplicans itself was a document of iniquity, attempting to bless the persons while pretending not to bless the union — a Jesuitical sophistry worthy of the father of lies. Leal Luna’s criticism is that it did not go far enough. She demands the full sacramental legitimization of the sin that cries to heaven for vengeance (Gen. 18:20). St. Pius X, in Lamentabili (Prop. 65), condemns the Modernist tenet: “Contemporary Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true knowledge without transforming it into a certain dogmaless Christianity, that is, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.” Leal Luna is the agent of that transformation. Her appointment proves that the “Mona Lisa smile” conceals a fixed resolve to drive the “conciliar sect” into the abyss of apostasia a fide.
Liturgical “Peace” as Capitulation to Modernism
Gagliarducci frames the removal of “Archbishop” Viola from the Dicastery for Divine Worship — moving him to the archpriesthood of St. Peter’s Basilica — as “fostering the beginning of a liturgical peace in the traditionalist world.” This is the language of the indultist trap. The “traditionalist world” referenced here is the FSSPX and Ecclesia Dei communities — those “pretending to be traditional Catholics” who recognize the usurpers as legitimate. True pax liturgica is impossible where the Novus Ordo Missae — a rite fabricated by the Freemason Bugnini to express a Protestantized ecclesiology — remains the normative liturgy. Moving Viola, a known enforcer of Traditionis Custodes, to the basilica built over the bones of the Prince of the Apostles is not a concession; it is a strategic redeployment. He will oversee the liturgical stage-management of the “Jubilee” and the “synodal” ceremonies, ensuring the lex orandi of the “neo-church” remains a lex credendi of apostasy. As Pius XI taught in Quas Primas: “The prayer prescribed by the Church is the rule of faith.” The “prayer” of the “Dicastery for Divine Worship” is the rule of the faith of the Antichrist.
The Mona Lisa Mask of the Antichrist
The article concludes with the revealing observation: “For now, the most common description of the Pope is a man with a ‘Mona Lisa smile,’ gentle and inscrutable.” This inscrutability is the modus operandi of the mysterium iniquitatis (2 Thess. 2:7). The “gentle” usurper appoints a radical feminist theologian to oversee “integral human development” while installing a canonist (Iannone) to vet bishops for loyalty to the synodal agenda. He retains the “Cardinals” Fernández, Roche, and Baggio — the “epitome of Pope Francis’ vision” — in positions of influence. He creates new “Cardinals” in February to cement a “synodal” majority. This is not “pragmatism”; it is the consolidation of the Great Apostasy foretold by St. Paul. The “Defense of Sedevacantism” demonstrates conclusively, citing St. Robert Bellarmine (De Romano Pontifice, Bk. 2, Ch. 30), that “a Pope who is a manifest heretic, by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head… by which things he may be judged and punished by the Church.” Bellarmine teaches that manifest heretics “are already outside the Church before excommunication and deprived of all jurisdiction… condemned by their own judgment.” Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code declares vacant any office by “tacit resignation… if the cleric publicly defects from the Catholic faith.” Pope Paul IV’s Bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio declares the elevation of a heretic “null, void, and of no effect” ab initio. Leo XIV (Prevost), by his public adhesion to the heresies of Vatican II (religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality, synodality) and his active governance of the “conciliar sect,” is a manifest heretic. He is not the Pope. He is a layman heading a paramasonic structure. His appointments have zero canonical validity. They are the administrative acts of a usurper in the Vatican, no more binding on the conscience of a Catholic than the decrees of a Masonic Grand Master.
Conclusion: The Only Appointment That Matters
The faithful Catholic, confronting this analysis, must not engage in Kremlinology. He must apply the regula fidei. The “Curia” described is the curia of the Antichrist. The “Dicasteries” are departments of the synagogue of Satan (Apoc. 2:9). The “bishops” to be appointed in Milan, Barcelona, Paris, Budapest, and Chicago will be hirelings (John 10:12), not successors of the Apostles. The “Cardinals” to be created will be electors of the next antipope. The “Mona Lisa smile” is the smirk of the Enemy who knows his time is short. “Quia venit diabolus ad vos habens iram magnam, sciens quia modicum tempus habet” (Apoc. 12:12). The true Church — Ecclesia militans — subsists in the bishops and priests who retain valid orders and the integral faith, rejecting the “new pentecost” of the conciliar sect. “Regnavit a ligno Deus” (Ps. 95:10, Vulgate). Christ the King reigns from the Cross, not from the “Dicastery for Integral Human Development.” Viva Cristo Rey!
Source:
What Pope Leo XIV’s Latest Appointments Reveal About the Future of the Church (ncregister.com)
Date: 10.11.2026