Conciliar Sect Distorts St. Francis to Advance Modernist Agenda
The VaticanNews portal (January 16, 2026) promotes a “Jubilee Year of Saint Francis” declared by antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), offering counterfeit “plenary indulgences” through pilgrimages to Franciscan sites and vague “acts of charity.” Bishop Krzysztof Nykiel of the conciliar sect’s “Apostolic Penitentiary” claims this aims to foster “deep maturity” rather than “spectacular celebration,” while paradoxically instituting new ritualistic requirements. This maneuver constitutes yet another assault on the theology of grace and the Church’s divine constitution.
Usurpation of Ecclesiastical Authority
The decree’s claim to grant indulgences exposes the conciliar sect’s fundamental illegitimacy. As Pius V’s Quod a Nobis (1568) established, only the true Roman Pontiff possesses the keys to the Church’s treasury of merits. The 1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 912) confirms that “only the Roman Pontiff can grant… plenary indulgences which are to be used by the faithful throughout the world.” Antipope Leo XIV’s pretension to exercise this power constitutes sacrilege, fulfilling Pius IX’s condemnation in the Syllabus of Errors (Prop. 23): “Roman pontiffs… have usurped the rights of princes.”
The decree’s conditions – including visiting Franciscan churches now controlled by modernist heretics – implicitly validate the conciliar sect’s occupation of sacred spaces. Yet Pius XII’s Mediator Dei (1947) warns that “the Church has no authority over invalid rites” (¶59). When the Vatican II sect encourages prayer in these desecrated buildings, it imitates the abomination of desolation standing in holy places (Daniel 9:27).
Theological Contradictions and Omissions
Nykiel’s assertion that indulgence constitutes “the remission by God of the temporal punishment for sins” while omitting the necessity of sacramental absolution from valid priests reveals the decree’s doctrinal bankruptcy. The Council of Trent (Session XIV, Chapter 1) dogmatized that “the acts of the penitent… constitute the matter of this sacrament… contrition, confession, and satisfaction.” The conciliar sect’s silence about the state of sacraments in its pseudo-churches proves its indifference to the ex opere operato nature of grace.
The article’s emphasis on “daily acts of charity and humility” as substitute conditions for indulgences embodies the Pelagianism condemned in Pius XII’s Mystici Corporis (1943): “They destroy the gratuity of the supernatural order when they claim that man can… by human effort… prepare for the reception of grace” (¶26). Nowhere does the decree mention the necessity of supernatural charity or perfect contrition required for true indulgences (Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, 1794).
Naturalistic Reduction of Franciscan Spirituality
The portal’s portrayal of St. Francis as a model of “poverty and simplicity” divorced from doctrinal orthodoxy constitutes hagiographical vandalism. The true Francis received the stigmata while meditating on Christ’s Passion – a supernatural reality antithetical to the conciliar sect’s horizontalism. As Bonaventure records in the Legenda Major (XIII.3), Francis sought “not peace without the sword of the spirit, but the peace that comes from abandoning worldly desires.” The article’s Francis emerges as an eco-friendly social worker rather than a vir catholicus et totus apostolicus (Letter to All the Faithful).
Nykiel’s claim that Francis invites “a return to personal reading of the Gospel” ignores the saint’s radical obedience to the Magisterium. The real Francis wrote in his Testament: “I firmly wish to obey… the Roman Church” – a obedience impossible to render to the Vatican II sect that denies the Church’s unique salvific role (Vatican II’s Nostra Aetate). This distortion fulfills Pius X’s warning in Lamentabili Sane (1907) against modernist exegesis that separates Christ from His Church (Prop. 58).
Instrumentalization of Suffering
The decree’s provision allowing homebound persons to gain indulgences through “prayers, sufferings, and daily difficulties” perverts the redemptive value of suffering. While Pius XII’s Mystici Corporis (¶79) teaches that suffering becomes meritorious “when offered to God through the hands of the High Priest,” the conciliar sect replaces mediation through Christ with subjective intention. This echoes the modernist error condemned in Lamentabili (Prop. 22): “Dogmas… are a certain interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has worked out.”
The article’s suggestion that spiritual fatigue stems from “an ‘inflation of holiness'” rather than lack of valid sacraments reveals its naturalistic worldview. True Catholics hunger for the Mass of Ages, not emotional experiences. As the Council of Trent (Session XXII, Chapter 2) declares: “In this divine sacrifice… that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross.”
Conclusion: True Franciscanism Versus Conciliar Counterfeit
The authentic St. Francis kissed the feet of priests because “I see nothing corporally of the Most High Son of God except His Most Holy Body and Blood” (Admonitions). The conciliar sect’s celebration of Francis while denying the sacramental priesthood proves its diabolical inversion. Let us heed Pius XI’s directive in Quas Primas (1925): “Rulers and princes are bound to give public honor and obedience to Christ… The empire of our Redeemer embraces all men” (¶19). Only when Rome abandons the Vatican II heresies will true jubilees return.
Source:
Year of Saint Francis: 'Indulgence is an encounter with God, not a spiritual shortcut' (vaticannews.va)
Date: 16.01.2026