Summary
The article reports that on February 18, 2026, the man residing in the Vatican and calling himself “Pope Leo XIV” addressed the association Pro Petri Sede. He asserted that the successor of Peter must retain “complete freedom to speak the truth, denounce injustice, defend the rights of the weakest, promote peace, and above all proclaim Jesus Christ.” He contrasted this with the historical role of the papal Zouaves who defended the Papal States with weapons, stating today’s commitment is through prayer and material aid. He linked this “sovereign freedom” to the pope’s mission to gather the faithful and proclaim the Gospel, claiming this freedom is essential in “troubled times.” The source is EWTN News, citing ACI Prensa, from February 18, 2026.
This speech is a quintessential product of the conciliar revolution, replacing the Catholic Church’s divinely mandated mission to proclaim the exclusive, social reign of Christ the King with a vague, naturalistic, and relativistic agenda of “defending truth” and “rights” that fundamentally contradicts integral Catholic doctrine.
The Myth of “Complete Freedom” in the Face of Divine Law
The central claim—that the pope must have “complete freedom to speak the truth”—is a modernist distortion of the papacy’s true nature. The pope’s freedom is not an autonomous power to define “truth” or “injustice” according to the spirit of the age. It is the freedom within the sacred bounds of divine law and Catholic doctrine to teach, govern, and sanctify without interference from secular powers. Pope Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors, definitively condemned the notion that the civil authority has any right to interfere in the Church’s mission (Errors 19-44). The “freedom” Leo XIV invokes is the freedom of the conciliar “Church” to collaborate with the world, not the freedom of the true Church to condemn the world’s errors. Pius IX also condemned the error 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 premise—that the pope’s primary task is to “defend the rights of the weakest” in a generic, secular sense—is a direct embrace of the naturalism condemned by Pius IX and Pius X. The true pope speaks not with “complete freedom” but with the solemn obligation to confess the whole truth of the Catholic faith, which is the only true religion (cf. Syllabus, Error 21: “The Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion”).
The Omission of Christ the King: The Central Apostasy
The most glaring and damning omission in the entire address is any mention of the social reign of Jesus Christ. The pope speaks of “proclaiming Jesus Christ” but strips this of its essential, integral meaning defined by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas. Pius XI established the feast of Christ the King precisely to combat the “secularism of our times, so-called laicism,” which “denied Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations.” The encyclical states: “His reign, namely, extends not only to 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.” Leo XIV’s speech contains not a single word about this universal kingship, about the duty of states to recognize Christ’s law, or about the condemnation of the separation of Church and state (condemned in Syllabus, Error 55). This silence is not accidental; it is the hallmark of the post-conciliar apostasy. The “troubled times” are the direct result of rejecting Christ’s kingship, as Pius XI explained: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” To speak of “defending truth” and “promoting peace” while omitting the only possible foundation—the law of Christ—is to build on sand. It is to preach a “peace” that is not the peace of Christ (John 14:27) but the false peace of the Antichrist.
Naturalistic Humanism: The Reduction of the Church’s Mission
The speech reduces the mission of the papacy to a series of naturalistic, sociological goals: “defend the rights of the weakest,” “promote peace,” and fund “training centers for people most in need.” This is a complete abandonment of the supernatural end of the Church. Pius XI, in Quas Primas, contrasts the true kingdom of Christ with earthly concerns: “His kingdom… is such that men who wish to belong to it prepare themselves through repentance, but cannot enter except through faith and baptism… This kingdom is opposed only to the kingdom of Satan.” The Church’s primary work is the salvation of souls, not the amelioration of social conditions. Leo XIV’s focus on material aid (“especially in favor of the least fortunate”) mirrors the modernist error condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu, which attacks the reduction of faith to practical action: “The dogmas of faith should be understood according to their practical function, i.e., as binding in action, rather than as principles of belief” (Prop. 26). This is the “synthesis of all errors” of Modernism: making religion a mere instrument of worldly betterment. The true pope would remind the world that “You were redeemed not with corruptible gold or silver… but with the precious blood of Christ” (1 Peter 1:18-19, quoted in Quas Primas), and that our bodies are “members of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15), not merely instruments for social projects.
The Heresy of Generic “Truth” and the Denial of Catholic Exclusivity
The phrase “complete freedom to speak the truth” is a Trojan horse for religious indifferentism. What “truth”? The article provides no definition, implying a generic, pluralistic truth accessible to all. This is the precise error condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus: “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (Error 15). The true pope must proclaim that the only truth that saves is the truth of the Catholic Church. Pius IX anathematized the proposition that “the Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion” (Error 21). Leo XIV’s silence on this dogmatic truth is a tacit denial of it. Furthermore, his call to “proclaim Jesus Christ” without specifying that Christ is the only way to the Father (John 14:6), and that outside the Church there is no salvation (cf. Lamentabili, Prop. 23: “A contradiction can and does exist between the events presented in Holy Scripture and the dogmas of the Church”), is a betrayal of the apostolic commission. The pope’s freedom is not to proclaim a “Christ” stripped of His exclusive, salvific role, but to proclaim “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today, and forever” (Heb. 13:8) in the immutable sense defined by the Church.
The Modernist Tone: “Troubled Times” and the Cult of Man
The rhetorical framework of the speech is thoroughly modernist. The focus on “troubled times,” “injustice,” “rights of the weakest,” and “peace” echoes the naturalistic, human-centered concerns of the modern world, not the supernatural perspective of the Church. St. Pius X, in Pascendi Dominici gregis (the companion document to Lamentabili), diagnosed Modernism as “the synthesis of all heresies,” which “reduces the role of the Church to a merely social or humanitarian function.” Leo XIV’s speech is a textbook example of this reduction. There is no mention of sin, of the necessity of grace, of the final judgment, of the state of mortal sin, of the sacraments as the ordinary means of salvation, or of the absolute primacy of God’s law over human laws. The “kingdom” he vaguely references is not the kingdom of God “which is not of this world” (John 18:36) in its earthly manifestation, but a worldly kingdom of social justice. This is the “cult of man” condemned by Pius XI in Quas Primas as the root of the secularist plague: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the entire human society had to be shaken.” Leo XIV’s speech operates entirely within the framework of the humanistic “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place (Matt. 24:15).
The Historical Whitewash: Papal Zouaves vs. The True Mission
The pope’s invocation of the papal Zouaves is a calculated piece of historical manipulation. He correctly notes they “defended the freedom of the Roman pontiff,” but utterly fails to explain what that freedom was. It was the freedom of the Pope as the temporal sovereign of the Papal States to govern a concrete territory according to Catholic law, free from the encroachments of liberal, anti-Catholic states. This is the freedom Pius IX fought for and defined in the Syllabus, condemning the seizure of Church property (Error 26) and the subjection of the Church to civil power (Errors 19-20, 41-44). The post-conciliar popes, beginning with John XXIII, have abandoned this temporal sovereignty and embraced the very secularism the Zouaves fought against. Leo XIV’s claim that “today there is no longer any question of fighting with weapons” is true only because the popes have surrendered the temporal sword. The true pope, if there were one, would not sentimentalize the Zouaves while collaborating with the very forces of secularism and globalism that destroyed the Papal States. He would instead uphold the doctrine of the social reign of Christ, which demands that all human authority, including the state, be subject to the law of Christ—a doctrine Leo XIV completely omits.
The Charitable Smokescreen: Material Aid vs. Supernatural Salvation
The concrete example given of the association’s work—funding a training center in Chiclayo, Peru—epitomizes the naturalistic shift. Catholic charity, as taught by Pius XI in Quas Primas, is ordered to the “eternal happiness” of souls. The Church’s mission is to “lead men to eternal happiness.” Material aid is a means to that supernatural end, not an end in itself. Leo XIV presents material support as the primary expression of the pope’s mission, with no connection to the necessity of Catholic faith and sacraments for salvation. This is the error of the “wider” or “broader” Church of the conciliar sect, which places “dialogue” and “human development” on par with, or even above, the imperative of conversion. The true pope would ensure that any charitable project explicitly aims at the conversion of souls and the restoration of the social kingship of Christ, not merely the improvement of material conditions according to worldly standards.
Conclusion: The Apostate’s Speech
This address by “Pope Leo XIV” is a masterclass in modernist evasion. It uses the language of faith (“proclaim Jesus Christ”) while emptying it of its Catholic content. It invokes the legacy of the papal Zouaves while betraying the very cause for which they fought: the freedom of the Church to govern society according to divine law. It speaks of “freedom” and “truth” while rejecting the exclusive, dogmatic truth of Catholicity. It highlights charitable works while ignoring the primary work of saving souls from eternal damnation. It addresses “troubled times” without identifying their root cause: the apostasy of Modernism and the rejection of Christ the King. Every sentence operates within the hermeneutic of discontinuity that defines the post-conciliar “church.” From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, this speech is not a defense of truth but a propaganda piece for the apostasy. It reinforces the sedevacantist conclusion: the structures occupying the Vatican are a paramasonic abomination, and the only “freedom” they seek is the freedom to lead souls to perdition by obscuring the exclusive, social, and absolute reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords.
Source:
Pope Leo XIV insists on his freedom to defend truth in turbulent times (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 18.02.2026