The Apostasy of “Inclusion”: Leo XIV’s Liturgical Unity as a Betrayal of Christ the King
The cited article from the National Catholic Register (March 25, 2026) reports that the antipope styling himself “Leo XIV” has sent a message to the French bishops, urging “concrete solutions” to heal the “painful wound” of liturgical divisions. He calls for a “new outlook” to include those attached to the Vetus Ordo while “preserving communion,” references the “directions desired by the Second Vatican Council,” and addresses the planned illicit episcopal consecrations by the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). This message is not a pastoral appeal but a manifesto of the conciliar sect’s fundamental apostasy: a naturalistic, human-centered approach that utterly betrays the supernatural, exclusive, and absolute reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ as taught by the immutable Magisterium before the death of Pope Pius XII.
1. The Foundation of the Error: Rejection of the Social Kingship of Christ
The antipope’s call for “liturgical unity” and “inclusion” is rooted in the modernist heresy condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors. The document explicitly anathematizes the idea that the Church should be “separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Error #55) and that “it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State” (Error #77). Pope Leo XIV’s entire premise—that multiple liturgical rites can coexist in “communion” as a matter of “sensitivity” and “diversity”—directly contradicts the Catholic doctrine of the regnum Christi, the reign of Christ the King over all individuals, families, and states.
Pius XI, in his encyclical Quas Primas (1925), which the article shamefully ignores, declared: “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.” The encyclical establishes that the liturgical celebration is the primary public act by which society acknowledges this kingship: “the annual celebration of this solemnity will also remind states that not only private individuals, but also rulers and governments have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him.” The antipope’s message makes no mention of this duty. Instead, it promotes a relativistic “unity” where the public honor of Christ is subordinated to human “sensitivity.” This is the precise “secularism” or “laicism” that Pius XI identified as the plague poisoning society: “the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations; the Church’s authority to teach men, to issue laws, to govern nations… was denied.”
2. The “Wound” is Not Liturgical Division But Apostasy from the Faith
The antipope diagnoses a “painful wound” of division over the Mass. The true wound, however, is the apostasy of the conciliar sect itself, which has replaced the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary—the true Mass—with a “supper” and a “table of assembly.” The division is between those who remain faithful to the immutable faith and those who have embraced the “dogmaless Christianity” condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu (Propositions 64-65). The article notes that Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum “broadly liberalized” the old Mass, and Francis’s Traditionis Custodes “sharply restricted” it. This reveals the true nature of the “unity” sought: it is a unity of subjugation under the authority of the conciliar magisterium, which has no authority. The “concrete solutions” sought by the French bishops will inevitably mean the complete suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass, as has been the pattern globally, because the conciliar sect cannot tolerate the clear, dogmatic, and sacrificial language of the ancient rite, which condemns their new ecumenical religion.
The article’s reference to the SSPX’s planned consecrations is telling. The antipope’s message does not condemn this impending schism with the clarity of Catholic doctrine. Instead, it lumps the SSPX together with all those “sincerely attached to the Vetus Ordo,” implying they are all part of the same “wound.” This is a deliberate obfuscation. The SSPX, by recognizing the antipopes as legitimate, is itself a modernist sect, a “schism within a schism of the neo-church,” as the user’s framework correctly identifies. Its planned consecrations are a grave sin of schism, but the antipope’s failure to name this sin specifically, while demanding “inclusion” for all, exposes his priority: maintaining the external structure of the conciliar sect at all costs, even over the salvation of souls.
3. The Language of Naturalism: A Symptom of Theological Decay
The antipope’s language is saturated with the naturalistic, psychological, and sociological jargon of the modern world, utterly alien to the supernatural vocabulary of the Catholic Church. Phrases like “painful wound,” “new outlook,” “greater understanding of their sensitivities,” “enriched by their diversity,” and “concrete solutions” are the vocabulary of a therapist or a social worker, not of a Vicar of Christ. They reduce the sacred liturgy—the supreme act of worship owed to God—to a matter of interpersonal dynamics and emotional comfort.
This is the “cult of man” condemned by Pope Pius XII. The article quotes the antipope saying the time has come to “turn resolutely toward the future” and offer “a message of encouragement and confidence.” This is the language of progressivism, the heresy that “truth changes with man” (condemned in Lamentabili, Prop. 58). The “future” for a Catholic is not a vague optimism but the glorious coming of Christ’s kingdom, which requires the rejection of all error and the public confession of the Catholic faith alone. The antipope’s “confidence” is placed in human “prevention measures” for the abuse crisis and “pastoral reflection” for offending priests, not in the justice of God and the need for public penance and reparation. The silence on the necessity of the actus perfectus contritionis and the Sacrament of Penance for those in mortal sin is deafening and damning.
4. The Omission of the Non-Negotiable: Christ’s Absolute Dominion
The most grave accusation against the article and the antipope’s message is its total silence on the absolute, exclusive, and mandatory reign of Christ the King over all human legislation, education, and public life. The antipope speaks of “Catholic education” defending its “Christian dimension,” but what does this mean? The Syllabus of Errors condemns the notion that “the best theory of civil society requires that popular schools… should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority” (Error #47) and that “the civil power may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government” (Error #44). The antipope’s vague call to “defend with determination the Christian dimension” without defining it as the exclusive, integral Catholic faith, is a capitulation to Error #77: that the Catholic religion need not be held as the sole religion of the state. It is an implicit acceptance of religious liberty, the very heresy that has led to the “public apostasy” Pius XI lamented in Quas Primas.
Furthermore, the antipope’s message contains not a single word about the duty of Catholic rulers to publicly confess the Catholic faith and enact laws in conformity with it. This is the core of the “Social Kingship of Christ” doctrine, the foundation of all Catholic social teaching. Its omission is not accidental; it is the necessary consequence of the conciliar sect’s embrace of the “separation of Church and State” (Error #55) and its partnership with the “synagogue of Satan” (as Pius IX called the sects undermining the Church) in building a new, naturalistic world order.
5. The False Dilemma: “Traditionalists” vs. “Progressives” Within the Same Apostate Structure
The article frames the issue as a tension between “traditionalists” attached to the old Mass and “progressives” within the conciliar hierarchy. This is a satanic deception. The true divide is between Catholic Tradition (the faith of all time) and Modernism (the synthesis of all heresies). The “traditionalists” who remain in communion with the antipopes—like the FSSPX and “indultists”—are “schism within a schism,” as noted. They accept the legitimacy of the conciliar popes and the Vatican II sect, thereby accepting its heretical principles (religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality). Their attachment to the old Mass is aesthetic and devotional, not doctrinal. They do not condemn the new Mass as invalid or sacrilegious; they merely prefer the old one. This is a corruption of the faith, a “pretense of tradition” that makes the apostasy of the conciliar sect more palatable.
The antipope’s call for their “generous inclusion” is therefore a tactic to absorb this “traditionalist” resistance into the modernist project, neutralizing it as a doctrinal threat. He does not call them to convert to the integral faith; he calls them to “welcome one another in charity and in the unity of the faith”—a “faith” that is now defined by the ambiguous, evolving “directions” of Vatican II, not by the dogmatic definitions of Pius IX, Pius X, and Pius XII.
Conclusion: A Call to Rejection and Resistance
The message from “Pope Leo XIV” is a masterclass in apostate rhetoric. It uses the language of charity, unity, and inclusion to smuggle in the most deadly errors: religious indifferentism, the denial of Christ’s social kingship, and the subordination of divine law to human “sensitivity.” It treats the sacred liturgy as a matter of pastoral policy rather than the very heartbeat of Catholic worship and doctrine. It offers “concrete solutions” that will inevitably mean the final extinction of the Traditional Latin Mass within the conciliar structures, as has happened everywhere else.
From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, the only response is total rejection. The faithful must recognize that the conciliar sect is a “paramasonic structure” occupied by antipopes. They must have no part in its liturgical “unity,” which is the unity of apostasy. They must flee to the true Church, which endures in those who hold the faith of Pius IX, Pius X, and Pius XII, and who are shepherded by bishops who have not caved to the modernist usurpers. The feast of Christ the King, instituted by Pius XI, demands not “dialogue” but the public confession that “Jesus Christ is King of kings and Lord of lords” (Rev. 19:16), a confession that condemns the entire secular, naturalistic project of the post-1958 “church.” The “concrete solution” is not inclusion in the apostate structure but extra ecclesiam nulla salus: there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, which is not the conciliar sect.
Source:
Pope Urges Liturgical Unity, Inclusion of Traditional Latin Mass Faithful (ncregister.com)
Date: 25.03.2026