VaticanNews portal reports that on May 9, 2026, the usurper antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) received representatives of Muslim communities in Senegal, calling for interreligious “dialogue,” condemning the “instrumentalization of God’s name” for political or military purposes, and promoting a vision of “fraternity” and “peaceful coexistence” between Christians and Muslims. He described Senegal as a “model of peaceful coexistence among Christians, Muslims, and believers of other traditions,” and asserted that “together, we, Christians and Muslims, believe that every human being is shaped by the hands of God, and therefore clothed with a dignity that no law nor any human power has the right to confiscate.” He further urged joint action “to condemn every form of discrimination and persecution founded on race, religion, or origin” and “to raise our voice in favor of every minority that suffers.” This address is a textbook specimen of the post-conciliar apostasy: a heretical equalization of the true religion with a false one, delivered from the highest platform of the counterfeit church, and revealing in a single speech the entire spiritual catastrophe wrought by the conciliar revolution.
The Dogma Outside the Church There Is No Salvation — Utterly Erased
The most fundamental dogma of the Catholic faith — extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation) — finds no place whatsoever in the antipope’s address. This dogma, defined by the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the Council of Florence (1442), and repeatedly confirmed by the ordinary and universal Magisterium, teaches that the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation and that those who knowingly and obstinately remain outside her fold cannot be saved. Pope Boniface VIII in Unam Sanctam (1302) declared with binding authority: “We declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” Pope Eugene IV’s Cantate Domino (1441) stated with terrifying clarity: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life everlasting; but that they will go into the ‘everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Mt. 25:41), unless before the end of their lives they are joined with Her.”
Yet Leo XIV stands before Muslims — who explicitly deny the Holy Trinity, the Divinity of Jesus Christ, the Redemption on Calvary, and the authority of the Gospel — and says nothing about their need for conversion to the Catholic faith for the salvation of their souls. Instead, he speaks of “fraternity” and “common responsibility” as though the theological chasm between the true faith and the heresy of Islam were a mere cultural difference. This is not merely an omission; it is a direct repudiation of the missionary mandate of Christ Himself: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Mt. 28:19). Pius XI in Quas Primas (1925), whose text we have before us, proclaimed that Christ’s kingdom “extends not only to Catholic nations or to those who, by receiving baptism according to law, belong to the Church… 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 antipope’s silence on the necessity of baptism and conversion is not diplomacy; it is practical indifferentism, condemned as heresy by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos (1832) and by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (Proposition 17: “Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ”).
“Fraternity” With Unbelievers — A Masonic and Modernist Hallmark
The antipope’s repeated invocation of “fraternity” (fraternité) is not accidentally chosen. This term is one of the three pillars of the French Revolution — Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité — and was adopted as a central slogan of Freemasonry, the declared enemy of the Church. Pope Leo XIII in Humanum Genus (1884) identified the Masonic project precisely as the promotion of “fraternity” detached from the supernatural order, a naturalistic brotherhood that denies the need for divine revelation and grace. When Leo XIV speaks of “this treasure of fraternity” between Christians and Muslims as “a precious good not only for your nation, but also for the whole of humanity,” he is echoing the language of the Human Fraternity Document signed by Bergoglio and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar in Abu Dhabi in 2019 — a document that effectively placed Islam’s “diversity” on the same plane as the Church’s mission, and which was rightly condemned as heretical by Catholic theologians faithful to Tradition.
The Syllabus of Errors of Pius IX condemned the proposition that “Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church” (Proposition 18). By strict analogy, to treat Islam as a partner in “fraternity” and “common responsibility” for humanity’s good is to implicitly affirm that Islam is a legitimate path to God — a proposition that strikes at the very heart of the Catholic faith. Pius IX further condemned the idea that “in the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship” (Proposition 77). The antipope’s address is the practical implementation of every one of these condemned propositions.
The “Dignity of Every Human Being” — A Naturalistic Distortion
Leo XIV asserts: “Together, we, Christians and Muslims, believe that every human being is shaped by the hands of God, and therefore clothed with a dignity that no law nor any human power has the right to confiscate.” While it is true that every human being possesses natural dignity as a creature of God made in His image, this truth, when abstracted from its supernatural context — namely, that man’s ultimate dignity consists in his call to the beatific vision, to sanctifying grace, and to membership in the Mystical Body of Christ — becomes a weapon of naturalistic humanism. The Syllabus of Errors condemned the proposition that “authority is nothing else but numbers and the sum total of material forces” (Proposition 60), and that “right consists in the material fact” (Proposition 59). When the antipope reduces the “dignity” of man to a principle that Christians and Muslims can affirm together, stripped of any reference to the supernatural order, the sacraments, and the necessity of the true faith, he is preaching not the Gospel but the religion of man — precisely the “cult of man” that St. Pius X identified as the very essence of Modernism in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907).
Moreover, the antipope’s appeal to “human dignity” as a common ground mirrors the language of the conciliar document Dignitatis Humanae (1965), which proclaimed a “right to religious freedom” contrary to the constant teaching of the Church. Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos condemned the “absurd and erroneous proposition” that “liberty of conscience and worship is the right of every man.” Pius IX in the Syllabus condemned the claim that “Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church” (Proposition 48). The antipope’s address is the living fruit of these condemned errors.
Senegal as a “Model” — The Praise of Religious Pluralism
Perhaps nothing in the antipope’s address is more revealing than his explicit praise of Senegal as a “model of peaceful coexistence among Christians, Muslims, and believers of other traditions.” He states: “It is a reality that constitutes the foundation of dialogue among peoples who are different because of their religious affiliation and ethnic origin.” Here the antipope does not merely tolerate religious pluralism as a de facto situation; he elevates it to an ideal, a “treasure” to be “safeguarded.” This is the very essence of the heresy condemned by Pius IX in Proposition 79 of the Syllabus: “It is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, [does not] conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism.”
The Church has always taught that while she may tolerate the presence of false religions in certain circumstances for the sake of the common good (as Thomas Aquinas explains in the Summa Theologiae II-II, q. 10, a. 11), she can never approve or praise religious pluralism as a positive good. To do so is to deny that the Catholic Church is the one true religion founded by God Incarnate. Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei (1885) taught: “The Almighty, therefore, has given the charge of the human race to two powers, the ecclesiastical and the civil, the one being set over divine, and the other over human, each the highest in its kind, and each fixed within definite limits, determined by its own nature and special object.” When the antipope praises a nation where Islam and Christianity coexist as a “model,” he inverts this order: he makes the peaceful coexistence of truth and error the ideal, rather than the triumph of the truth.
The Condemnation of “Instrumentalization of God” — A Calculated Ambiguity
Leo XIV states: “To reject every instrumentalization of the name of God for military, economic, or political gain.” On the surface, this sounds pious. But in context, this statement serves a deeply subversive purpose. By condemning the “instrumentalization” of God’s name, the antipope implicitly reduces the question of religion’s relationship to politics to one of manner rather than of principle. The Church has always taught that the Catholic religion must be recognized by the state as the true religion, that the Catholic Church must enjoy legal preeminence, and that the Catholic magistrate has the duty to place himself and his jurisdiction at the service of the Church and the true God. This is the social reign of Christ the King, proclaimed by Pius XI in Quas Primas: “The State must… render public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ… for what we wrote at the beginning of Our Pontificate about the diminishing authority of law and respect for power, the same can be applied to the present times: ‘When God and Jesus Christ — as we lamented — were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed.'”
When the antipope warns against “instrumentalizing” God for political gain, he is not calling for the true social reign of Christ the King. He is calling for the privatization of religion — the very “secularism” (laïcité) that Pius XI identified as the “plague that poisons human society” in Quas Primas. The antipope wants a God who inspires “fraternity” and “dialogue” but who must never be allowed to actually govern nations, legislate morality, or claim public obedience. This is the God of Liberalism, not the God of Catholic doctrine. It is the God condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus (Proposition 55): “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.”
The Silence on Conversion, the Sacraments, and the Supernatural
Throughout the entire address, there is not a single mention of: the Holy Trinity; the Divinity of Jesus Christ; the Redemption through His Most Precious Blood; the necessity of Baptism; the Holy Eucharist as the true Body and Blood of Christ; the necessity of the sacraments for salvation; the Blessed Virgin Mary; the necessity of conversion to the Catholic faith; the reality of sin, hell, or the last things; or the missionary mandate of the Church. This silence is not accidental; it is the most damning indictment of the address. As St. Pius X taught in Lamentabili Sane Exitu (1907), whose condemned propositions we have before us, Modernism is “the synthesis of all heresies” (Proposition 65: “Contemporary Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true knowledge without transforming it into a certain dogmaless Christianity, that is, into a broad and liberal Protestantism”). The antipope’s address is precisely this: a dogmaless, Christless, grace-less discourse that could have been delivered at any Masonic lodge or United Nations assembly.
The omission of any supernatural content transforms the address from a Catholic act of pastoral charity into an exercise in naturalistic humanitarianism. The antipope speaks of “peace,” “justice,” “fraternity,” “human dignity,” “minorities,” and “moral forces” — but every one of these terms is emptied of its Catholic supernatural content and filled with the content of the secular human rights ideology. This is the “cult of man” that St. Pius X condemned: the reduction of religion to social activism, and of the Church to an NGO.
The “Two Lucias” of the Conciliar Sect — One Face, Many Apostasies
The antipope’s address in Senegal is entirely consistent with the trajectory of the conciliar sect since 1958. Just as the “Fatima” apparitions — analyzed in the document before us — were progressively reinterpreted by the modernists to serve ecumenical and syncretistic purposes (Stage 3 of the Masonic operation: “Takeover of the narrative by modernists, concealment of the Third Secret, ecumenical reinterpretation”), so too has the entire post-conciliar apparatus been systematically emptied of Catholic content and refilled with the spirit of the world. Leo XIV is not an aberration; he is the logical and necessary culmination of the conciliar revolution. From John XXIII’s opening of the windows to the “spirit of the world,” through Paul VI’s Nostra Aetate and Bergoglio’s Human Fraternity, the trajectory has been one of ever-deeper capitulation to religious indifferentism.
The antipope quotes his own previous statement from Bamenda, Cameroon: “Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic or political gain.” But this self-quotation reveals the fundamental dishonesty of the conciar project: the antipope condemns the abuse of religion while simultaneously destroying religion itself by reducing it to a tool for interreligious “dialogue” and humanitarian cooperation. He is like a man who condemns the misuse of a medicine while poisoning the patient.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation Speaks
The address of Leo XIV to the Muslim communities of Senegal is a perfected specimen of the post-conciliar apostasy. It equalizes truth and error, praises religious pluralism as a model, reduces the faith to naturalistic humanism, omits every supernatural reality, and advances the Masonic program of “fraternity” detached from the Cross of Christ. It is the voice of the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9, 3:9) — not of Islam, which at least has the honesty to deny Christ explicitly, but of the counterfeit church that occupies the Vatican and speaks with the language of the world while claiming the authority of Peter.
The faithful who still profess the integral Catholic faith must reject this address in its entirety and recognize it for what it is: not a gesture of goodwill, but a sacrilegious act of religious syncretism performed by a usurper who has no authority from Christ and no communion with the true Church. The true Church endures — in the faithful who profess the unchanging Catholic faith, who worship at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the ancient rite, and who await the restoration of the papal throne to the Vicar of Christ. As Pius XI proclaimed in Quas Primas: “His reign encompasses all human nature, it is clear that there is no power in us that is exempt from this reign.” Let Christ reign — not through the counterfeit “dialogue” of apostates, but through the conversion of all nations to His one, true, Catholic Church. Adveniat Regnum Tuum.
Source:
Pope: Never instrumentalize God for military, economic, or political gain (vaticannews.va)
Date: 09.05.2026