EWTN News reports that Costa Rica’s new president, Laura Virginia Fernández Delgado, began her administration on May 8 by laying her presidential sash before an image of Our Lady of the Angels, attending a Mass celebrated by Bishop Javier Román of Limón, who prayed for “wisdom,” “prudence,” and “clarity” while invoking national unity and the well-being of the people. What superficially resembles an act of Catholic piety is, upon examination, yet another manifestation of the conciliar sect’s reduction of the Faith to naturalistic humanitarianism, where Marian devotion serves as ceremonial decoration for a political regime that operates entirely within the framework of liberal democracy, stripped of any acknowledgment of Christ the King’s social reign, the reality of sin, the necessity of the sacraments, or the supernatural end of human society.
The Absence of Christ the King in a “Marian” Ceremony
The most striking feature of this reported event is what is entirely missing. Bishop Román, president of the Costa Rican Bishops’ Conference, delivered a homily replete with invocations of “peace,” “wisdom,” “prudence,” “unity,” and “well-being of our people” — yet nowhere does the report indicate that Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true Man, the King of all nations and all peoples, was once mentioned as the source of all legitimate authority and the sole foundation of social order. Pius XI, in the encyclical Quas Primas (1925), established the Feast of Christ the King precisely to combat the “secularism of our times, so-called laicism,” which “began with the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations.” The Pope declared with prophetic clarity: “His reign, namely, extends not only to Catholic nations or to those who, by receiving baptism according to law, belong to the Church, even though their erroneous opinions have led them astray or discord has separated them from love, but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.”
What did Bishop Román proclaim instead? He spoke of “a truth greater than oneself” — a formulation so vague and imprecise that it could satisfy any deist, Mason, or adherent of any world religion. This is the language of religious indifferentism, condemned by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos (1832) and by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (Proposition 15: “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true”). The bishop did not say “Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life” (John 14:6), nor did he affirm that “there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). Instead, he offered the platitude that recognizing “a truth greater than oneself” means understanding that “power has limits” — a formulation indistinguishable from the secular humanist discourse of “human rights” and “limited government” that the Church has always condemned as a usurpation of divine authority.
Pius XI further taught: “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, because the main reason why some have the right to command and others have the duty to obey was removed.” The entire ceremony, as reported, operated within the framework of authority derived from men — from democratic elections, from the will of the people — with Marian piety serving as a cultural ornament rather than as the proclamation of the divine constitution of society.
The Homily as a Manifesto of Naturalistic Humanism
Bishop Román’s homily, as reported, is a textbook example of the conciliar sect’s substitution of naturalistic humanism for supernatural Catholic teaching. Consider the following themes:
First, the bishop spoke of “strength” for those assuming public responsibilities, of “serenity and peace” for hearts that might “harden amid so many pressures.” This is the language of therapy, not of the Gospel. Where is the call to sanctifying grace? Where is the reminder that the state of grace is the indispensable foundation for any Christian who bears authority? Where is the warning about mortal sin, about the eternal consequences of unjust governance? The bishop spoke as though public office were merely a psychological burden requiring emotional support, rather than a sacred trust before the judgment seat of Christ the King. Pius XI taught that the annual celebration of Christ the King “will remind states that not only private individuals, but also rulers and governments have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him: for it will remind them of the final judgment, in which Christ, whom not only was cast out of the state, but was also forgotten and ignored through contempt, will very severely avenge these insults.” No such reminder was given.
Second, the bishop invoked the Holy Spirit for “wisdom in making decisions, prudence to listen, and clarity to act, always with the well-being of our people in mind.” The phrase “well-being of our people” — bienestar de nuestro pueblo — is the language of secular governance, not of Catholic social teaching. The Church has always taught that the end of civil society is not merely the temporal welfare of its members but their eternal salvation. Leo XIII, in Immortale Dei (1885), defined the state’s duty in relation to the Church: “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 limits which are defined by its particular nature and prerogative.” The bishop’s prayer reduced the governance of a Catholic nation to the categories of secular management — “decisions,” “listening,” “acting” — without any reference to the divine law, the natural law as interpreted by the Church, or the obligation of the state to recognize the Catholic religion as the religion of the state (Proposition 77 of the Syllabus: “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” — condemned by Pius IX).
Third, the bishop stated that “families battered by violence need that peace. Our youth, often tempted by misguided paths or by discouragement, it. Our communities, scarred by insecurity, drug trafficking, and murders, need it.” Here, the bishop identifies real social ills — violence, drug trafficking, murder — but offers no supernatural remedy. Where is the call to repentance? Where is the acknowledgment that these evils are the fruits of sin, of defection from God, of the rejection of Christ the King by nations and individuals? Where is the proclamation that the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the sacraments, and the preaching of the integral Catholic Faith are the only true remedies for the ills of society? Pius XI declared: “We therefore have strong hope that the feast of Christ the King, which we shall henceforth celebrate annually, will bring society back to our most beloved Savior.” Bishop Román, by contrast, offered prayers for “peace” and “serenity” without once directing the new president or the nation toward the only source of true peace: the Kingship of Christ and the social reign of Mary — which is always ordered toward the establishment of Christ’s Kingdom, not toward the vague “well-being” of democratic governance.
The Invocation of St. Thomas More as Patron of “Rectitude”
Bishop Román invited President Fernández to draw inspiration from St. Thomas More, who exercised authority “with rectitude and consistency,” noting that authority attains its “greatest grandeur when exercised considering others.” This is a selective and sanitized reading of St. More’s witness. St. Thomas More died as a martyr — he was beheaded by Henry VIII precisely because he refused to acknowledge the king as supreme head of the Church in England, thereby defending the primacy of the Roman Pontiff and the divine constitution of the Church. His “rectitude and consistency” were not mere civic virtues exercised “considering others” in the manner of a benevolent secular administrator; they were acts of supernatural faith that cost him his life. The bishop’s invocation of St. More stripped the saint of his martyrdom and reduced him to a model of ethical governance — a maneuver entirely consistent with the conciar sect’s habit of hollowing out the saints of their supernatural significance and recasting them as exemplars of humanitarian values.
Women in Power: The Conciliar Cult of “Humanity”
Bishop Román also highlighted “the fact that, for the second time in Costa Rican history, a woman has assumed the leadership of the country,” affirming that women possess a special capacity to “safeguard life, to sustain it even amid difficulties, and to remind us that behind every decision, there are always real people, families, and genuine suffering.” The bishop then stated: “The country needs ‘firmness, yes; but also humanity,’ as well as leaders capable of ‘listening to that cry and seeking ways to relieve those who feel that the doors are beginning to close.'”
This passage is saturated with the cult of man — the conciliar religion’s substitution of human sentiment for divine truth. The emphasis on “humanity,” “real people,” “genuine suffering,” and “relieving those who feel that the doors are beginning to close” is the language of Gaudium et Spes, the pastoral constitution of the Second Vatican Council that inaugurated the Church’s “opening to the world” and its embrace of anthropocentrism. The Church has always taught that the primary duty of those in authority is to govern according to God’s law, not to “relieve” feelings or to respond to “cries” that are never identified in terms of divine justice. Moreover, the bishop’s singling out of a woman’s capacity to “safeguard life” — while perhaps intended as a pro-life statement — is framed entirely within the categories of sentiment and empathy, not within the categories of divine law, the protection of the unborn as a matter of justice before God, or the condemnation of abortion as a mortal sin and a crime against the natural law.
The “Church” That Prays for Democratic Leaders
Bishop Román concluded by saying: “As a Church, we wish to say to you with sincerity, Madam President: We pray for you. Not only during this celebration. Every Sunday, the Church lifts up its prayers for those who bear the responsibility of leading the peoples.” This statement reveals the conciliar sect’s ecclesiological self-understanding: the “Church” is an institution that prays for democratic leaders within the framework of liberal governance, offering spiritual support for the exercise of power within a system that is constitutionally indifferent to the Kingship of Christ. The true Church — the Catholic Church as constituted by Her Divine Founder — does not merely “pray for” rulers; She teaches them, governs them in matters of faith and morals, and demands that they recognize Her divine authority and the social reign of Her King. Pius XI declared: “By rendering this public veneration to the Lord’s Kingship, people must remember that the Church, established by Christ as a perfect society, demands for itself by a right belonging to it, which it cannot renounce, full freedom and independence from secular authority.” Bishop Román’s “Church” demands nothing; it merely “prays” and “accompanies” — the posture of a chaplaincy to the secular order, not of the Mystical Body of Christ exercising Her divine mandate.
Furthermore, the report notes that the bishop “entrusted the present and future of the country to the protection of Our Lady of the Angels.” Marian devotion, when authentic, is always ordered toward the establishment of the Kingship of Christ, since Mary is the Queen of Christ the King and all her intercession is directed toward her Son’s reign over souls and societies. But in the context of this ceremony — with its total silence about Christ the King, its naturalistic humanism, its indifferentist language, and its embrace of democratic governance as a self-sufficient framework — the Marian invocation becomes mere folk piety, a cultural gesture devoid of doctrinal substance. It is the kind of devotion that the conciliar sect promotes: emotionally comforting, politically harmless, and entirely disconnected from the Church’s perennial teaching on the social reign of Christ the King.
The Symptom and the Disease
This event is not an isolated incident but a symptom of the systemic apostasy of the conciliar sect. The Second Vatican Council, through Dignitatis Humanae (on religious liberty), Gaudium et Spes (on the Church in the modern world), and Nostra Aetate (on non-Christian religions), introduced a new ecclesiology in which the Church no longer claims the right to demand that states recognize the Catholic Faith and the social Kingship of Christ. Instead, the Church “dialogues” with the world, “accompanies” its leaders, and “prays for” democratic governance — all while remaining silent about the divine constitution of society, the reality of mortal sin, the necessity of the sacraments, and the eternal consequences of defection from God.
Bishop Román’s homily is a perfect illustration of this apostasy. Not a single word was reported about the obligation of the Costa Rican state to recognize the Catholic religion as the state religion. Not a single word about the duty of the president to govern according to the divine law and the teaching of the Church. Not a single word about the reality of hell, the necessity of baptism, the obligation of evangelization, or the missionary mandate of the Church. Instead: “wisdom,” “prudence,” “clarity,” “peace,” “unity,” “well-being,” “humanity.” This is not the language of the Catholic Church; it is the language of the United Nations.
St. Pius X, in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), identified the Modernist as one who “puts man at the center of all things” and reduces religion to “sentiment” and “experience.” Bishop Román’s homily is a living example of this Modernist reduction. The ceremony at the Basilica of Our Lady of the Angels, far from being an act of authentic Catholic piety, is a liturgical enactment of the conciliar revolution — a demonstration of how the neo-church has transformed the Faith into a humanitarian ideology, Marian devotion into political pageantry, and the Church’s divine mission into a chaplaincy to the secular order.
The true Church endures — in the faithful who profess the integral Catholic Faith, who recognize the social Kingship of Christ, who offer the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the immemorial Roman Rite, and who refuse to bow before the idols of democracy, religious indifferentism, and the cult of man. Adveniat Regnum Tuum — Thy Kingdom Come — is not a prayer for “peace” and “well-being” within the framework of liberal democracy; it is a demand that Christ the King reign over every nation, every government, every soul, and every aspect of human life. Until that demand is proclaimed — clearly, uncompromisingly, and without the equivocations of the conciliar sect — no ceremony, however “Marian” in appearance, can be anything other than an act of spiritual bankruptcy.
Source:
President of Costa Rica entrusts her term to Our Lady of the Angels (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 13.05.2026