‘You Who in Diversity Are One’: How Leo XIV Addresses Jesus Christ in Video Promoting Interreligious Cooperation

And just what diversity might that be?

‘You Who in Diversity Are One’: How Leo XIV Addresses Jesus Christ in Video Promoting Interreligious Cooperation

The so-called Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network has just released its ‘Pope Video’ for the month of October. It showcases Leo XIV’s prayer intention for the next 31 days, which is: “For collaboration between different religious traditions.”

The published video is 2 minutes long and features Robert Prevost (‘Pope Leo’) reading a very troublesome script, accompanied by lots of clips of various interreligious activities, including the infamous 1986 Prayer for Peace in Assisi, the 2019 signing of the Document on Human Fraternity in Abu Dhabi, unbelievers planting trees, and much more. Here it is:

Together with this video, the Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network issued a press release, and Vatican News released a story covering it:

• Press Release: For collaboration between different religious traditions (PWPN)
• Pope’s October prayer intention: ‘Collaboration among religions’ (Vatican News)

Let’s now take a look at the words of Leo XIV in that October 2025 ‘Pope Video’. We’ll present the entire script first and then offer some comments:

Let us pray that believers in different religious traditions might work together to defend and promote peace, justice and human fraternity.

Lord Jesus,
You, who in diversity are one
and look lovingly at every person,
help us to recognize ourselves as brothers and sisters,
called to live, pray, work, and dream together.

We live in a world full of beauty,
but also wounded by deep divisions.
Sometimes, religions, instead of uniting us,
become a cause of confrontation.

Give us your Spirit to purify our hearts,
so that we may recognize what unites us
and, from there, learn again how to listen
and collaborate without destroying.

May the concrete examples of peace,
justice and fraternity in religions
inspire us to believe that it is possible to live
and work together, beyond our differences.

May religions not be used as weapons or walls,
but rather lived as bridges and prophecy:
making the dream of the common good credible,
accompanying life, sustaining hope
and being the yeast of unity in a fragmented world.

Amen.

Oh boy! This is an unmitigated disaster. Prevost is no less of an apostate than Jorge Bergoglio (‘Pope Francis’) was, he just puts a friendlier face on it all with better attire, knowing about the importance of good optics: “And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light” (2 Cor 11:14).

So Leo begins with the introductory comment: “Let us pray that believers in different religious traditions might work together to defend and promote peace, justice and human fraternity.”

Notice how in our times more and more the word “religion” is being gradually replaced with the smoother-sounding “religious tradition.” This way of proceeding clearly aims at divorcing the question of objective truth from the notion of religion, which is exactly what Leo wants, since few things disrupt ‘harmony’ so much as arguments over whose religion is true.

Here we recall the scandalous words of Prevost’s infamous predecessor, Bergoglio, when he was speaking to young people of different religions in Singapore a year ago:

One of the things that has impressed me most about you young people, about you here, is the capacity for interfaith dialogue. And this is very important, because if you start arguing, “My religion is more important than yours…,” “Mine is the true one, yours is not true….” Where does this lead? Where, somebody answer, where? [someone answers, “Destruction”]. That’s right. All religions are a path to God. They are — I make a comparison — like different languages, different idioms, to get there. But God is God for everyone. And because God is God for everyone, we are all God’s children. “But my God is more important than yours!” Is this true? There is only one God, and we, our religions are languages, paths to get to God. Some Sikh, some Muslim, some Hindu, some Christian, but they are different paths. Understood? But interfaith dialogue among young people takes courage. Because the age of youth is the age of courage, but you can have this courage to do things that will not help you. Instead you can have courage to move forward and for dialogue.

(Antipope Francis to interreligious youths in Singapore, Sep. 13, 2024)

No doubt, there are many different paths. The trouble is that only one of them leads to a happy eternity with God, the others to hell: “Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me” (Jn 14:6). And further: “Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!” (Mt 7:13-14).

These words are not simply ‘one language’ among other possible alternatives. If what Francis said is true, then what Christ said is false. Only the one or the other can be true; both of them cannot. Demoting religions to ‘religious traditions’ facilitates the descent into relativism and subjectivism, and relegates dogmatic truth to the status of opinion. The idea of dogma as mere opinion is Modernist to the core and constitutes apostasy from the Catholic Faith, for when the very notion of dogma is neutralized, all dogmas fall together.

Next, Leo begins to pray: “Lord Jesus, You, who in diversity are one and look lovingly at every person, help us to recognize ourselves as brothers and sisters, called to live, pray, work, and dream together.”

Christ being “one in diversity”! What in the world is the man talking about — in his native English, no less?! In what sense could Christ be said to be “diverse”? One shudders even to raise the question, and even more so to think of the answer someone like James Martin might give!

Our present world is obsessed with worshipping diversity, and Leo XIV is not ashamed to pay his own obeisance to this golden calf.

As for “recogniz[ing] ourselves as brothers and sisters”, he probably meant recognizing each other in that way. Indeed, all men are brothers and sisters in a natural sense, since we all share the same human nature. All the more, then, ought we to help our fellow-men to attain the Beatific Vision to which they are called by God, rather than “dream[ing] together” with unbelievers in some reconciled diversity of religions.

As Pope Pius X wrote in his scathing rebuke of the French Sillonist movement: “…there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness” (Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique).

In the same document, the sainted Pope thunders against the idea of interreligious cooperation in ‘making a better world’, as it is called today:

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.

This being said, what must be thought of the promiscuity in which young Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in a work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous for them than a neutral association?

(Pope St. Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique; underlining added.)

In condemning Sillonism, St. Pius X condemned in essence the very ‘human fraternity’ religion of which Francis was such a fan, and which Leo is now advancing in his stead:

We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the “Kingdom of God”. – “We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind.”

Indeed, such a humanistic pseudo-religion is what Leo XIV, too, is working for.

Continuing with Prevost’s ungodly prayer: “We live in a world full of beauty, but also wounded by deep divisions. Sometimes, religions, instead of uniting us, become a cause of confrontation.”

Who ever came up with the idea that the different religions have as their joint purpose the unity of all people? Such a notion is ludicrous. Disagreements between religions are the most consequential disagreements of all — unless, of course, one has already watered down and neutralized the notion of religion to such an extent that disagreement over it becomes as meaningless as arguing about personal preferences for a ‘tradition’.

Peace and harmony among the religions can only come at the price of apostasy from the truth, and that would mean betraying Our Beloved Redeemer. Jesus Christ did not come in order to reconcile the different religions, nor to deliver the world from pain, suffering, or disharmony. On the contrary, He came to destroy false gods and false religions through the institution of His Church, specifically through His Sacrifice on the Cross, the preaching of the Gospel, and the commission of His Apostles, thereby fulfilling the Old Covenant and establishing forever the New Covenant.

Christ knew that His Gospel would result in division, and this was prophesied; but there simply is no other way to bring mankind back to God:

And Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary his mother: Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contradicted; and thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed. (Luke 2:34-35)

Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it. (Matthew 10:34-39)

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not carry his cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:26-27)

Jesus saith to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? By the Lord this has been done; and it is wonderful in our eyes. Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone, shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it shall grind him to powder. (Matthew 21:42-44)

Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious. And he that shall believe in him, shall not be confounded. To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner, and a stone of stumbling, and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set. (1 Peter 2:6-8)

And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mark 16:15-16)

It does indeed sound like “Sometimes, religions, instead of uniting us, become a cause of confrontation”, doesn’t it?

Just yesterday, the false pope Leo XIV told a working group for interreligious dialogue: “The word religion itself refers to the notion of connection as an original element of humanity.” One cannot help but be reminded of the Modernists’ doctrine of the ‘religious sense’ condemned by Pope St. Pius X, and recall Pius XI’s rejection of

…that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.

(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 2)

Mankind must be divided with regard to religion, for “I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed” (Gen 3:15), and so everyone either belongs to the Mystical Body of Christ or to the Mystical Body of the Antichrist (so to speak). And although one and the same person can at one point in life belong to the one and at another point in life to the other (and even switch sides repeatedly many times during life), there is no in between, for “No servant can serve two masters” (Lk 16:13):

The race of man, after its miserable fall from God, the Creator and the Giver of heavenly gifts, “through the envy of the devil,” separated into two diverse and opposite parts, of which the one steadfastly contends for truth and virtue, the other of those things which are contrary to virtue and to truth. The one is the kingdom of God on earth, namely, the true Church of Jesus Christ; and those who desire from their heart to be united with it, so as to gain salvation, must of necessity serve God and His only-begotten Son with their whole mind and with an entire will. The other is the kingdom of Satan, in whose possession and control are all whosoever follow the fatal example of their leader and of our first parents, those who refuse to obey the divine and eternal law, and who have many aims of their own in contempt of God, and many aims also against God.

(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 1)

We might add that this division of humanity will be ratified and made permanent by God Himself at the General Judgment: “And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left” (Mt 25:33; cf. Apoc 20:11-15) with the corresponding sentences: “Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Mt 25:34) for the sheep; and “Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Mt 25:41) for the goats.

The division between the Blessed in Heaven and the damned in hell is eternal and insurmountable: “And, besides all this, there is a great gulf fixed between us and you, so that there is no passing from our side of it to you, no crossing over to us from yours” (Lk 16:26; Knox translation).

The next two stanzas in Leo XIV’s prayer just continue the same tune of happy interreligious fraternity.

Leo and his motley pan-religious crew very much fit the description St. Pius X gave of the Sillonists: “For the construction of the Future City they appealed to the workers of all religions and all sects. These were asked but one thing: to share the same social ideal, to respect all creeds, and to bring with them a certain supply of moral force” (Notre Charge Apostolique).

Yes, it is legitimate to seek to increase temporal happiness; not, however, at the expense of eternal happiness. Pope St. Pius X really put things in perspective when he wrote:

But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, [Jesus Christ] has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors.

Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body.

Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one’s personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism.

(Pope St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique; paragraph breaks added.)

Leo XIV ends his frightful prayer with the same mamby-pamby stuff the world has been hearing from Rome ad nauseam for the last few decades:

“May religions not be used as weapons or walls, but rather lived as bridges and prophecy: making the dream of the common good credible, accompanying life, sustaining hope and being the yeast of unity in a fragmented world.”

No, thanks, we’ll pass on a bridge to Islam or Judaism, to Shintoism or to Zoroastrianism, to Sikhism or to Mormonism. We know where these bridges lead, and it’s not Heaven.

Just earlier this year we saw where all this interreligious madness leads when, on Feb. 4, ‘Bishop’ Paolo Martinelli — whom Leo just received in audience on Sep. 26, we might add — proclaimed in Abu Dhabi: “I visited his holy [Hindu] temple, as a marvelous thing to see. Such a beauty which is able to remind us [of] the fundamental relationship we have with God. We need such a place, which is able to keep us in contact with God! Thank you very much” (source).

A ‘Roman Catholic bishop’ asserting that the world needs Hindu temples so as to keep in contact with God? These people have truly lost their marbles, but what is much worse, they have lost the Catholic Faith — if they ever had it.

The stern warning of Pope Pius XI regarding the indifferentism that underlies interreligious and ecumenical programs has thus once again proven to be prophetic: “…one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion” (Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 2).

Image source: YouTube (screenshot; enhanced)
License: fair use