New ‘Pope’, same old Vatican II garbage…
Leo XIV Spews Ecumenical Bilge in Message Commemorating 1925 Stockholm Ecumenical Conference
A so-called ‘Ecumenical Week’ recently ended in Stockholm, Sweden, celebrating the centenary of an interreligious conference in the Swedish capital in 1925. Not surprisingly, Robert Prevost (‘Pope Leo XIV’) sent the participants a congratulatory message and joined the festivities in spirit.
The official name of the gathering 100 years ago was “Universal Christian Conference on Life and Work”, having been set up by Nathan Söderblom (1866-1931), who was then an archbishop of the so-called Lutheran Church of Sweden. It ran from Aug. 19-30, 1925.
Here is a video clip (without sound) showing some of the participants in procession:
.
On Aug. 22, 2025, ‘Pope’ Leo XIV released a message loaded with the typical Vatican II errors about the nature and unity of the Church as he praised the Swedish ecumenists:
In the present post, we will look at Leo’s message in its entirety and point out how badly this ‘Pope’ deviates from the Catholic Faith as it was known until the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958:
Dear brothers and sisters,
I extend heartfelt greetings to all gathered in Stockholm for the 2025 Ecumenical Week marking the centenary of the 1925 Universal Christian Conference on Life and Work, as well as the 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, a profound event in the history of Christianity.
In the year 325, bishops from across the known world gathered in Nicaea. In affirming the divinity of Jesus Christ, they formulated our creedal statements that he is “true God from true God” and “consubstantial (homoousios) with the Father.” Thus, they articulated the faith that continues to bind Christians together. That Council stood as a courageous sign of unity amidst difference – an early witness to the conviction that our shared confession can overcome division and foster communion.
Notice that right off the bat, Leo XIV endorses the Protestants’ and Orthodox’ claim to the First Council of Nicea (325), as if that first ecumenical council was somehow part to these non-Catholic groups’ patrimony. Prevost speaks of “our creedal statements” and of “the faith that continues to bind Christians together”. Furthermore, he invokes “our shared confession” in the hope of overcoming divisions. All of this is either heretical or nearly heretical, immensely dangerous, and incredibly scandalous as it effectively validates the false religions to which these non-Catholics subscribe.
Behind this ecumenical approach to non-Catholic ‘Christians’ (improperly so-called) lies the absurd error, so widely accepted in our day, that the Catholic Faith can be had in elements, in parts, or by degrees. According to this ‘cumulative’ ecclesiology that allows for participation in ecclesial communion to a greater or lesser extent, a man is no longer either Catholic or not but rather ‘more’ or ‘less’ Catholic depending on how many elements of Catholicism he happens to accept. It won’t come as a surprise that such a concept cannot be found in Catholic doctrine before Vatican II.
As we saw the other day, an ecclesiology of degrees-of-participation-in-communion was rejected by Pope Pius IX. It is a grave error which holds
…that the false religions, those other than the Catholic, are in some measure a partial approach to the fullness of truth which is to be found in Catholicism. According to this doctrinal aberration, the Catholic religion would be distinct from others, not as the true is distinguished from the false, but only as the plenitude is distinct from incomplete participations of itself. It is this notion, the idea that all other religions contain enough of the essence of that completeness of truth which is to be found in Catholicism, to make them vehicles of eternal salvation, which is thus reproved in [Pope Pius IX’s allocution] Singulari quadam.
(Mgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation: In the Light of Recent Pronouncements by the Holy See [Westminster, MD: The Newman Press, 1958], p. 47)
Before Vatican II, the Popes made clear that Faith or communion with the Church cannot exist in elements but is either had entirely or not had at all:
If each of you in the light of faith, meditates within himself on these truths in tranquility of mind before his crucifix, it will be easy for him to see that the outcome of slogans such as you have heard can be nothing else than, by separating you from the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops in communion with him, to separate you from the Catholic Church in its entirety, and consequently you will cease to have her for a Mother. For how could the Church be your Mother, unless your fathers are the shepherds of the Church, that is to say, the Bishops? And how can you boast of the title of Catholic if, separated from the center of Catholicity, that is to say, from this Apostolic and Holy See and from the Sovereign Pontiff in whom God has placed the source of unity, you break with Catholic unity? The Catholic Church is one, she is neither broken nor divided: therefore, your [sect called] “petite eglise” cannot in any sense belong to the Catholic Church.
(Pope Leo XII, Apostolic Exhortation Pastoris Aeterni, n. 4; translation taken from Papal Teachings: The Church, n. 149; underlining added.)
The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. “No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic” (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). …For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others. Faith, as the Church teaches, is “that supernatural virtue by which, through the help of God and through the assistance of His grace, we believe what he has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceived” [Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, Chapter 3].
(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Satis Cognitum, n. 9; underlining added.)
Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself.
(Pope Benedict XV, Encyclical Ad Beatissimi, n. 24; underlining added.)
All of this is pretty clear and really not difficult to understand. Just as a mother who is 34 weeks pregnant is not ‘more’ pregnant than a mother who is only 15 weeks along, neither is one heretic ‘more Catholic’ than another if he ‘only’ denies one dogma instead of eight, for instance. Nor is an Orthodox ‘more Catholic’ than a Lutheran, nor a Lutheran ‘more Catholic’ than a Calvinist, and so on.
One may perhaps say that a certain Protestant is closer to the Catholic Faith than another, but both of them, being non-Catholics, are cut off from it and therefore out of communion entirely.
It is often objected that a kind of partial communion must exist ‘between all Christians’ on account of a common baptism (for those Protestants who still baptize validly), but that is not the case. Although it is true that a valid baptism imprints an indelible character on the recipient’s soul, on account of which the sacrament cannot be repeated even if it remain fruitless (fruitless is not the same as invalid, but that’s another discussion), nevertheless that ineradicable mark does not of itself suffice to put one in communion with the Church:
The spiritual character imprinted upon the soul in Baptism [alone] does not make one a member of the Church; it is rather a sign or badge showing that he has received the rites of initiation, but it does not prove that he retains membership. This may be illustrated by the case of a person receiving a tattoo mark as a sign of initiation into a society that uses such marking. If the person afterward leave the society, he would cease to be a member, though he still bore the indelible sign of his initiation.
(Fr. E. Sylvester Berry, The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise [St. Louis, MO: B. Herder Book Co., 1927], p. 227)
Thus, a valid baptism only means that the heretic or schismatic is called to return to the Catholic Church, having once received her sacrament.
That is precisely why the Church legitimately speaks of a need to return to the Church even with regard to those Protestants or Orthodox who were never personally Catholics to begin with and so didn’t themselves actively ‘leave’ the true religion:
Therefore the <whole> and <entire> Catholic doctrine is to be presented and explained: by no means is it permitted to pass over in silence or to veil in ambiguous terms the Catholic truth regarding the nature and way of justification, the constitution of the Church, the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the only true union by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ. It should be made clear to them that, in returning to the Church, they will lose nothing of that good which by the grace of God has hitherto been implanted in them, but that it will rather be supplemented and completed by their return. However, one should not speak of this in such a way that they will imagine that in returning to the Church they are bringing to it something substantial which it has hitherto lacked. It will be necessary to say these things clearly and openly, first because it is the truth that they themselves are seeking, and moreover because outside the truth no true union can ever be attained.
(Pope Pius XII, Holy Office Instruction Ecclesia Catholica, section II, Dec. 20, 1949; underlining added.)
In the fourth century, neither Protestants nor Orthodox existed, and although non-Catholics may consider themselves the inheritors of the faith of Nicea, that subjective belief does not make it so.
Regardless of individual Catholics’ personal sincerity, the fact of the matter is that Nicea I was an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church and not of any other religion. The religion of the bishops of Nicea was the Catholic religion, not the religion of the heretics or schismatics today. Of course many non-Catholics will disagree with that conviction, but the point is that at least the Pope — which Prevost claims to be — should hold that position.
Returning to Leo XIV’s message for the Swedish Ecumenical Week, we find that the false pontiff then doubles down, comparing the great Roman Catholic Council of Nicea to the 1925 ecumenical-heretical assembly in Stockholm:
A similar desire animated the 1925 Conference in Stockholm, convened by the pioneer of the early ecumenical movement, Archbishop Nathan Söderblom, then Lutheran Archbishop of Uppsala. The gathering brought together around 600 Orthodox, Anglican and Protestant leaders. Söderblom’s conviction was that “service unites.” He therefore called on his Christian brothers and sisters not to wait for agreement on every point of theology, but to unite in “practical Christianity” – to serve the world together in the pursuit of peace, justice and human dignity.
Never mind that there can be no “practical Christianity” where there is no Christianity:
But the return to Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is incarnate. It identifies itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the mystical body of Jesus Christ and which has for its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Saviour, the daughter and the heiress of His redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance, and of that immortality which have been promised it, it makes no terms with error, but remains faithful to the commands which it has received to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time and to protect it in its inviolable integrity.
(Pope Leo XIII, Apostolic Letter Annum Ingressi; underlining added.)
…[T]he Catholic Church is the irreplaceable support and the sole conserving force of real and genuine Christianity. In fact, what remains outside the Catholic Church after the real havoc wrought by the so-called free thought, liberalism, and various pretended reforms, what remains of the doctrine of Jesus Christ transmitted by the Gospel and legitimate Tradition? What remains of the sacraments instituted by Jesus Christ? What remains of his Divine Person itself?
(Pope Pius XI, Allocution Siamo Ancora, May 12, 1936; translation taken from Papal Teachings: The Church, n. 932; underlining added.)
In the Church founded by Jesus Christ, unity in matters of Faith, government, and worship flows from the top down: from the Vicar of Christ down to the lowliest Catholic beggar. Just as action follows thought, so genuine works of mercy (with the right disposition and proper motive), whether they be corporal or spiritual, follow from true doctrine.
The idea that ‘service unites’ is true only in a trivial sense: Yes, when handing out food at a soup kitchen, one can do so alongside a pro-abortion, feminist lesbian Methodist pastor, but precisely what does that do? What sort of ‘unity’ is this, and why would we care to have it? “Be not seduced: Evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor 15:33).
So much of ecumenical babble is just hot air.
Next, Leo admits in half a sentence that no representative of the Catholic Church was present at the 1925 ‘interdenominational’ meeting in Sweden:
While the Catholic Church was not represented at that first gathering, I can affirm, with humility and joy, that we stand with you today as fellow disciples of Christ, recognizing that what unites us is far greater than what divides us.
Notice that Leo does not say why the Church was not represented at the assembly: because a meeting such as that is founded on false doctrine and reduces the Catholic Church to simply being one of many ‘Christian denominations’ — whereas she is the one and only true Church founded by God Himself: “…the Catholic religion…, as it is the only one that is true, cannot, without great injustice, be regarded as merely equal to other religions” (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 16).
Furthermore, as Pope St. Pius X pointed out:
If, as We desire with all Our heart, the highest possible peak of well being for society and its members is to be attained through fraternity or, as it is also called, universal solidarity, all minds must be united in the knowledge of Truth, all wills united in morality, and all hearts in the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ. But this union is attainable only by Catholic charity, and that is why Catholic charity alone can lead the people in the march of progress towards the ideal civilization.
(Pope Pius X, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique; underlining added.)
Ah, but what unites Catholics and Protestants is just so much greater than what divides them, right? Wrong! Catholics and heretics are divided in Faith, in worship, and in government. There is nothing greater than these that could possibly unite them. Regardless, the Holy Office under Pope Pius XII warned the world’s Catholic bishops to
…be on guard lest, on the false pretext that more attention should be paid to the points on which we agree than to those on which we differ, a dangerous indifferentism be encouraged, especially among persons whose training in theology is not deep and whose practice of their faith is not very strong.
(Instruction Ecclesia Catholica, section II)
Next, Leo XIV acknowledges that ecumenism was not endorsed by the Holy See until the abominable Second Vatican Council, whose proceedings were under the direction of the false popes John XXIII (1962-63) and Paul VI (1963-65):
Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has wholeheartedly embraced the ecumenical path. Indeed, Unitatis Redintegratio, the Council’s decree on ecumenism, called us to dialogue in humble and loving fraternity, grounded in our common baptism and our shared mission in the world. We believe that the unity Christ wills for his Church must be visible, and that such unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering.
Did you catch that? Leo keeps doubling down. What began with partial communion, the same faith, “our creed”, and a common baptism has now become a “shared mission in the world”! That’s where we are in 2025 A.D., 60 years after the council: The ‘Pope’ believes and teaches that not only Catholics but also Orthodox and Protestants have a mission from God! They have been sent, in other words, by God Himself to… well, to do what exactly? And where and when was this divine mission supposedly given to them? Leo doesn’t say!
Prevost continues:
This call to shared witness finds powerful expression in the theme chosen for this Ecumenical Week: “Time for God’s peace.” This message could not be more timely. Our world bears the deep scars of conflict, inequality, environmental degradation and a growing sense of spiritual disconnection. Yet amid these challenges, we recall that peace is not merely a human achievement, but a sign of the Lord’s presence with us. This is both a promise and a task, for the followers of Christ are summoned to become artisans of reconciliation: to confront division with courage, indifference with compassion, and to bring healing where there has been hurt.
It is abundantly clear from these words and the general tenor of the entire message that Leo XIV believes — as has been standard since Vatican II — that Protestants and Orthodox are genuine “followers of Christ” who are bearers of “the Lord’s presence”.
This is deeply disturbing, for despite the fact that the majority (we may reasonably assume) of Orthodox and (at least conservative) Protestants subjectively mean to be true followers of Christ, such personal sincerity does not suffice to make them part of Christ’s flock in the objective order:
Now, whoever will carefully examine and reflect upon the condition of the various religious societies, divided among themselves, and separated from the Catholic Church, which, from the days of our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostles has never ceased to exercise, by its lawful pastors, and still continues to exercise, the divine power committed to it by this same Lord; cannot fail to satisfy himself that neither any one of these societies by itself, nor all of them together, can in any manner constitute and be that One Catholic Church which Christ our Lord built, and established, and willed should continue; and that they cannot in any way be said to be branches or parts of that Church, since they are visibly cut off from Catholic unity.
(Pope Pius IX, Apostolic Letter Iam Vos Omnes)
…it will be entirely necessary for your Christian community, if it wishes to be part of the society divinely founded by our Redeemer, to be completely subject to the Supreme Pontiff, Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, and be strictly united with him in regard to religious faith and morals. With these words — and it is well to note them — is embraced the whole life and work of the Church, and also its constitution, its government, its discipline. All of these things depend certainly on the will of Jesus Christ, Founder of the Church.
(Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Ad Sinarum Gentem, n. 11)
It is clear that Leo’s ideas about non-Catholic Christians are firmly grounded in the ecclesiology of Vatican II and its partial-communion approach to the Church of Christ, according to which every baptized person who believes in Christ is to some extent a member of the Church. Since, however, such an ecclesiology admits all kinds of heretics and schismatics into the Church’s ranks even objectively, it then follows that there is no real unity between them; hence the need for ecumenism: “We believe that the unity Christ wills for his Church must be visible, and that such unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering”, Prevost adds.
This is insanity. As we already said, unity in the true Church flows from the top down. It is generated and maintained by Jesus Christ Himself, who “rules it visibly, through him who is His representative on earth” (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, n. 40). That is, the unity of the Church Militant is guaranteed through the exercise of the Papacy in doctrine, worship, and government. Unity does not come about through dialogue with heretics but always exists in the Catholic Church, to which the heretics are called to convert.
The ecclesiology of Vatican II, fully endorsed by Leo XIV, stands condemned by Pope Pius XI:
And here it seems opportune to expound and to refute a certain false opinion, on which this whole question, as well as that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of the Christian churches depends. For authors who favor this view are accustomed, times almost without number, to bring forward these words of Christ: “That they all may be one…. And there shall be one fold and one shepherd” [John 17:21; 10:16], with this signification however: that Christ Jesus merely expressed a desire and prayer, which still lacks its fulfillment. For they are of the opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time existed, and does not to-day exist. They consider that this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal. They add that the Church in itself, or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common, nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder; that these all enjoy the same rights; and that the Church was one and unique from, at the most, the apostolic age until the first Ecumenical Councils.
(Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos, n. 7)
Next, the fake pope Leo rattles off some “ecumenical milestones” of his equally-invalid predecessors:
This mission has grown stronger through recent ecumenical milestones. In 1989, Pope John Paul II became the first Roman Pontiff to visit Sweden and was warmly welcomed at the Uppsala Cathedral by Archbishop Bertil Werkström, Primate of the Church of Sweden. That moment signaled a new chapter in Catholic-Lutheran relations. It was followed by the joint commemoration of the Reformation in Lund in 2016, when Pope Francis joined Lutheran leaders in common prayer and repentance. There, we affirmed our shared journey “from conflict to communion.” This week, as you dialogue and celebrate together, I am pleased that my Delegation is able to be present as a sign of the Catholic Church’s commitment to continuing the journey of praying and working together, wherever we can, for peace, justice and the good of all.
Ah, yes, that journey of working for a better world… Pope St. Pius X said something about that which we can be confident Leo XIV won’t ever repeat:
True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He 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. … 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, Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique; underlining added.)
Prevost then wraps up his message to the Swedish ecumenists by invoking the Holy Ghost, which he claims has guided them all in their ecumenical endeavors:
May the Holy Spirit, who inspired the Council of Nicaea, and who continues to guide us all, deepen your fellowship this week, and awaken fresh hope for the unity which the Lord so ardently desires among his followers.
With these sentiments, I pray that the peace of Christ be with you all.
Here we can see the ecclesiology of Vatican II on full display — not merely in theory but in practice. Here we can see what a hopeless mess of subjectivism, relativism, and indifferentism it really is.
On July 19, 2004, the sedevacantist Bp. Donald Sanborn had a formal debate with the conservative Novus Ordo theology professor Dr. Robert Fastiggi regarding Vatican II’s strange new doctrine on the Church. It is well worth watching, together with His Excellency’s follow-up conference; and we are also providing links to some additional information:
- Did Vatican II Teach Heresy? Bp. Sanborn vs. Dr. Fastiggi (video)
- Bp. Sanborn’s Vatican II Ecclesiology Conference (video)
- The New Ecclesiology: An Overview
- Documentation: The New Ecclesiology (double-column comparison old vs. new teachings)
- The Ecclesiology of Vatican II (video)
Don’t fall for those who want you to ‘wait and see’ how Leo XIV turns out. There is no time to waste. Robert Prevost is thoroughly a man of Vatican II, and although the Conciliar revolution might perhaps advance a bit more slowly under Leo than it did under Francis, the driver, engine, general direction, and final destination of this train are still the same:
It’s a false pope heading toward the abyss, using apostasy to drive souls to hell.
Image source: composite with elements from Facebook (Sverigeskristnarad) and Shutterstock (Marco Iacobucci Epp)
Licenses: fair use and paid
;
No Comments
Be the first to start a conversation