Posted on 05/28/2026 4:41:38 PM PDT by ebb tide
On May 8, 2025, Leo XIV spoke these words from the loggia of St. Peter’s:
We want to be a synodal Church.
Now, on May 25, 2026, he has published a detailed manifesto for its construction.
Magnifica Humanitas is a blueprint for the construction of a new society, which Leo variously calls the “city,” “Jerusalem,” and a “civilization of love.” The words “building” and “rebuilding” are used 40 times in the text.
This “Jerusalem” is not the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ, or is the term used to refer to the heavenly Jerusalem to come. In fact, the term “Catholic Church” does not appear even once in Magnifica Humanitas. Leo XIV does use the term “synodal Church.” [1]
Leo XIV’s new “civilization of love” is founded on the rationalistic principles of liberalism that have been progressively imposed on Christendom over the past two centuries while being continually condemned by the Catholic Church.
Magnifica Humanitas is a massive document. Indeed, with more than 40,000 words, five chapters, and 245 paragraphs, it is better described as a short book – a book that is also a manifesto for the destruction of the Catholic Church.
In this initial article, I wish to give an overview of its most destructive elements; further detailed examination of individual sections will follow later.
Leo XIV sets out his agenda
The first two paragraphs of the text reveal Leo XIV’s agenda, with the opening sentence introducing two images that will repeat throughout the texT.
“Humanity,” Leo writes, “is today facing a pivotal choice: either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to build the city in which God and humanity dwell together.” [2]
The “Tower of Babel” is the present world, moving in directions that give Leo XIV grave cause for concern. The “city in which God and humanity dwell together” is the alternative way of living that Leo proposes to us.
This city, however, is quite different from the “city of God” as conceived in traditional Catholic thought, that is, as the Catholic Church and the Christian social order that is the fruit of her teaching and her sacraments.
On the contrary, Leo tells us that every generation “inherits the task of shaping its own era” and of “guiding history” to “become a place where the dignity of every person is safeguarded, justice is promoted and fraternity is made possible.” [3]
In this first paragraph, Leo establishes that his society has a natural rather than a supernatural end. In Leo’s vision, man, not God, is in the driving seat of history, and the world he is called to build is a “fraternity” centered on man. [4]
In the second paragraph, Leo XIV assures us that “the powerful and mysterious action of the Holy Spirit” allows us to “diligently contribute to every initiative that builds a more just world, and we can call others to collaborate in promoting the integral development of every human being.”
For Leo, the “integral development of every human being” is the goal, but there are few grounds for thinking he considers such development as reaching beyond the bounds of this life.
At no point in the document does Leo make reference to man’s true destination – eternal supernatural union with God in the beatific vision of heaven – which is the very meaning and purpose of his life. Or does the document in any way allude to the possibility of eternal separation from God in Hell. [5]
The word “spiritual” is occasionally found. It is never used with reference to the spiritual life as understood by the Catholic Church but always in a way which embraces a wide variety of meaning and could be used by people of all religions and none. Indeed, Leo states that there are many “great spiritual paths” to be found among the religions of the world. [6]
The preaching of the faith replaced by ‘dialogue’
The Church’s contribution to man’s integral development is to be found in “dialogue,” Leo writes, in the document second introductory paragraph:
We wish to engage in dialogue with all men and women of our time, with whom we share in the events, questions and aspirations of humanity. Together with them, we seek to identify new paths for the common good and for promoting a dignified life for all. Indeed, openness to dialogue is an integral part of the Church’s vocation because, constituted in Christ as “a sacrament… of communion with God and of the unity of the entire human race,” she recognizes history as the place where the Gospel challenges and directs human experience.
This paragraph introduces two major themes that will run through the document.
First, Leo identifies “dialogue” as an “integral part of the Church’s vocation.” However, the Church was not established by Jesus Christ to dialogue with the world but to judge it. Our Lord entrusted His Church with the “Great Commission” to preach the gospel. He instructed His Apostles:
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. (Mk 16:15-16)
The Catholic Church teaches with authority truths that have been revealed by God. These are not matters for dialogue, but doctrines that must be obediently received by mankind, and that are necessary for our salvation.
The salvation of souls is the core mission of the Church. It is why she was founded. Yet this is the mission excluded from consideration in Magnifica Humanitas.
Secondly, the Church can only be considered “a sacrament … of communion with God and of the unity of the entire human race” to the extent that men are united with Christ in His Mystical Body, which is none other than the Catholic Church.
Unity in the Catholic Church strictly requires three conditions: baptism, public profession of the faith proposed by the Magisterium, and obedience to the legitimate authority of the hierarchy.
Yet, as we will see, this need for unity is precisely what Leo XIV does not require in his “Jerusalem,” his “civilization of love,” or his “synodal Church.”
Fatal threads that run through the text
The first two paragraphs of Magnifica Humanitas introduce two key approaches that run throughout the text: (i) the substitution of a natural end for the “church,” (ii) the avoidance of the “church’s” claims to possess a body of true doctrine that must be taught with authority. These errors, found in seed in the introduction, bear abundant bad fruit as the document proceeds.
I speak of the “church” because the society described by Leo in Magnifica Humanitas cannot be the Catholic Church. Indeed, as noted above, Leo does not even use that term. Leo’s “church” is better described by the term that he used on the day of he was chosen to succeed Francis and that he repeats in this text, that is, “synodal Church.”
Leo’s secular liberal Jerusalem
In the next section of this article, I will give some idea of how these ideas develop as the document proceeds. The examples given in the next section are far from being comprehensive. In future articles, specific errors will be examined in more detail.
In the ninth paragraph of Magnifica Humanitas, Leo reintroduces the image first presented to us in the introduction, namely the choice between “constructing Babel or rebuilding Jerusalem.” Jerusalem is here identified with “fraternal coexistence” rather than the Church. [7]
The next paragraph further emphazises that this “rebuilding” refers to “the possibility of building together, of transforming diversity into a resource and of making listening and dialogue the common ground upon which to cultivate justice and fraternity.” [8]
The role of Christians in this process is, “through the practice of synodality,” to become “the space in which humanity rediscovers its solid foundations and its final end.” [9]
Leo XIV notes that “in the Book of Revelation, John sees the New Jerusalem “coming down out of heaven from God” (Rev 21:2) as a gift for all humanity.” [10] But for Leo, the “new Jerusalem” is not the Church Triumphant. On the contrary, in the next sentence, he explains that “this vision of grace is an invitation for us Christians to work together in order to foster a peaceful, just and dignified life in community within today’s ‘cities.’” [11]
Leo clearly replaces a vision of our eternal life with God with one of an improved life on this earth.
In the next paragraph, Leo makes clear that building this new Jerusalem “means accepting the limits and weakness of humanity without considering them an error to be corrected.” [12] Conversion, therefore, will not be required. Indeed, in paragraph 13, he makes clear that all “faith communities” have “their own section of the wall.” [13]
This new society does have “standards of discernment,” but they are of a purely natural, temporal kind: “the dignity of the human person, the universal destination of goods, the preferential option for the poor, care for our common home and peace”. [14]
Leo’s “city” will “translate these standards into practices such as responsible planning, the assessment of human and social impact, the inclusion of the most vulnerable, the promotion of digital literacy and guiding research and industry toward justice and peace.”
This is a technocratic vision of secular human society and one in which Leo wants all mankind to merge. In paragraph 16, Leo addresses his appeal to join this new city to all mankind: “to all the Catholic faithful, to all Christians and to all men and women of goodwill.” [15]
The cornerstone of this new society will not be Jesus Christ but rather “the “rejected stones” — the poor, the sick, the migrants and the least among us — will become the cornerstone, and a solid, welcoming common home will emerge on the earth.” [16]
The Synodal Church replaces the Catholic Church
For the new society, there will be a new church. The age of the Catholic Church, established by God and exercising divine authority, is over. Leo’s church is one which carries out “her particular vocation of listening, dialogue and service, and of being responsive to everything concerning the lives of contemporary men and women.” [17]
This church “stands alongside the world without overpowering it” because its doctrine is not “a handbook of principles and norms to be applied, but a process of shared discernment.” [18] It is “committed to reflecting on the concrete reality of historical situations, rather than abstract concepts.” [19]
This church has the “mission” of “transforming the structures of society from within and forging paths toward a greater humanity.” [20]
Such a church cannot, of course, be the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ, hence Leo XIV gives it a new name: “a synodal Church, a Church that ‘walks together,’” [21]
He calls on us to transform ourselves into the new church through “the adoption of a synodal style.” [22] He urges Catholics to carry out an “examination of conscience” to “ensure that the principles outlined in this chapter are applied, especially within its own structures.” [23] These include “a synodal approach for mission.” [24]
What will the Synodal Church look like?
Paragraphs 118-126 are among the most dangerous of the whole text. It is here that the real nature of the “synodal Church” is made clear. In a future article, I will examine them in more detail, but a summary can be given here.
For Leo XIV, religion does not consist in shared faith and worship but rather in the cultivation of internal religious experiences. This is the religious approach of Modernism. I have already explored its relationship with synodality here, and with the teaching of Francis here.
Religion, for Leo XIV, comes from within, from our internal experiences, and finds its expression not just in worship but also in art. Leo finds “an almost prophetic significance” in Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, Pablo Picasso’s painting Guernica and Steven Spielberg’s film Schindler’s List. [25]
In paragraph 123, Leo praises humanity for being “capable of creating institutions that protect our shared life,” but the institutions named are not Catholic institutions but the Red Cross and the United Nations. [26]
The document mentions the word “sin” only three times. Two of these occasions are in reference to “structures of sin” rather than individual sin. [27] The third is a statement that sin does not remove human dignity. [28] There is no reference to sin with relation to the offense caused to God or to its eternal consequences. “Moral corruption” is mentioned in paragraph 121, but only as something that harms humans and society.
Leo XIV’s religion has in fact lost its “religious” character. It is nothing more than secular humanism. Everyone is welcome in his “civilization of love.” Among the individuals presented as examples for us are Nelson Mandela, Benazir Bhutto, and Martin Luther King Jr. [29]
These are secular saints for Leo XIV’s new secular religion.
Leo XIV tries to preempt his critics
Leo XIV was clearly aware that his introduction to the document, discussed in some detail above, would raise alarm bells in readers who still possessed some sense of the authentic Catholic faith.
Therefore, as early as the third paragraph of the document, he tried to preempt criticism by associating himself at the outset with the great pontiff Leo XIII. “Criticize me,” he seems to say, “and you criticize him.” Leo XIV writes:
When some objected that the Church should not waste energy on worldly matters, but instead focus on communicating the message of eternal life, Leo XIII responded with realism and wisdom, saying that the proclamation of the Gospel cannot overlook the concrete lives of people. [30]
However, consideration of the teaching of Leo XIII only reveals the stark contrast between the two men. While Leo XIV completely neglects the eternal welfare of mankind, Leo XIII places it at the center of his teaching. His great encyclical Rerum Novarum was indeed focused on social and economic problems, but the Holy Father was careful to place his social doctrine in its proper context.
Leo XIII taught:
The working man, too, has interests in which he should be protected by the State; and first of all, there are the interests of his soul. Life on earth, however good and desirable in itself, is not the final purpose for which man is created; it is only the way and the means to that attainment of truth and that love of goodness in which the full life of the soul consists. [31]
He continued:
What advantage can it be to a working man to obtain by means of a society material well-being, if he endangers his soul for lack of spiritual food? “What doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his soul?” This, as our Lord teaches, is the mark or character that distinguishes the Christian from the heathen. “After all, these things do the heathen seek … Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His justice: and all these things shall be added unto you.” [32]
He went on to place his entire teaching on the economic order in the light of these eternal principles:
Let our associations, then, look first and before all things to God; let religious instruction have therein the foremost place, each one being carefully taught what is his duty to God, what he has to believe, what to hope for, and how he is to work out his salvation; and let all be warned and strengthened with special care against wrong principles and false teaching. Let the working man be urged and led to the worship of God, to the earnest practice of religion, and, among other things, to the keeping holy of Sundays and holy days. Let him learn to reverence and love holy Church, the common Mother of us all; and hence to obey the precepts of the Church, and to frequent the sacraments, since they are the means ordained by God for obtaining forgiveness of sin and for leading a holy life. [33]
These are the salutary truths that the Church was founded to preach and that Leo XIV fails to transmit.
Conclusions
In his encyclical Humanum Genus, Pope Leo XIII, like Leo XIV, made use of St. Augustine of Hippo’s language of two cities. Commenting on a quotation from the saint, he wrote:
“Two loves formed two cities: the love of self, reaching even to contempt of God, an earthly city; and the love of God, reaching to contempt of self, a heavenly one.” At every period of time each has been in conflict with the other, with a variety and multiplicity of weapons and of warfare, although not always with equal ardor and assault. [34]
The Vicar of Christ continued:
At this period, however, the partisans of evil seems to be combining together, and to be struggling with united vehemence, led on or assisted by that strongly organized and widespread association called the Freemasons. No longer making any secret of their purposes, they are now boldly rising up against God Himself. They are planning the destruction of holy Church publicly and openly, and this with the set purpose of utterly despoiling the nations of Christendom, if it were possible, of the blessings obtained for us through Jesus Christ our Savior. [35]
Pope Leo XIII’s age is our own. We are still living out the battle between the City of God and the City of modern, liberal man.
Magnifica Humanitas of Leo XIV represents the next stage of Satan’s assault on the Catholic Church, aiming for its complete destruction and the ruin of what remains of Christian civilization. In its place, Leo XIV will continue to build the “synodal Church” to keep the true Catholic Church in eclipse.
This is not a conspiracy theory; it is a plan laid out in the pages of Magnifica Humanitas.
It is also a plan that is ultimately doomed to fail.
In Humanum Genus, after exposing out the diabolic scheme in which the enemies of the Church were engaged, Pope Leo XIII directed us to a remedy that will not fail:
So vehement an attack demands an equal defense — namely, that all good men should form the widest possible association of action and of prayer. We beseech them, therefore, with united hearts, to stand together and unmoved against the advancing force of the sects; and in mourning and supplication to stretch out their hands to God, praying that the Christian name may flourish and prosper, that the Church may enjoy its needed liberty, that those who have gone astray may return to a right mind, that error at length may give place to truth, and vice to virtue. [36]
And he entrusted our cause to “the Virgin Mary, Mother of God … who from the moment of her conception overcame Satan” to “blessed Michael the prince of the heavenly angels, who drove out the infernal foe,” to “Joseph, the spouse of the most holy Virgin and heavenly patron of the Catholic Church,” and to “the great Apostles, Peter and Paul, the fathers and victorious champions of the Christian faith.”[37]
With heavenly intercessors like this on our side, we may be confident that the synodal Church will never prevail against the Catholic Church, no matter the earthly powers with which it may align.
ReferencesReferences
| ↑1 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, No. 42. |
|---|---|
| ↑2, ↑3 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, No. 1. |
| ↑4 | The concept of “fraternity,” like “liberty” and “equality,” occupies a central position in Enlightenment and liberal thought. |
| ↑5 | The phrase “eternal life” appears only once, when Leo indicates that he will not be talking about it. The phrase “eternal goods” is used in a summary of the doctrine of John XXIII, and in the context of emphasizing the need to give attention to “the concrete needs of people’s daily lives.” |
| ↑6 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 223. |
| ↑7 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 9. |
| ↑8, ↑9, ↑10, ↑11 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 10. |
| ↑12 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 11. |
| ↑13 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 13. |
| ↑14 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 14. |
| ↑15, ↑16 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 16. |
| ↑17 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 19. |
| ↑18 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 20,27. |
| ↑19, ↑20 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 34. |
| ↑21 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 42. |
| ↑22, ↑23, ↑24 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 86. |
| ↑25 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 122. |
| ↑26 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 123. |
| ↑27 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 36,79. |
| ↑28 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 52. |
| ↑29 | Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, 123,124. |
| ↑30 | These words are not in fact found in the paragraph of Pope Leo XIII referenced by Leo XIV. |
| ↑31 | Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, No. 40. |
| ↑32, ↑33 | Pope Leo XIII, Rerum Novarum, No. 56. |
| ↑34, ↑35 | Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, No. 2. |
| ↑36, ↑37 | Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, No. 37 |
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
When human dignity becomes detached from the sovereignty of God, Christianity risks becoming reduced to an ethical or humanitarian vision.
Ping
I’m ready for Pope Grok I....
I didn’t get to vote for him Ebb.
Catholics can thank the Bergoglio stacked College of Cardinals for electing a communist as Pope.
He’s so gay.
Where to begin? This entire critique is scary and informative.
Common ground with Communists and Islamists? Convert them, yes. Be absorbed by them, no.
Robert Prevost thinks he is a lot smarter than he really is.
RE: I didn’t get to vote for him Ebb.
Cardinal Lawrence: “Is this really necessary? I feel as if I’m at some American political convention.”
Cardinal Bellini: (Gloomy, as he clears his throat)
“Well... we are.”
-—The Conclave movie (2024).
City of God vs City of Man. I believe I read about this somewhere before.
The Catholic Church died a while back, the head just don’t know it yet
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.