Francis II: How the Catholic Left Saw It Coming and the Right Pretended Not To
Liberal Applause and Traditionalist Amnesia in the Wake of Pope Leo XIV’s Election
When Pope Leo XIV emerged on the loggia, the left didn’t hesitate. They didn’t wring their hands or wonder aloud. They didn’t need time to observe. They knew. James Martin, Thomas Reese, Blase Cupich, Austen Ivereigh: every major progressive voice in the post-conciliar Church erupted with praise. And why wouldn’t they? They got exactly what they wanted.
A Continuation, Not a Correction
Commonweal Magazine wasted no time framing Leo’s election as the natural continuation of Francis. Austen Ivereigh, Francis’s biographer and chief PR man, openly declared Leo XIV’s rise as “proof” that the “change of era inaugurated by Francis is here to stay.”
His detailed report reveals that Cardinal Prevost’s name surfaced not through a groundswell of surprise, but because he had already been groomed for it. For two years, Francis met privately with him every Saturday. He was Francis’s trusted fixer. His inner circle collaborator. His theological and structural continuity.
So close was their relationship that Francis, shortly before his death, elevated Prevost to the rank of cardinal bishop, quietly placing him on equal footing with the conclave’s most serious contenders. As Ivereigh points out, even this was a signal, “a little posthumous hint” that Prevost was his chosen heir.
Prevost’s appointment wasn’t just a matter of resume. It was deeply symbolic. Francis had trained him, formed him, and relied on him. In Chiclayo, Peru, he implemented Evangelii Gaudium, Laudato Si’, and Fratelli Tutti in summer lay leader courses. He modeled “synodality” with diocesan assemblies and infused his ministry with the very spirit of Vatican II that Francis canonized in practice.
Ivereigh admits that Leo “will continue to build the synodal Church of which Francis dreamed,” and will “reformulate” his predecessor’s themes “in more Augustinian terms.” Different tone. Same revolution.
The Left Always Knew
This explains why:
Cardinal Cupich immediately praised Leo as one who would “carry on the regard for the poor so associated with Pope Francis” while leading “in his own way.”
Fr. James Martin, SJ called him “a brilliant choice,” gushing over his humility, decisiveness, and trustworthiness.
Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ connected Leo’s choice of name to Leo XIII, implying a continuation of progressive social doctrine.
Sr. Barbara Reid described him as a pope for the entire Church, emphasizing his inclusion of marginalized voices.
Kim Daniels openly said Leo would “advance Francis’ spiritual and ideological goals.”
For the progressive establishment, this was never a mystery. Leo’s election was not a break. It was a victory lap.
Trad Inc. Forgot What It Knew
And yet, what did many traditionalist voices do? After warning that Prevost might be another Francis, after highlighting his administrative failures and progressive associations, they pivoted within hours of white smoke.
Several traditionalist Catholic commentators expressed concerns about Cardinal Robert Prevost prior to his election.
JD Flynn, in an article for The Pillar, highlighted concerns regarding Prevost’s handling of clerical abuse cases during his tenure in Chicago. Specifically, he noted that in 2000, Prevost allowed a priest accused of sexual abuse to reside near a Catholic school, a decision that drew criticism from figures like Cardinal Blase Cupich. Flynn’s reporting suggested that such decisions could reflect a broader pattern of administrative judgment that might not align with traditionalist expectations.
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, before the conclave, warned that electing a liberal pope similar to Pope Francis could risk a schism within the Church. He emphasized the need for a pope who would uphold traditional Catholic doctrine and expressed concern over the Church’s direction under progressive leadership.
Taylor Marshall, a prominent traditionalist commentator, also expressed reservations about Prevost. In a video titled “A NEW LIBERAL POPE? Worst Case Situation Analysis,” Marshall criticized Prevost’s alignment with Francis’s progressive agenda.
But as soon as Prevost became Leo, many of these voices spoke of prudence, patience, and calm. Aesthetic gestures, like nice vestments and a mention of Peter, suddenly outweighed two decades of alignment with Francis.
It didn’t take weeks. It didn’t take months. It took a day.
Some even scolded those who continued raising alarms. We were told to stop “pouncing.” To give him time. To let the pontificate “breathe.”
But the left didn’t wait. Because they knew they didn’t have to.
Francis with a Mask
Every fact in Commonweal confirms the suspicion many of us had the moment Leo canonized Francis in a tweet. He isn’t a break. He’s a disguise. He is Francis with better tailoring.
He confirms bishops who support women’s ordination. He appoints nuns to dicasteries governing priests. He praises Fratelli Tutti, reaffirms Nostra Aetate, and promotes synodality. He has canonized the past decade not only in language but in personnel. The revolution continues, only this time with less stammering.
Trad Inc.’s Strategic Retreat
Why did so many voices go silent? Why did they pretend not to notice what the left had always known?
Perhaps because the tone changed. Perhaps because the chaos of Francis was exhausting. Perhaps because they hope Leo will allow the Latin Mass to survive—if only we behave.
But if we are willing to trade truth for tone, or compromise in exchange for permission slips, then the resistance to modernism is over. It ends not with suppression, but with sighs of relief that the new pope is more polite than the old one.
They Told Us the Truth. We Just Ignored It.
This is not about giving Leo XIV a chance. It’s about admitting what he already is. The left told us plainly. Ivereigh confirmed it in glowing detail. Their confidence is our warning.
They knew what they were getting.
So did we.
Only one of us chose to forget.
Mary Help of Christians
24 May 2025 A. D.
Traditionalists are still in denial, by and large. It is a disease, like the blind refusal of the Pharisees "to see" the truth in Our Lord's healing of the man born blind in the Ninth Chapter of St John's Gospel. They won't see what they don't want to see.
Trads pretended not to see, and the pretense continues. For some it is a matter of flattery, perhaps to gain or regain a position, or not to lose position or parish or diocese in the case of the FSSP, for example. No one wants to lose the Old Latin Mass, which was just guillotined in Charlotte. (It was exiled to a Protestant church site an hour outside of the city. The SSPX has an outpost there, fortunately, on the south side of Lake Norman, which I expect to explode in numbers.) The crushing of the Old Latin Mass in Charlotte would not have occurred without the green light from Leo and/or his minions at the Vatican. If it were against his will, it would not have happened. If it were not in accord with his will, 'Bishop' Martin (who's got to be Lavender) would not have dared do it.
Almost anyone with a donate button (especially if they carry a large gourmand budget for pheasant, Amaro, and fat slabs of cow, and without a sinecure, like Fr. Z, for example) is in a panic over the truth. What a foolish utterance to demand the silence of others for one's own cowardice: "Shut up!" and: "Do not pay attention to the man behind the curtain!"
What a ridiculous spectacle for any Catholic blogger who allegedly loves truth, and even more so if he is a priest.
The Left, meanwhile, not only knows exactly who Prevost is--as if Bergoglio, Kasper, the inner Nine, et al. would be stupid enough to put Prevost in charge of their little Apostate-Bishop factory if he wasn't a fully vetted apparatchik--but they also seemingly knew in advance that he was going to be elected.
Look at Kasper's supremely confident pre-Conclave prediction of a bergoglian. Look at a smirking Wuerl in St. Peter's Square prior to Prevost's announcement. Would he have been there had a Catholic any chance of being elected?
Look at Austin Ivereigh and James Martin insulting Fr. Nix and his Info-Vaticana journalist friend for "attacking" Prevost. Why did they focus on defending Prevost? Clearly they knew a Bergoglian was coming. Maybe that's obvious jst from the stacked number. Seemingly, though, it seems to me, they knew it was Prevost.
Prevost was after all a plant. Bergoglio's final dastardly dart aimed at Holy Mother Church's Heart, flung from his dead hand from beyond the grave.
His plan was implemented to perfection by crafty Lavender mafia and the reliably clueless and impotent 'opposition' (dare I call it that) of the conservative faction led by Burke and Sarah.
Prevost's election by all appearances was pre-planned in advance. Grooming to the next level. Bannon notes the sheer improbability of a complete unknown soaring to election on the first day. The electioneering behind this freak 'chance' may quite possibly violate the law of Universali Domenici Gregis and its ban on vote-canvassing.
We can add that to the concerns of Archbishop Vigano and others that no way could 108 cardinal electors appointed by a heretic usurper false pope possibly elect a valid Pope.
Most of the Bergoglio cardinals could hardly be credibly accused of being Catholic. Like Prevost himself.
Amen, man.
When I heard his name announced, and that he was out of Chicago, I felt like a knife went into my heart, and my stomach turned, and I began to cry. Because I am a Chicagoan and Catholic my whole life, and I know what the guys who go up the ladder in the Catholic Church in Chicago are (Modernists), and that the guys who are not that get sidelined, and if they don't watch it, get canceled entirely. This has been going on since Bernardin in 1982.
I didn't need but a second to know how awful this choice was, just based on that he was an American from Chicago. Then seeing Cupich choking up, overwhelmed with emotion of happiness when NBC's Lester Holt interviewed him in Rome in a garden somewhere, I wanted to vomit. I have the divine privilege of having Cupich as my bishop, so I knew what his tears of joy meant too.
Listening to all this Trad "give the guy a chance" talk was mind boggling to me. It is like knowing who the members of the mafia are who are controlling your neighborhood, and hearing the don died, and then being told the new don would be Mr. X. Big deal. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. You think the mafia brought in a law abiding citizen to lead them? Com'on man! Whadda you stupid?
I am just waiting now for the rest of the trad Catholic world to catch up. Some already have, but wait, oh wait. I have a sense this is the time when we are going to see the apparent destruction of the Catholic Church, like is spoken of in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. When the proverbial SHTF, we will be in a tsunami.
I KNOW God will provide, but the people who survive this are going to have to be even more based than they ever were before. The confusion in our heads, the attacks of the devil(s), the persecutions, will be ramped up. They are going after US. God will provide, but you better have your ducks in a row, because, like a tsunami, it will overwhelm most who are not ready.
And if I am wrong, and God doesn't permit them to do all the damage they intend to do, then I will come back here and praise Him, and thank Him, and admit I expected worse than He permitted.
God bless you all. Hang in there. God wins.