Is Satan enthroned in the Vatican? That is what we are going to be debunking in this article. There is a growing movement of radical traditionalist “Catholics” referred to as rad trads. It is the radical Traditionalists who say that Lucifer is in the Vatican and they basically use this as a weapon, to say that the Catholic Church is wrong, and ideally they claim to be Catholic.
Now, notice a distinction. I’m not saying traditional Catholics say this. Traditional Catholics love the Latin mass in the old right, that’s fine. I have no problem with traditional Catholics. But these are radical Traditionalists. Other, otherwise known as extremist Traditionalists, who are maybe Catholic, maybe not, depending on the person. And they are found in groups like SSPX and Sedevacantists. Many of them don’t even accept the Pope. They don’t accept the second Vatican council. Many of them don’t even accept the last three popes or more than three popes. And so, these are the type of people who are attacking the Church as they claim to try to save the Church. So, in this article, we are going to be debunking a lot of their claims.
The claim seems to be made by SSPX proponents because they quote two SSPX Bishops: Bishops Williamson and Bishop Fellay. Both were ex-communicated by Pope John Paul II. If that puts into perspective the kind of dubious sources they’re using here. These bishops who are going to be claiming that the Catholic Church is evil, and that Lucifer is there, have themselves been excommunicated, and themselves were in rebellion against the Church itself. And the other sources they use, as we will see, aren’t much better.
But it gets even worse. Bishop Williamson not only was excommunicated by the Catholic Church, he was also out by SSPX themselves too, and he’s been on record in court for being a Holocaust denier many times. These are the kind of extremists that this claim references.
So I have some problems right off the bat with most of the sources being used here, but let’s go on deeper.
These radical Traditionalists are doom and gloom. All their website is doom and gloom, especially Sedevacantists and such like that. Everyone is bad. Everyone is going to Hell. Everything is evil except us. And they were the ones who would hold signs on their neck saying, the end is coming tomorrow. They’re the ones who are saying that the everyone in the Church is evil. You have to repent. I mean, it’s all extremist, sensationalist, alarmist kind of mentality. And you see that in their videos.
They constantly talk about a great Apostacy, how Rome will fall, how the anti-Christ will be seated in Rome. All of these other prophecies that they self-interpret, even though they have no authority to interpret them. They say that it refers to the Bishop of Rome or the Pope or the Catholic Church, the current Catholic Church. They are saying that the Catholic Church basically has apostatized, which would make Jesus a liar because he said that the gates of Hell will not prevail against his Church.
Is there a great apostacy coming? Yes. Have there been great apostacies in the past? Yes. Does this disprove the Catholic Church? No. So let’s look at the Rad Trads claim in detail:
- In one of their videos, which claims that Lucifer is in the Vatican, they keep flashing a picture throughout the video of Lucifer sitting on the throne in the Vatican. Lucifer is not actually there on the throne in the Vatican. It is not an actual portrait. It is not an actual seat or an actual place in the Vatican where Lucifer is sitting. It’s just a picture or an artistic representation that someone created to emotionally manipulate people.
- In another clip of their video, a quote comes up that “Rome will lose the faith.” Extremist Catholics are famous for saying that Rome will lose the faith and supposedly quoting an apparition of Our Lady of La Salette. They quote this apparition a lot and they apply it to the Catholic Church and the Pope. But how do they know it applies to the Pope and not to Pagan Rome or just the city of Rome? It sounds like Protestants. Protestants come up to us all the time and say, didn’t the Romans kill Jesus? And yet you are Roman Catholic? And I just have to smack my head because the Romans who killed Jesus, first of all, didn’t want to. It was the Jews that wanted Jesus crucified, but they couldn’t carry out the death sentence. So, they made the Romans do it. And it was the Pagan Romans, not the Catholic Church that hadn’t even been invented yet, because the Catholic Church wouldn’t start until Pentecost. And so, it couldn’t have been the Catholic Church or the Roman Catholic Church or anything like that. But this is the same kind of mentality you hear from Rad Trads. They’re assuming that Rome will lose the faith refers to the Pope or the Catholic Church, when in fact Rome could just be the city of Rome or the anti-Christ will set up his seat in Rome. You’ll often hear that, the anti-Christ will sit in Rome, and they assume it to be the Catholic Church, but why isn’t it the city of Rome? I mean, many times, most times in fact, biblical scholars say that the anti-Christ will sit in the seat of actual Rome, not the Catholic Church. That it IS an emperor, not a Pope. And when you read the actual passages and you study the apparitions, then you see that this can’t be and is not a Pope.
They’re saying that many Christians have fallen away from the faith today, that they’ve become heretics. But if you read what the anti-Christ is going to do and the all-out war that he is actually going to rage, how bloody it’s going to be, how millions of Christians will actually be killed and martyred. This has nothing to do with the Catholic church today.
I mean, yes, there’s some laxity in the Church. Yes, there’s some absolute evil, disgusting, corrupt bishops, and priests in the Church, but this is far from being the Anti-Christ sitting in Rome and waging war on all the Christians. This sounds, again, hokey, like the same conspiracy theories Jehovah’s Witnesses have and Seventh Day Adventist have and all the rest of the restorationists cults out there.
In the apparition, Mary said Rome would lose the faith. She never said How. She never said when. Rad Trads interpreted their own way, this is important. They’re the ones interpreting her apparition. It’s the Church’s job alone to interpret apparitions. They have no authority to do this. So, when they try to apply this to the modern-day Catholic Church, they fail on a number of levels, including the fact that they have no authority
- When Rad Trads say that the Pope has lost his authority, that he’s the anti-Christ, that the Catholic Church apostatized, are they not taking the exact playbook of the Protestants? They’re ripping a page right out of the Protestant playbook because that’s exactly what Protestants say. Protestants say that the Catholic Church is the anti-Christ, the Pope is the anti-Christ, the Catholic Church is for Satan, and they’re going to destroy true Christians. They’re persecuting currently true Christians. I mean, literally for 500 years, this has been the battle cry of Protestants, and now it’s the battle cry of Rad Trads, literally the same thing. Protestants and Rad Rads both rebel against the Church in the same way.
Yet, we know this will not happen because Jesus himself said in Matthew 28:19 that he will be with his church until the end of time and in Matthew 16:18- 19, the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church. So, we have Jesus’ promise that the Church is not going to fall. Yes, maybe there’s evil in it. Yes. Maybe it will be attacked. Yes. Maybe we don’t like the direction it’s going right now. Yes. Maybe it’s in a crisis, but the gates of Hell will not prevail. We’ve wrote several articles on our website where we discussed that this is not the first crisis that the Catholic Church has ever had, and in fact, there have been some probably as big in the past and the Catholic Church always got through because the gates of Hell will not prevail. And going into schism, just to try to fight what you think is the problem, is not actually the solution. I actually like what Jimmy Akin from Catholic Answer says. He says that regarding this apparition, there are only three pages written down. That’s it. Three handwritten pages. That was in 1851. In 1879, there was a booklet of many pages given to the pope. So clearly many things were added to the original revelation, and it’s very hard to discern, if not impossible to discern today, what the original revelation was, unless we see those three pages, and all of the things that were added to it. So, when we say “Rome shall lose the faith”, was that part of the original apparition or was that something that was added into the booklet that was then given?
There’s a good chance that it might not be part of that original three-page handwritten document that was sent to the Pope. It could have been an additional thought afterwards. It could have been something the visionary added in. Something she, maybe, interpreted, but we don’t know. We don’t even know if that’s part of the original revelation, and that’s important because they quote it all the time as if it is.
Moreover, Jimmy Akin goes on to talk about, and this is very interesting. He says that in 1865, she says, the visionary who had this apparition, says that the anti-Christ will be born in abomination, so he will be born as the anti-Christ born in abomination in the Holy places. He will be like an incarnate Demon who utters frightful screams. Doesn’t sound a lot like Pope Francis, like they accused. Goes on to say, that he shall have brothers, I think two brothers, who will make war, and at the age of 12, they will go to war and have victories with their armies. Can you guys think of a time when the Pope has armies today? And he’s using two brothers to conquer the world in this huge bloody warfare because I can’t. It doesn’t seem too fit for the depiction of the anti-Christ that she’s mentioning. The text goes on to say that the great cities, including all of Marseille and Paris will be swallowed up and conquered. Earthquakes will swallow up these cities.
A populist believing that everything is lost will be seeing nothing but murder, the clashing of armies, sacred blasphemies, and so much more. I mean, does this sound like what’s going on today? Does this sound like what’s sitting in Rome today? No. It’s nonsense. And this is what happens when Rad Trads try to interpret things to their own, and they do what Protestants do. They do what atheists do. That is having something that they already believe in their mind, and then they try to find any amount of information, whether it’s true or not, credible or not, that will support their already preconceived theory, rather than following evidence wherever it leads. And that is the problem with many of these Rad Trads.
- Now, regarding some clips in their video about Father Gabriele Amorth, a Vatican Exorcist. I actually like Father Gabriele Amorth. I’ve read a couple of his books and I think he has some good writings in his books. But come on, are we serious with these clips that they play in their video about Father Amorth? Father Gabriel Amorth literally speaks like two whole sentences and a random English voice with an English accent, probably the people who just made this video said: “Absolutely, it’s true”. (Answering to the Devil is present in the Vatican?).
It was like an old cartoon, an old kung Fu movie with a lag between the voice over and the person speaking!
Not to mention they speak things out of context. They’re taking these clips out of context and then they play a whole different clip, which has nothing to do apparently with the one before. It says: “It seems very real”, and then all of a sudden he speaks two sentences and then they confirm: “Yes, Absolutely, it’s real”.
Like, come on. Does that seem weird to anybody else? Not really Credible, not really academically done? Just my thoughts! Even if he did say that, what does he mean? What is he talking about? What context is there? Can you give the full context of what he was saying? Can you expound on it, so we can know the clear and purposeful meaning of the text, of what he was trying to get across? Or are you just cutting out pieces, small little pieces like Protestants do in the Bible, just that fit your preconceived ideas. It’s not academic, it’s not scholarly, and it’s not convincing.
So what does Father Amorth mean? Does he mean that the Catholic Church is Satanic? No, he doesn’t. And I know that because I’ve read his writings and I know he’s a faithful priest. Does he believe that there’s Satan in the Church? Maybe. Or does he mean there are evil priests in the Church? Maybe. Or does he mean Satan hates the Church and wants to attack it?
They have no context for this. So how can we use this as a credible source? But do you see how they work? They just post all these things, one after another, after another, AFTER making their initial case that Lucifer is enthroned in the Vatican. Then they try to find every piece of available evidence that’ll prove that, whether it’s taken out of context or not. But when it’s thrown together in clips back-to-back, and you see all these pictures, and this haunting music that’s supposed to emotionally manipulate you just as Jack Chick does. Apparently, it becomes convincing, but if you look deeper at these, it’s not always what it seems.