Donation in support of Leo’s work through GoFundMe https://www.gofundme.com/f/the-leo-zagami-show-lesule and https://cash.app/$leozagami

Article by Leo Zagami
As most of you know, my first book in English was entitled Pope Francis: The Last Pope? Money, Masons, and Occultism in the Decline of the Catholic Church. Of course, this controversial title is connected to the “Prophecies” of St. Malachy, allegedly the work of a twelfth-century monk, though it first appeared in 1590 and is now widely considered a forgery, but in God’s world even a forgery might have some element of truth. The “Prophecy” contains a list of more than a hundred brief mottoes, said to describe more than a hundred popes, beginning with Celestine II (who served in the office from 1143–44). Counting forward, the prophecy would tie the next-to-last motto on the list to the late Benedict XVI.
So, will Francis be the final pope? Even supporters of the “Prophecy” in question have acknowledged at times their uncertainty regarding Francis as the final pope as the next Conclave keeps getting closer and closer.
The assumption of papal primacy has always been based on an alleged apostolic succession from Peter to the latest pope and this standard Roman Catholic teaching has been accepted for centuries by most Christians of all denominations and it rests on a particular interpretation of one key passage of Scripture, in which Jesus stated, “you are Peter, and on this rock, I will build My church… I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven” (Matthew 16:18–19). However, the Church in Rome, for the first 140 years of its existence did not have a presiding bishop,1 let alone a pope. To support this narrative the Catholic Church often cites the letters of Ignatius of Antioch, also known as Ignatius Theophorus, one of the early Christian writers and Patriarchs of Antioch who died around 107 A.D. are often used to argue for the monarchical episcopate in the first century.
However, Catholic patristic scholars highlight significant textual problems with the Ignatian manuscripts (including interpolations as well as forgeries).
Further, the term “bishop” (“episcopos”) in the New Testament is used interchangeably with the term “presbyteros” (elder) and cannot be used to prove an early monarchical episcopate. Here is a table demonstrating the problems with the Ignatian manuscripts. My friend Dr. Jules Gomes, (BA, BD, MTh, PhD), who has a doctorate in biblical studies from the University of Cambridge and is currently a Vatican-accredited journalist based in Rome and is the author of five books and several academic essays has recently explained in a detailed article originally entitled The New Vatican Statement: A Ticking Time Bomb published last year by The Stream,[1] and in a new updated version of the said article published a week ago on his Substack (https://drjulesgomes.substack.com/) that: “This is the most common consensus of Catholic, Protestant, and secular historians.” Adding in confirmation to his view a quotation from the eminent Catholic historian Eamon Duffy, who writes in his magisterial book Saints and Sinners: A History of the Popes, “All the indications are that there was no single bishop in Rome for almost a century after the deaths of the Apostles.”
The early followers of Jesus met in a “constellation of independent churches, in the houses of wealthy members of the community,” Duffy observes. Gomes also quotes historian Peter Lampe, whose book From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome in the First Two Centuries is considered the definitive study on the subject: “Not until the second half of the second century, under Anicetus, do we find compelling evidence for a monarchical episcopacy.”
So, how did we go from a plurality of presbyters to Pope Boniface VIII, who in his bull Unam Sanctam (1302), would declare, proclaim, and define that “it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” And how did the Jesus Movement evolve from “nothing directly approaching a papal theory in the pages of the New Testament,” as Duffy puts it, to Vatican 1 declaring “papal infallibility” as dogma that must be obeyed on the pain of anathema? Well, the answer is in the instrumental use of Christianity by the Roman Empire and later the nascent Holy Roman Empire who would bring to life that forgery known as the Donation of Constantine (Latin: Donatio Constantini), a forged Roman imperial decree by which the 4th-century emperor Constantine the Great supposedly transferred authority over Rome and the western part of the Roman Empire to the Pope. Composed probably in the 9th century, that was used, especially in the 13th century, in support of claims of political authority by the papacy.
Now, let me explain how Pope Francis and the Jesuits have “planted a time bomb to detonate the Papal Supremacy,”[2] after his earthly departure making him de facto the last pope as I always predicted. Now, “According to Catholic teaching” as reported by Dr. Jules Gomes, “only one institution can tame the papal Leviathan — the papacy. And Pope Francis is doing it with all the delicacy of Emperor Titus’ armored elephants doing the Pyrrhic dance around the Colosseum.”
On June 13, 2024, the Vatican’s Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity that is another arm of the expanding “One World Religion” project I have discussed in detail in Volume 6.66, Volume 7, and Volume 9 of my Confessions of an Illuminati, released an unprecedented 151-page document shockingly titled “The Bishop of Rome: Primacy and Synodality in Ecumenical Dialogues and Responses to the Encyclical Ut Unum Sint.”
This papal-approved dossier produced with the help of the Jesuit Order, which claims to have the status of a “study document,” is indeed a time bomb carefully calibrated to keep ticking until it detonates the theory and practice of papal supremacy in the Roman Church after the death of Pope Francis. That’s why America the monthly Catholic magazine of the Jesuits of the United States published, on the same day the document in question was made public, an article entitled, What’s the right role of the Bishop of Rome and papal primacy? Vatican document seeks path to unity with other Christian churches.[3] In it the shameless Jesuits claim, “This study document comes 29 years after Pope John Paul II’s encyclical on the Catholic Church’s commitment to Christian unity,” and that “The Polish pope issued the invitation aware of how the primacy of the bishop of Rome has caused and still causes roadblocks to other Christian churches on the journey to the unity willed by Christ.” And that the new study document “contextualizes John Paul II’s invitation” as it recalls that “the understanding and exercise of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome entered a new phase with the Second Vatican Council.”
In reality, the document performs as Gomes says a “Samson-like suicidal feat”: as “it nobly announces that it is bringing the pontifical palace crashing down for the sake of ecumenical unity among the churches, as a response to Pope John Paul II encyclical on ecumenism.”

Here are seven takeaways from The Bishop of Rome and the document that confirms Pope Francis will be indeed the last pope as confirmed by the “Prophecies” of St. Malachy as well as myself:
- The document admits it is no longer helpful to interpret “Petrine texts” in the Gospels to support papal supremacy.
“Contemporary exegesis has opened new perspectives for an ecumenical reading of the ‘Petrine texts,’” the document states. “Catholics have also been challenged to recognize and avoid an anachronistic projection of all doctrinal and institutional developments concerning papal ministry into the ‘Petrine texts,’ and to rediscover a diversity of images, interpretations and models in the New Testament.”
As my friend Jules wrote here, it vindicates Archbishop Peter Kenrick of St. Louis, Missouri, who demonstrated how most of the church fathers did not believe that the “rock” of Matthew 16:18 was Peter: 44 fathers understood the rock as Peter’s confession, 16 interpreted the rock as Jesus, 8 interpreted the rock as all the apostles, a few believed the rock to be the faithful. Only 17 fathers thought the rock was Peter.
“From this it follows, either that no argument at all, or one of the slenderest probability, is to be derived from the words, ‘On this rock will I build my church,’ in support of the primacy,” Kenrick concluded in a landmark response at Vatican 1.
“From the moment they appear in patristic literature at the beginning of the third century, the interpretations of Matthew 16:17–19 are multiple,” the Vatican document concedes, virtually repeating Kenrick’s findings. “But it is never forgotten that the first stone on which the Church is built is Christ himself.”
2. The document calls for reinterpreting the papal supremacist claims of Vatican I, including papal infallibility.
“Vatican I should be understood within the framework of its historical context,” the document insists, lamenting that the council’s “dogmatic definitions have proved to be a significant obstacle for other Christians with regard to the papacy.”
The document acknowledges that Vatican I was a product of its times and it hence historically contingent. “That Council had no intention of either denying or rejecting the tradition of the first millennium, to wit: the church as network of mutually communicating churches,” it recognizes.
Vatican I can only be correctly received in light of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council. Vatican II treated questions which had remained open at Vatican I,” it explains. On the question of papal infallibility it cites a Lutheran statement that “infallibility language is not intended to add anything to the authority of the Gospel, but rather to let that authority be recognized without ambiguity.”
3. The document incorporates the interpretations of Protestant and Eastern churches in understanding the Petrine office.
“The Bishop of Rome” summarizes 30 responses to John Paul II’s Ut unum sint and 50 ecumenical dialogue documents on the subject. It is loaded with quotes from the House of Bishops of the Church of England, the Bishops’ Conference of the Church of Sweden, the Presbyterian Church in the USA, the World Council of Churches. It liberally cites documents and dialogues with Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, Old Catholics, Baptists, and Oriental and Eastern Orthodox churches.
For Pope Francis “today the Petrine ministry cannot be fully understood without this openness to dialogue with all believers in Christ,” it emphasis.
4. The document acknowledges universal papal jurisdiction did not exist in the first millennium.
Referring to the fact that the pope did not enjoy universal jurisdiction in the first thousand years of Christianity, the document quotes Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI): “As far as the doctrine of the primacy is concerned, Rome must not require more of the East than was formulated and lived during the first millennium.”
It also cites the Orthodox–Catholic international dialogue on Synodality and Primacy during the First Millennium, which notes “the right of appeal to major sees” but insists that “the bishop of Rome did not exercise canonical authority over the churches of the East.” Moreover, there is no evidence that the Oriental Orthodox Churches even accepted such a ministry.
5. The document acknowledges the response of historic Lutheran confessions to the problem of papal supremacy.
The two most important Lutheran doctrinal treatises on the Petrine office — Papacy: The Smalcald Articles (1537) and the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope (1537) are mentioned favourably in the Vatican document.
The document even quotes the Lutheran reformer Philip Melanchthon who argued that, if the pope “would allow the gospel,” the papacy’s “superiority over the bishops” could be granted iure humano (by human law). The Lutheran–Catholic dialogue in the USA introduced a general concept of “Petrine function,” which is not necessarily tied to a particular see or person, it observes.
6. The document acknowledges that the current model of papacy is itself the biggest obstacle to Christian unity.
Convinced that “the Pope […] is undoubtedly the gravest obstacle on the path of ecumenism,” Pope Paul VI, “by his gestures and statements, contributed in many ways to a new understanding of papal ministry,” the document records.
Pope John Paul II was equally “convinced that a mutually acceptable ministry of unity cannot be defined unilaterally.” Recognizing “we have made little progress in this regard,” Pope Francis has called for a “pastoral conversion” of the papacy, insisting that “today the Petrine ministry cannot be fully understood without this openness to dialogue with all believers in Christ.”
7. The document acknowledges that Pope Francis has been working intentionally towards downgrading papal supremacy.
As me and a few years later Dr. Jules Gomes predicted , Pope Francis was rewriting papal history from the start of his unprecedented Jesuit role and “taking the papacy down a peg or two” when he started shedding papal titles as I clearly indicated in Pope Francis: The Last Pope? “The Bishop of Rome” now admits with this document that this was his strategy from the beginning.
“In line with the pastoral practice of his recent predecessors, the emphasis of Pope Francis on his title of ‘Bishop of Rome’ from the beginning of his pontificate, the other pontifical titles now being listed as ‘historical’ (see Annuario Pontificio 2020), also contributes to a new image of the Petrine ministry,” it concedes.
While the document continues to maintain the historical, political, geographical, and ecclesial centrality of Rome and hence the claims of its bishop to “preside in love,” the ramifications of its “conclusions and methodology are explosive” says Dr. Gomes.
Indeed, the headline of the news story on the said document that appeared in the German bishops’ media last year says it all: “The Papacy should be Transformed from a Stumbling Block into the Cornerstone of Ecumenism,” but in reality this is only the kickstart of a Masonic-inspired project that as I explained in Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 7: From the Occult Roots of the Great Reset to the Populist Roots of The Great Reject, was planned for a very long time in lodges of Freemasonry and the Illuminati. That’s why Pope Francis’s own words reflect a total reversal of the supremacist claims of Pope Pius XI who at Vatican 1 declared that papal supremacy and universal jurisdiction was “supported by the clear witness of Holy Scripture” — a claim debunked by biblical exegesis that was nevertheless considered instrumental for centuries by the Church of Rome.
While Pius XI claimed, “the primacy of Peter over the whole Church,” Pope Francis finally admits that “the Pope is not, by himself, above the Church; but within it as one of the baptized.” But he does it not for setting us free with the truth as revealed in John 8:31-32 but rather to prepare the advent of the “One World Religion” of the Antichrist. Maybe that’s why Pope Pius XI warned that his teaching of papal supremacy was “the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.”
One wonders how Pius XI would react if he knew that 150 years later his successor would call for a reinterpretation of Vatican 1, complaining that “the dogmatic definitions of the First Vatican Council are a significant obstacle for other Christians” — the very followers of Jesus he would have condemned as heretics and schismatics.
As reported by the Jesuits in America, who cite Cardinal Koch, this “renewed understanding and exercise of papal primacy can contribute to the restoration of Christian Unity,” [4] and I’m sure some evangelical or Orthodox Christians might initially think this is a great idea, but of course they ignore the fact this is a Masonic/Jesuit project built for the destruction of Christianity in support of the rise of the ultimate Antichrist. Fortunately, St Malachy’s alleged “Prophesies” tell us that after the last Pope we will have the return of Jesus, so at least we have something to look forward too.
[1] https://stream.org/the-new-vatican-statement-a-ticking-time-bomb/
[2] https://drjulesgomes.substack.com/p/how-pope-francis-planted-a-time-bomb
[3] https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/06/13/bishop-rome-study-document-dicastery-promoting-christian-unity-248153
[4] https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/06/13/bishop-rome-study-document-dicastery-promoting-christian-unity-248153
Don’t miss THE LEO ZAGAMI SHOW/MAGA COUNTER COGNITIVE WARFARE Saturday, March 8, 2025 with Leo & Christy Zagami LIVE at 4 pm PST (5 pm MT/ 6 pm CST/ 7 pm EST) with news, geopolitical, and occult analysis.
Purchase this book now: Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 11: The Past, Present, and Future of Mind Control from Sun Tzu to MK-ULTRA and Beyond:
GET ALSO Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 10: Islamic Freemasonry and the Secret Societies Behind the Eternal Conflict in the Middle East
Don’t forget the groundbreaking Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 9: Seven Steps to The Secrets of the New World Disorder from Transhumanism and Immortality to Gnostic Jesus, UFOs, and Insect Witchcraft
A shocking book about the real Hollywood Illuminati: Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 8: From the Rise of the Antichrist To the Sound of the Devil and the Great Reset
And don’t miss the amazing Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 7: From the Occult Roots of the Great Reset to the Populist Roots
SUPPORT LEO’S WORK BY BUYING HIS BOOKS!!!
Leo Zagami is the author of the groundbreaking book Confessions of an Illuminati Vol. 6.66 The Age of Cyber Satan, Artificial Intelligence, and Robotics
GET also Confessions of an Illuminati Volume 5: The Decline of the West and the Rise of Satanism in our Society with a brand-new chapter on the CCP virus and The End Times
And don’t forget also Confessions of an Illuminati Vol. 4, American Renaissance 2.0 and The Missing Link From the Invisible World