Hildegard Allegedly Receiving a Vision (Wikipedia)
The SSPX ‘Latin Mass’ bishops asked the Vatican to repeal their excommunication:
Following schism, SSPX leaders must work for unity
July 14, 2026
Church unity does not mean everyone holding hands singing “Kumbaya.” It also doesn’t mean pretending a problem doesn’t exist.
Sometimes it means telling people they are out because they did not abide by the rules.
That’s what Pope Leo XIV recently did with the Society of St. Pius X, known as SSPX, known for celebrating the Latin Mass and rejecting some of the church’s Vatican II reforms.
In a move not done lightly July 2, the Vatican announced that the SSPX clergy had brought upon themselves an automatic, or latae sententiae, excommunication because they consecrated bishops without papal approval. It also said the group was in schism with the Catholic Church and that sacraments of penance and matrimony administered by SSPX priests were invalid, and lay Catholics who “adhere formally” to the group were similarly excommunicated. https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/editorial/editorial-following-schism-sspx-leaders-must-work-unity
July 14, 2026
The Society of Saint Pius X has issued its formal response to the Holy See’s Decree of excommunication, thus initiating a process which results in the temporary suspension of the penalties of the Decree.
On 11 July, the Society sent a “preliminary recourse” to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), marking its formal response to the 2 July Decree from the Dicastery regarding the penalty of automatic excommunication incurred by the six SSPX bishops. News of the appeal was published on the evening of 13 July. https://thecatholicherald.com/article/sspx-makes-canonical-appeal-against-excommunication
The SSPX group, among other things, wants to continue to have ‘mass’ in Latin (see Pope Leo XIV excommunicates SSPX bishops–but was Latin Mass original?).
A reader sent me a link to an article in Italian (https://share.google/jIFadphM5B2Pt5a7f) that I machine-translated. Here are some excerpts from it (bolding from the original):
The Church will give birth to the Antichrist: Hildegard of Bingen and the ecclesiology of the SSPX
The episcopal consecrations of the SSPX and all the arguments for and against them have brought back to the forefront an old ecclesiological conviction of Lefebvre’s followers: the opposition between a supposed “Eternal Rome,” traditional and orthodox, and a “Conciliar Rome,” modernist and heretical. … Nevertheless, it is not entirely without foundation. Its strength stems from a genuine intuition that, unfortunately, is often trapped within an insufficient doctrinal framework.
This intuition consists of recognizing that the Church’s final crisis will not come exclusively from outside. The mystery of iniquity will not manifest itself solely in the form of external persecution, a pagan emperor, or a power hostile to Christianity. Biblical and patristic tradition has always considered the possibility of internal corruption, of a trial that would affect the Church itself throughout its historical existence.
Many contemporary Catholics seem uneasy with this prospect. Accustomed—since the Council of Trent—to a defensive apologetics that equates any reference to ecclesial apostasy with a concession to Protestantism, they prefer to deny the problem rather than confront it. But the issue does not disappear by ignoring it. … St. Paul foretold a great apostasy and the manifestation of the Man of Lawlessness before the end of time ….
Father Julio Meinvielle articulated this tension through the well-known image of a Church of Promises and a Church of Propaganda. … The importance of this insight lies in the fact that it does not attempt to resolve the problem through an artificial separation between a true Church and a false one. The mystery remains open precisely because both dimensions coexist within the same visible reality .
It is here that one of the most extraordinary figures of Christendom acquires particular relevance. Saint Hildegard of Bingen was neither a marginal visionary nor a popular prophetess of dubious reputation. A Benedictine abbess, advisor to emperors and popes, and author of theological, scientific, and musical treatises, she occupied an exceptional place in the intellectual and religious life of the 12th century. Despite her immense authority throughout Christendom, during the Protestant Reformation, Lutherans used her figure to attack the papacy: indeed, some of the saint’s exegetical interpretations suggested a profound connection between the Church and the Antichrist . This earned her centuries of ostracism, during which her work was relegated as suspect. However, in 2012, Pope Benedict XVI rescued her from her Lutheran oppression, canonizing her and proclaiming her a Doctor of the Church.
It is worth pausing for a moment to consider this fact, as it is not merely an honorary distinction. Through it, the Church recognizes in an author a doctrinal eminence particularly worthy of being proposed to the faithful. It is difficult to imagine that Joseph Ratzinger, one of the greatest modern scholars of patristic and medieval tradition, was unaware of one of the most famous and unsettling visions in Scivias : the one in which the Antichrist is born of the Church .
This is worth bearing in mind, especially for those who diagnose “anti-Papism” with the same certainty that medieval physicians used to diagnose imbalances of the humors. The idea that the Church will undergo a profound eschatological crisis born from within does not originate from some traditionalist blog, a conspiracy theory, or a contemporary apocalyptic extravaganza. It is part of the work of a Doctor of the Church whose teaching was explicitly proposed by Benedict XVI to all Christians. It is a pity that the Lefebvrist world cannot rely too heavily on Hildegard precisely here, where it would be most advantageous, since the saint’s authority depends on canonizations whose validity it tends to question.
The vision that interests us appears in Book III of the Scivias , dedicated to the history of salvation and the consummation of time. Hildegard contemplates an immense female figure representing the Church. The woman appears crowned and glorious, clothed in celestial dignity. However, when the gaze descends from the navel downward, the image begins to transform. There appear wounds, scales, stains, and deformities that symbolize the accumulated sins of the children of the Church throughout history. And then something unprecedented occurs. Precisely in the place “where the woman is distinguished,” a monstrous black head emerges, with fiery eyes, donkey ears, and leonine jaws: … from her very heart emerges the monstrous head of the Antichrist.
The Antichrist does not appear as a reality entirely external to the Church. … two distinct Churches … identifying the Antichrist with the Papacy. …
Father Leonardo Castellani also understood the importance of this problem. … Particularly the insight that allows us to understand the dramatic relationship between the historical Church and the figure of the Great Harlot …
If the faithful Church could simply separate itself from the corrupt Church, the problem would be relatively simple . It would be enough to abandon the decadent structure and gather around the small remnant of the elect. …
Herein lies the true scandal. The ultimate test will not be choosing between two Churches. It will be remaining faithful to the one true Church precisely when its wounds become visible to all. …
Hildegard’s vision … many of her children become instruments of the mystery of iniquity. The monstrous head emerges from her womb, but never takes her place. For the Antichrist may be born alongside Peter, may make use of Peter, and even benefit from Peter’s errors; but he will never be Peter.
The above is discussing a tale between two Roman Catholic churches (which is what the above article pushes–and I edited out much of that).
However, the real issue to consider is a tale of the true church verses false ones.
So, in a sense, one could say that the “ultimate test” for those wishing to be true Christians is choosing between the corrupt church and the faithful “small remnant of the elect.”
This has been an issue throughout the church age.
This type of thing actually was reported in some detail when it occurred in Jerusalem about 135 A.D.
At that time, professed Christians had a choice to make. Because of the Jewish Bar Kokhba revolt, Emperor Hadrian declared one had to work on the Sabbath in order to live in Jerusalem (which Hadrian renamed Aelia Capitolina).
The Christians had a choice: either to remain under the direction of a relative of Jesus known as Judas Kyriakos and flee elsewhere or compromise and follow Marcus of Jerusalem and not flee.
History records that most made the wrong choice. Actually, much of this was the subject of the sermon I gave last Sabbath:
The Eastern Orthodox Church claims that Mark/Markus/Marcus of Jerusalem was the 16th bishop of Jerusalem with true apostolic succession. While the Roman Catholic Church and the Continuing Church of God accept that the previous 15 bishops/pastors/overseers had that succession, we do not accept that Marcus does. Marcus arose after the Jewish Bar Kokhba revolt (c. 132-135 A.D.). According to sources, he endorsed lawlessness and persuaded professors to Christ to abandon apostolic teachings in order to remain in Jerusalem after Emperor Hadrian made decrees against practices such as the Sabbath, Passover, and teaching the law in the Bible. Those leaders prior to Marcus reportedly had the truth in purity and the “standard of orthodoxy,’ but Marcus changed that. Were his changed practices adopted by others? Was cowardice, to not offend the Roman Empire, a factor? What about Justin Martyr and Sunday? Did true Christians go along with Marcus or did they flee? Were any persecuted who held to the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3)? Did the faithful retain what is called aspects of the Mosiac law like the Sabbath, Passover on the 14th, and avoiding unclean meat? Were people like Marcus warned against by Jude 4? What were reasons that the Romans liked Sunday? Why is Easter not Passover? Did Thebuthis rebel against church governance? Did Markus’ example impact other, such as those in Athens? Could Mark’s actions been a factor in the later formation of the Greco-Roman Catholic confederation? Did the Romans want Christians to eat biblically unclean animals? Did the faithful Nazarene Christians flee and separate from the compromisers that followed Marcus? Did Marcus’ decision lead to the writing of false gospels? Despite Marcus’ takeover, did Irenaeus claim Jerusalem was no longer profitable to produce good fruit? Was not relying on proper church leadership and the word of God what led to Marcus’ rise as well as that of the Greco-Roman confederation? Dr. Thiel addresses these issues and more in this sermon.
Here is a link to the sermon: Marcus of Jerusalem: Apostate or Apostolic Successor?
Sadly, instead of learning from that, most people in the end time will also choose to follow the Beast and final Antichrist.
The mystic Hildegard, who died in 1179, clearly had visions of various types that often seem to be opposed to Bible prophecy.
Here is one from her:
Antichrist will make the earth move, level mountains, dry up rivers, produce thunder and lightning and hail … (Culleton, The Reign of Antichrist, p. 129)
Yet, the Bible does not teach that Antichrist “make the earth move, level mountains, dry up rivers, produce thunder and lightnings and hail.” The Bible teaches that God will have this done during the Day of the Lord (Revelation 16:12, 17-21).
Furthermore, she also taught:
Antichrist … His doctrine of faith will be taken from the Jewish religion and seemingly will not differ much from the fundamental beliefs of Christianity, for he will teach that there is one God who created the world, who rewards the obeyers of his commands and trespassers he chastises, who will raise all from the dead in due time. (Culleton, p. 127)
Yet, because the original Christian faith was more “Jewish” than Roman Catholics now accept, and that Jesus said His followers would be rewarded (Matthew 16:17), plus the Bible further shows that God will resurrect everyone else after the millennium (Revelation 20:5,13), this is certainly something that we would expect Jesus, NOT THE ANTICHRIST, to teach. True Christianity is not a doctrine or Antichrist. Jesus, of course, practiced the “Jewish” religion, but the way that God, not certain rabbis, intended for it to be practiced.
Roman Catholics need to understand that some of their prophets (such as their ‘doctor’ Hildegard) are really warning against the returning Jesus Christ, and are referring to Him as Antichrist. Please do not be taken in by that.
Furthermore, Hildegard also claimed the following in another vision:
And fly from those who linger in caves and are cloistered supporters of the Devil. Woe to them, woe to them who remain thus! They are the Devil’s very viscera, and the advance guard of the son of perdition.
Therefore, O you My beloved children, avoid them with all devotion and with all the strength of your souls and bodies. For the ancient serpent feeds and clothes them by his arts, and they worship him as God and trust in his false deceptions … Because they are afraid of My people, they do not openly resist these institutions of Mine, but in their hearts and their deeds they hold them as nothing. By devilish illusion, they pretend to have sanctity; but they are deceived by the Devil, for if he were to show himself to them openly they would understand him and flee him … But because the Devil knows he has only a short time for his error, he is not hastening to perfect infidelity in his members; you, you evil deceivers, who labor to subvert the Catholic faith. (Hildegard of Bingen. Scivias. Paulist Press, Mahwah (NJ), pp. 301-302)
Hildegard’s teaching that the Christians in something that sounds like the biblical place of safety in the wilderness (Revelation 12:14-16; see also There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians. Why it May Be Near Petra), as well as those that support them, are tools of Satan. That is something that should concern all who believe Church of God doctrines.
Notice what my book 2012 and the Rise of the Secret Sect (written in 2009) points out the following related to Hildegard’s prophecy:
It would appear that the mystic was demonically-influenced as she is actually warning against supporting the true Philadelphian pacifist Christians (something that may happen, as some might try to join them per Isaiah 56:8). It is the Philadelphians who will be protected, yet she seems to be claiming that they are the “supporters of the Devil” (probably because they will oppose the final revised ecumenical church and because that church will have persecuted them). Because she calls them “the advanced guard of the son of perdition,” she apparently refers to a group of people who will be protected in caves just before Christ returns.
Notice also that she specifically warns against religious people in caves who are miraculously fed.
Yet she must not have realized that the Bible indicates that those who receive God’s protection in the wilderness during the end time (Revelation 12:14–16), and are in caves (Jeremiah 48:28), are His people (Isaiah 16:1–4 in Sela/Petra), will be religious (Revelation 14:12), and will be miraculously fed (Isaiah 33:15-16). Hence, the above vision does indicate that even the demons have known about a place of protection where some people will be miraculously fed, for quite some time.
However, those associated with the King of the North will then turn their attention to the rest of her seed, the non-Philadelphian Christians (which will be a “secret sect,” but will try to remain hidden, most likely, to avoid this persecution).
Even a commentator’s note in the Rheims New Testament (a Roman Catholic translation) agrees that the Church goes to a wilderness location:
The Church shall flee as to a desert in Antichrist’s time, but not decay or be unknown, no not for
so short a time.
Early Catholic leaders such as Irenaeus, Hippolytus, and Cyril also believed this. Hence Hildegard is once again not even faithful to Catholic positions on prophetic matters.
Furthermore, notice:
Bishop St. Victorinus (2nd century): But the woman fled into the wilderness, and there were given to her two great eagle’s wings…to that…church…let them go to that place which they have ready, and let them be supported there for three years and six months from the presence of the devil.
Thus, the idea of true Christians fleeing, being supported, and being away from the devil for 3 ½ years is consistent with both biblical and certain Roman Catholic teachings. No one should rely on Hildegard’s false admonition. The Greek Orthodox also tend to believe that the faithful will flee to caves in the desert/wilderness for 3 ½ years.
Hildegard was been exalted by the Roman Catholic Church as a “saint” and “doctor” of their church.
Perhaps I should point out that Hildegard herself wondered if her visions were of demonic source at times. I suspect that many were.
Notice also:
Hildegard of Bingen (The italicized words are a vision she claims to have seen, while the non-italicized words are her explanation): After this I saw the image of a woman as large as a great city, with a wonderful crown on her head and arms from which a spendor hung like sleeves, shining from Heaven to earth. Her womb was pierced like a net with many openings, with a huge multitude of peole running in and out…I could not make out her attire, except that she was arrayed in great spendor and gleamed with lucid serenity, and on her breast shone a red glow like the dawn; and I heard a sound of all kinds of music singing about her, “Like the dawn, greatly sparkling.” And that image spreads out its splendor like a garment, saying, “I must conceive and give birth!” And at once, like lightning, there hastened to her a multitude of angels, making steps and seats within her for people, by whom the image was to be perfected..
.Wherefore now you see the image of a woman as large as a great city; this designates the Bridge of My Son, who always bears her children by regeneration in the Spirit and in water, for the strong Warrior founded her on a wide base of virtue, that she might hold and perfect the great crowd of His elect; and no enemy can conquer or storm her…
Her womb was pierced like a net with many openings, with a huge multitude of people running in and out; that is, she displays her maternal kindness. … And thus the Church is the virginal mother of all Christians, since by the mystery of the Holy Spirit she conceives and bears them … So she, beningly gazing on them, says in a sad voice that these children of hers will return again to dust. (Hildegard of Bingen. Scivias. Paulist Press, Mahwah (NJ), pp. 169-175).
Additionally, notice:
Hildegard of course gives us several pictures of the end times. But the one that was most .. powerful, I think, is the picture in her book Scivias, the visionary book that she wrote in the 1140s. And this is a series of visions, many of the connected with the heavenly world, but others dealing with the course of history. One of these famous images is the picture of the kingdoms of the end time and the birth of Antichrist from the Church. This is a powerful image of a vast female figure representing the Church, with this horrible monstrous head being born from the woman. And that of course is the image of the Antichrist, who will be born from the Church, who will persecute believing Christians, and who will try to pretend that he is divine by ascending into heaven. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/explanation/legend.html accessed 07/14/26
So, Hildegard of Bingen indicated that the final Antichrist would come out of her church. And she is right about that. In addition to long being opposed to the original Christian faith, the final Antichrist will, in my view, feign some version of Roman Catholicism.
Although Hildegard was correct to suggest that the final Antichrist would arise from her church, many of her professed positions that were apparently opposed to biblical and certain Greco-Roman understandings of end time events.
There is still a choice today: the true Church of God or one of the Greco-Roman ones that departed from the original faith.
Some items of possibly related interest may include:
Attending the Church of Choice This article discusses whose choice is important to worship God; should you attend the church of your choice or the church of God’s choice?
Marcus of Jerusalem: Apostolic successor or apostate? Marcus is claimed to have been the 16th bishop of Jerusalem, but did he get his position from faithfulness or political compromise? Here is a link to a related sermon: Marcus of Jerusalem: Apostate or Apostolic Successor?
Judas Kyriakos vs. Marcus of Jerusalem: Which was an apostolic successor and which was an apostate? Mark of Judah Kyriakos? What did they stand for? Could apostolic succession for Jerusalem transferred to Mesopotamia for a time?
Beliefs of the Original Catholic Church: Could a remnant group have continuing apostolic succession? Did the original “catholic church” have doctrines held by the Continuing Church of God? Did Church of God leaders uses the term “catholic church” to ever describe the church they were part of? Here are links to related sermons: Original Catholic Church of God?, Original Catholic Doctrine: Creed, Liturgy, Baptism, Passover, What Type of Catholic was Polycarp of Smyrna?, Tradition, Holy Days, Salvation, Dress, & Celibacy, Early Heresies and Heretics, Doctrines: 3 Days, Abortion, Ecumenism, Meats, Tithes, Crosses, Destiny, and more, Saturday or Sunday?, The Godhead, Apostolic Laying on of Hands Succession, Church in the Wilderness Apostolic Succession List, Holy Mother Church and Heresies, and Lying Wonders and Original Beliefs. Here is a link to that book in the Spanish language: Creencias de la iglesia Católica original.
Some Doctrines of Antichrist Are there any doctrines taught outside the Churches of God which can be considered as doctrines of antichrist? This article suggests at least three. It also provides information on 666 and the identity of “the false prophet.” Plus it shows that several Roman Catholic writers seem to warn about an ecumenical antipope that will support heresy. You can also watch a video titled What Does the Bible teach about the Antichrist?
Satan’s Plan Does Satan have a plan? What is it? Has it already been successful? Will it be successful in the future? Here are links to a two-part sermon series: What are Some of the Parts of Satan’s Plan? and Satan’s Plan is More Dramatic than Many Realize.
Do Certain Roman Catholic Prophecies About Antichrist Warn Against Jesus? Will the final “Anti-Christ” be Jewish, insist on Saturday, be opposed to the trinity, and bring in the millennium? Certain Catholic writings indicate this, while others take a different view, but what does the Bible show? A related sermon is Will Jesus Christ be called the Antichrist?
Greco-Roman Catholic Prophecies: Do They Mirror, Highlight, or Contradict Biblical Prophecies? People of all faiths may be surprised to see what various Roman and Orthodox Catholic prophets have been predicting as many of their predictions will be looked to in the 21st century.
There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians. Why it May Be Near Petra This article discusses a biblical ‘place of safety,’ Zephaniah 2 to ‘gather together,’ and includes quotes from the Bible and Herbert W. Armstrong on fleeing to a place–thus, there is a biblically supported alternative to the rapture theory. Two sermon-length videos of related interest are available Physical Protection During the Great Tribulation and Might Petra be the Place of Safety? Here is something related in the Spanish language: Hay un lugar de seguridad para los Filadelfinos. ¿Puede ser Petra?