The director of the Holy See Press Office, Matteo Bruni, states that he was unaware of the letters published this week regarding the traditional pilgrimage Ad Petri Sedem, letters that contradict the explanation given by the Vatican to justify why the pilgrims were not allowed to enter St. Peter’s Basilica. As reported on Thursday, October 29 by The Pillar, the spokesperson replied that he had no “record of any relevant correspondence”, in words translated from English by this editorial team, such as the following.
The Vatican explanation became known on Monday the 26th. A spokesperson for the Holy See then told the same outlet that only the procession had been denied and that, if the group wanted a time of adoration or prayer inside the basilica, “they should have submitted a specific request for that purpose”. Journalist Diane Montagna, who identifies that spokesperson with Bruni, also reports that, according to The Pillar, the Secretariat of State’s denial referred exclusively to the procession, because it is normally not permitted, even for dioceses arriving in Rome on pilgrimage.
The letters released on Wednesday the 28th by the Italian blog Messa in Latino paint a different sequence. On June 12, the chaplain of the pilgrimage, French priest Claude Barthe, asked Leo XIV to renew permission to celebrate the traditional Mass in St. Peter’s. On August 7, the substitute of the Secretariat of State, Archbishop Paolo Rudelli, replied that they could not accommodate the request that year. On September 8, Barthe reduced the request: he asked that the pilgrims be allowed to enter the basilica in procession, pray for the Pope before the Altar of the Confession, and adore the Blessed Sacrament at the Altar of the Chair, at one o’clock in the afternoon, the time that, according to what he wrote, the sacristy had indicated to them. Rudelli responded on September 30 that it was not possible to grant the request favorably. Neither of the two responses gives a reason.
The September letter, therefore, did mention prayer before the Apostle’s tomb and eucharistic adoration, and not only the procession. Montagna maintains in her newsletter that the correspondence disproves the version that the request was not specific enough, and raises the point that, if the denial affected only the procession, it remains unexplained why the Secretariat of State said nothing about the prayer and adoration, which had also been requested. The Pillar itself admits that the September 8 letter appears to show that the organizers did provide the details that, according to the Vatican, were missing.
On Saturday, October 24, the pilgrims’ procession stopped beside the obelisk in St. Peter’s Square, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s Mass was celebrated in the Basilica of Saint Mary Major. A year earlier, in October 2025, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke had celebrated the traditional Mass at the Altar of the Chair in St. Peter’s with the Pope’s authorization.
The question of who made the decision also remains open. Both letters from the Secretariat of State bear the substitute’s signature, not the Pope’s. The auxiliary bishop of ’s-Hertogenbosch in the Netherlands, Rob Mutsaerts, said in an interview with Michael Matt of The Remnant, aired on Monday the 26th and reported by LifeSiteNews, that it is not known who decided to prevent the pilgrims from entering and that it may have been the Pontiff’s entourage, people appointed by his predecessor. Mutsaerts said he cannot imagine Leo XIV making that decision personally, but added: “In the end, he is the one responsible”. In his view, there was no good reason to give the pilgrims such a slight, and he said he did not understand the hostility toward a Mass attended by families, young people, and devout persons.
Bruni’s response does not clarify whether the Press Office was aware of the letters when it explained the denial, nor whether it intends to correct its version. Nor does it explain why the Vatican attributed to the organizers a lack of specificity that the September 8 letter does not reflect.
The Vatican said the pilgrims should have expressly requested to pray in St. Peter’s; they had requested it in writing on September 8, and now its spokesperson says he is unaware of that letter.
Read also
- Barthe asked the Pope to renew the traditional Mass in St. Peter’s: Rudelli replied twice that he could not
- The organizers of Ad Petri Sedem clarify the restrictions on Schneider’s Mass in Saint Mary Major
- Mutsaerts responds to Roche: “Why is every ancient liturgy a treasure except the ancient Roman rite?”