Leo XIV, American independence and the nation-state.
On July 4, Leo XIV took advantage of the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the United States of America —his country of origin— to highlight some of the Holy See’s positions in today’s world. He rejected the invitation to participate in the celebrations organized and, instead, visited Lampedusa. There, he proposed that the European Union adopt an immigration policy different from the American one, which, if adopted, would return to the Old Continent a role of political and moral leadership on the world stage. Later that night he accepted the invitation to the dinner offered by the United States Embassy to the Vatican.
The day before, Prevost had delivered a speech accepting the Medal of Freedom awarded by the National Constitution Center of Philadelphia, an institution dedicated to promoting education in the constitutional values of the United States. He focused on the fundamental theme of the founding of the United States: the protection of human dignity through the guarantee of fundamental rights. He pointed out as an inevitable premise the respect for human life, which, from conception to natural death, must obviously be manifested above all in the protection of migrants and the rejection of war.
In the letter Leo XIV addressed to all Americans on June 25 to commemorate the founding of the nation, in a reference to the encyclical Sapientiae christianae, published by Leo XIII in January 1890. The document of his predecessor marked a turning point in the Church’s stance precisely regarding the formation of nation-states. Leo XIII resolved the conflict by recalling that the nation-state was part of the natural law that the Creator established to organize human society. On the question of the army, Leo XIII offered a detailed and complex response. First, he argued that “a good citizen cannot doubt that he must give his life for his country,” thus recognizing the organization of military service imposed by the nation-state as a form of self-defense. Then, by specifying that love of country was subordinate to love of the Church, he ultimately attributed to the latter the final judgment on the morality of decisions made regarding the exercise of military violence.
Leo XIII was consistent with the doctrine of just war. This granted rulers the unquestionable power to decide whether or not to initiate hostilities. Thus, acceptance of the nation-state also translated into the justification of any war that its leaders decided to undertake, leaving the Church only the faculty to issue subsequent moral judgments. Leo XIV reiterates the text of his homonymous predecessor to reaffirm that the nation-state is governed by natural law, as interpreted by the Church. The affirmation of national identity remains one of the elements of the historical development of the contemporary era that the Church applauds. Leo XIV emphasizes that it finds its proper expression within the State not so much because it raises a mass army to defend it, but because it promotes that human dignity.
Cardinal Lopez Romero: an isolated case?
Signed on July 6 and published on the 8th, the diocesan statement bears the signature of Cardinal Cristóbal López Romero, Archbishop of Rabat (Morocco). The cardinal announces to his faithful that Rome has initiated an investigation into a complaint of inappropriate conduct toward adult women. The France-Presse agency, as reported by La Croix (July 7), mentions five complainants. The complaints, which reached the apostolic nunciature in April, are being handled by the vicar general, Marc Helfer, who, regarding the incidents, stated: “We do not know if these are really sexual assaults, but no one is covering anything up.” The cardinal: “I have already responded to my ecclesiastical superiors, with whom I will continue to cooperate fully in the investigation.” He also stated that he has not committed any assault, act of violence, or sexual harassment.
The diocese, which represents 1% of the population and has already faced two accusations of clerical abuse (A. Exelmans and Y. Grosjean), now deals with a much more serious accusation involving its own bishop. We all know that Pope Francis’s cardinal appointments were born of impulses not always documented. We have cases of resignation once appointed upon discovering there were problems. The inevitable question is whether we are facing an isolated case, or whether we have a College of Cardinals very much affected and with figures whom we hope will retire as soon as possible. Cristóbal of Rabat will be tried by a civil court composed of Muslims; it will be interesting to follow the case. In May 2027 he turns 75; this situation will be prolonged and an attempt will be made to cover it up with a discreet acceptance of resignation. We are talking about a cardinal with the right to vote who has recently voted. Does the Church deserve to be in these hands?
Espionage in the Vatican.
Two former agents of the Italian secret service have been arrested in Rome accused of selling classified information to Russian military intelligence for years. It is a case of espionage, like so many others to which Europe has been exposed, but among the documents of the investigation there is a detail that directly concerns the Holy See: according to a wiretap published by Corriere della Sera, the Russians supposedly instructed their informant —in writing— to work “with the Vatican.” And, allegedly, he did so. The use of diplomatic cover is a common practice in espionage: the agent operates formally as an embassy official and enjoys immunity, which means that, if discovered, he cannot be arrested, but only expelled. The method seems to have been taken from a Soviet manual: meetings on benches in coastal towns along the Lazio coast —Bracciano, Santa Marinella—, notes on paper with requests from superiors in Moscow, micro SD cards hidden in wall cavities, envelopes with cash. The price list: four thousand euros for each file submitted. During the searches, approximately twenty thousand euros in cash were found in the suspects’ homes.
On October 9, 2025, the Carabinieri recorded one of the meetings between Piras and Astakhov, on a bench at the Bracciano viewpoint. The former agent complained about his remuneration, accused the Russian of having paid his own expenses and reminded him of a specific mission he had received in the past: when “you, together with the general” had ordered him in writing to proceed “with the Vatican,” he had done so, even having to make “a contribution to Pope Francis.”
What is unknown is the specific content of the activity indicated as carried out “with the Vatican.” The documents known to date do not clarify whether it involved gathering information on papal diplomacy, establishing access to curial circles through donations and contacts, monitoring people or offices, providing information on people considered sensitive, or following or intercepting prelates, laypeople or journalists. It is not even clear to whom that “alms” was really paid. It is not clear whether there was any kind of collaboration with members of the Gendarmerie.
Advisor to the supervision of the Vatican Bank.
The Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR) has announced the appointment of Marina Natale as a new member of its Supervisory Council. Natale has more than thirty years of experience at the highest levels of the banking and financial sector. “Her outstanding experience and leadership skills, acquired at the highest levels of the European banking and financial system, will allow the Institute to continue strengthening its governance,” commented François Pauly, president of the IOR’s Council of Superintendence, emphasizing that Natale’s appointment represents “an important contribution to achieving the IOR’s objectives, in accordance with the principles of transparency, accountability and integrity” that guide the Institute’s actions. Well, we will see and we will report; little hope,
The validity of the sacraments.
The note, Fernández says: “Finally, the holy People of God are warned that the sacred ministers of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X administer the sacraments illicitly, and that the sacrament of penance administered by them and the marriages they officiate are invalid.”
The Church has always allowed even excommunicated priests to administer the sacraments in emergency situations, such as the imminent danger of death of the recipient. The Church has always prioritized the salvation of souls over strict observance of penalties in emergency situations. Canon 976 of the Code of Canon Law states: “Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he validly and licitly absolves any penitent who is in danger of death from any censure and sin, even if an authorized priest is present.” Canon 1335 § 2 confirms this principle: “If a censure prohibits the celebration of the sacraments or sacramentals or the performance of acts proper to the power of governance, the prohibition is suspended whenever it is necessary to attend to the faithful who are in danger of death.”
Müller: “The note of the dicastery, which appears only in the explanatory notes, is not clear.” “The authority to forgive sins is conferred by Christ himself in the sacrament of Holy Orders, not by the Pope through his primacy of jurisdiction, since Orthodox priests also validly grant absolution.” “The Pope can only prohibit the exercise of this authority and reserve certain sins for his own absolution, such as, for example, the sin against the unity of the Church committed through an unauthorized episcopal consecration.”
Although Müller stated that the sacraments administered by the SSPX are valid, he stressed that they remain “prohibited.” “The faithful must stay away from a community that is in open conflict or whose leader… is in open conflict and disobeys the Pope,” the faithful must “simply attend Holy Mass where the bishops and priests are in full communion with the Pope.” “When it comes to marriage, it is a bit more complicated, because marriage, after all, is contracted before God through the consent of the spouses.” “But the Church, for very good reasons, has also established the external form, although in certain circumstances a dispensation from the formal requirement may be granted.” “In China, people who wish to marry but cannot go to a priest without going to prison can, of course, according to their conscience before God, contract an indissoluble marriage, and this is valid.” “But in this particular case [of the SSPX], I would advise against having the marriage ceremony celebrated by a priest who is not in full communion with the Church, because, after all, the priest is the witness who represents the Church.”
The confusion of the faithful.
The extremely severe measures of the Vatican regarding the consecrations never cease to attract attention, however justified they may be. The Vatican has refused to apply excommunication in numerous very serious situations within the Church over the last 60 years. One can publicly deny the Catholic faith, celebrate scandalous Masses, show approval of same-sex couples, divorce and other forms of immorality. However, since the Second Vatican Council, these actions have not entailed the excommunication of those who committed them. And, undoubtedly, it is extreme and unusual that the Vatican not only excommunicates the bishops of the SSPX, but hundreds of thousands of Catholic faithful.
How is it possible that Pope Leo XIII takes such extreme measures? Even the secular media have been astonished by what they describe as “severe and unprecedented.” The contrast between the treatment received by declared heretics within the Church and that of traditional Catholics seems to indicate that Rome suffers from a certain syndrome of uprooting from tradition. What Rome does not want to see in the Church is that the New Mass or the Second Vatican Council be questioned. It does not want the traditionalist movement to have the means to continue. It does not want the lay faithful to be traditional Catholics. There is a sector of the Church that is in full growth today, full of good and devout Catholics and numerous Catholic families, while the rest of the Church is dying. And this is the sector of the Church that the Pope punishes harshly. Rome is exerting enormous pressure on the faithful to stop attending the SSPX and integrate into the conciliar Church. Instead of promising them that they will begin to combat heresy and guarantee them the practice of traditional Catholic faith, they offer them full communion in exchange for becoming Catholics of the Second Vatican Council.
On the Latin Mass.
For those interested in sacred music, liturgy and liturgical Latin, it is unpleasant and painful to note that, once again, the so-called “Lefebvrians” have been defined as supporters of the “Latin Mass”: this time in a way that is not only superficial, but completely erroneous. Given that the true causes of the conflict between Rome and the Fraternityare mainly of a doctrinal nature, as evidenced in the so-called “profession of faith” sent to Rome by the Superior.
It is unacceptable to contrast the Latin liturgy with the Second Vatican Council. This council, in fact, affirmed that the liturgy should be celebrated in Latin, granting, especially in the readings and admonitions, greater space for national languages ( Sacrosanctum Concilium, n. 36), and also requiring that priests, except in isolated cases, recite the Divine Office (now called the “Liturgy of the Hours”) in Latin and not in the local languages. The elimination of Latin from the liturgy is not at all a requirement of Vatican II, but is evidently a case of those distorted applications of the conciliar texts that Joseph Ratzinger, first as a professor, then as a cardinal and finally as Benedict XVI, repeatedly pointed out since the 1980s. The mere fact that all the Popes after the Second Vatican Council celebrated Mass in Latin is a convincing demonstration of this: if the decisive point were Latin, considering that Leo XIV, like his predecessors, frequently celebrated Mass in Latin, where would the conflict be?
Vatican II ended in 1965, and only in 1969 did Paul VI promulgate the new Roman Missal, followed quickly by the new texts for the Office. The Council of Trent (1545-1563) did not develop a “new Mass”: in 1570, Pius V indicated the usual form of the Missal used in Rome as the normative text, but, as is known, the possibility of using other forms was guaranteed to those who could demonstrate a ritual antiquity of at least two centuries, evidently to avoid the infiltration of Protestant-style rites. Leaving aside the question of the form of the rite, authoritatively recalled by Cardinal Müller, and limiting ourselves to the question of language, the press campaigns urging the Church to give greater space to Latin are understandable, but all this has nothing to do with the consecrations of the Society of Saint Pius X. We defend Latin, of course, the language that united the West and Catholicism; but let us do so, please, with solid reasons and not based on historical fantasies or nonexistent foundations.
The traditional movements in France.
After the break between the Society of Saint Pius X and Rome, traditionalist Catholics in France are adopting a clear stance: they reaffirm their loyalty to the Pontiff and participate in the preparations for his visit to France. The recent ordinations of the Society of Saint Pius X in Écône, Switzerland, and the subsequent excommunications have worried many, says Philippe Darantière, president of the association Notre-Dame de Chrétienté, which organizes each year the traditional Pentecost pilgrimage from Paris to Chartres. “It is not always easy to maintain tradition and, at the same time, unity with the ecclesiastical hierarchy, he explains” and hopes to count on the goodwill of the French bishops. French traditionalists actively participate in the preparations for the Pope’s visit to France from September 25 to 28. Among the participants is the organization Notre-Dame de Chrétienté. Darantière explained that the Archdiocese of Paris requested his organization to participate in the preparations for the papal visit. Around 10,000 volunteers are needed. Notre-Dame de Chrétienté was contacted because of its experience in large-scale events; nearly 20,000 people participate in its annual pilgrimage.
The ‘Trumpet of Jericho’.
Unresolved tensions.
It is regrettable that today priests are concerned with petty political issues, trying to appear pastoral. The clergy should stay out of politics, for Christ did not call them to that. Their mission is to protect the faithful from the current political nightmare, which leads humanity to bow to such trivial issues as climate action and the inclusion of “migrants.” All this political uproar is based on the search to ingratiate oneself with the globalists of the UN; it seems that planetary idolatry has replaced divine worship, thanks to all the political manipulation. Much of what they do today has political motivations, trying to distance people from tradition while selling them modernist heresies. Political brainwashing has reached the very heart of the Church and is perhaps the most regrettable evil of our time, since it attacks the souls of men and often leads them to perdition.
The decree and the corresponding explanatory note on the Écône consecrations from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith represent a litmus test for detecting unresolved tensions. Speaking of schism is referring to a problem of disobedience to papal authority. As if being Catholic simply meant being “Roman.” Here we are, once again caught in the whirlwind of an absolutist vision of the Petrine ministry. The Lefebvrist case is discredited, even in Vatican media: an act of disobedience to the Pope. By doing so, all the decades of reflection on the ecumenical conversion of the papacy are deliberately set aside.
The images of Écône may have caused a positive impression on many young Catholic priests today because of the way the liturgy was celebrated. It is evident that a certain resurgence of fascination with tradition is occurring among the young clergy; it is enough to take a look at some publications that circulate abundantly. The decadence in the worship of most of our parishes cannot attract anyone; it is endured, but never enjoyed as would be natural.
The real problem is that, simply by the inexorable passage of time, traditional priests have the advantage. Pretending to eliminate by means of decrees an overflowing life is impossible; history proves it again and again. We very much fear that we will continue to be flooded with useless meetings with trivial topics to have arguments and not talk about the real problems. We all know, even its defenders, that the spirit of the council finds no place to incarnate and that what remains, much or little, goes the other way. Both sides know that it is only a matter of time.
“Freely you have received; freely give.”
Happy reading.