June draws to a close; we are living in hurried times, and the news of each day arrives like an avalanche that risks sweeping us away. The daily task of surveying the horizon must not make us lose sight of the fact that these are only symptoms of something deeper unfolding before our eyes, which is not always easy to see.
The new archbishops.
On the solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, Pope Leo XIV presided over the Eucharistic celebration in St. Peter’s Basilica, during which he blessed and conferred the pallia on the new metropolitan archbishops appointed last year. Thirty-five archbishops received the pallium. The first thing that drew attention was the scant interest shown by the faithful in this celebration. Pope Francis had preferred not to hold it, and whether for that reason or because the new archbishops are not especially popular, attendance was very discreet. The nave was full but not overcrowded; the transept was almost empty, and the cathedra held only the priests distributing Communion and little else. The absence of the faithful was noticeable—those who, as was traditional, would accompany their archbishops. With thirty-five, not long ago, one had to reserve a place; today, no one even thinks of it.
The pallium is a narrow band of white wool, adorned with crosses, worn by the metropolitan over the shoulders. It is made from the wool of lambs blessed each year on the feast of Saint Agnes and is kept in the Confessio of Saint Peter, near the Apostle’s tomb. “Taken from the Confessio of Blessed Peter, as a sign of the authority with which the Metropolitan, in communion with the Roman Church, is legitimately invested in his own jurisdiction.” The metropolitans then pronounced the oath, committing themselves to be “always faithful and obedient to Blessed Peter the Apostle, to the Holy Apostolic Church of Rome,” and to the Supreme Pontiff and his legitimate successors. The Pope blessed the pallium and placed it on the shoulders of each archbishop, exchanging with him a sign of peace. The words of the investiture explained its meaning: “May this pallium be for you a symbol of unity and a sign of communion with the Apostolic See; may it be a bond of charity and an encouragement of strength.”
In his homily, Leo XIV focused on the two celebrated figures, one “chosen” as “shepherd of his flock” and the other as “apostle to the Gentiles”: “In them we venerate two pillars of the Church.” The Pope especially highlighted their vocation to unity, while recalling that “this greatness of spirit does not mean that Peter is perfect”: the Apostle denies the Master during the Passion and is rebuked by Paul for certain inconsistencies, yet “he knows how to recognize his mistakes and repent, without becoming discouraged or neglecting his mission.” “Communion in the Church is not built by clinging to one’s own positions, but by seeking, in the heart of all, points of convergence in the Truth.” The task entrusted to Peter and his successors, he added, is “to listen to the voices of each one, to discern inspirations, to guide paths, to correct errors, to instruct, to encourage, to exhort, and to accompany the brethren.”
Program of the Pope’s brief visit to Lampedusa.
The Pope will arrive on the morning of July 4 on a flight from Ciampino and will stop on the island for about three and a half hours, visiting some of the area’s most emblematic sites: from the local cemetery to the “Gate of Europe,” passing through Molo Favaloro, where he also plans to meet with migrants. The only previous papal visit to the island dates back to July 2013, when Pope Francis visited the island just a few months into his pontificate, celebrating a historic Mass and denouncing what he called the “globalization of indifference.” A morning-only visit, with breakfast in Rome and a return home for lunch.
The aftermath of the Consistory.
The second Consistory of Leo XIV indicated that the transition from one pontificate to another is underway, but has not yet been completed, and it is uncertain whether it ever will be. For Leo XIV, consistory meetings appear to be more a broad consultation than an instrument of governance, a form of consultation distinct from that of Pope Francis. “Little by little, we are rediscovering the true meaning of the Consistory: the gathering of the College of Cardinals around the Successor of Peter so that, through mutual listening and shared discernment, the Holy Spirit may help the Pope guide the Church. It is not a parliament, not a congress in which opinions or interests prevail, but an experience of communion at the service of the mission.”
It remains to be seen whether the annual consistories Leo XIV intends to convene will have any impact on the Synod of Bishops and its current administration, and in what way. Pope Francis addressed the question of Church reforms by creating commissions and supporting a Council of Cardinals, the so-called C9 (also C7 or C6, depending on the members appointed), without, however, granting it any real decision-making power. During Francis’s pontificate, the cardinals met to discuss matters within their competence only three times: in the first two consistories for the creation of cardinals and, in the last, to discuss the reform of the Curia that had already been carried out.
The periodic collegial meeting of all the cardinals represents a change, but the outcome has yet to be seen. The conduct of Leo XIV’s first Consistory had not pleased everyone. The cardinals had been divided into linguistic groups and their interventions entrusted to the mediation of a moderator. The cardinals prefer to take responsibility for their words, as has always been the case, and it was expected that this would also occur in Leo XIV’s first Consistory. The method remained synodal, a group work.
A transition that does not arrive.
Leo XIV has been in office for more than a year, but has not yet replaced many of the heads of Curia departments. The most significant change in the Dicastery for Communications will not take effect until November, although it has already been announced. Other key positions will also change, but on specific timelines, and a major staff rotation due to age is expected throughout the year. Pope Francis’s key figures have not changed, nor have his methods. This Consistory became a forum for debate, where a series of issues were discussed that, in their formulation, seemed more like starting points for a pastoral conversation than material for a debate on governance.
The liturgy, which had been among the possible topics of discussion in the first Consistory, has disappeared completely. We find ourselves on the eve of new episcopal ordinations without a papal mandate. The Priestly Society of Saint Pius X sent an extensive letter to all the cardinals on doctrinal issues and the errors of the Second Vatican Council, and its members have referred to these topics. However, the Pope has no intention of submitting all this to public debate. Faced with a possible schism, fostering another confrontation between “conservatives” and “progressives” within the Consistory could, in fact, generate greater divisions.
The synodal method serves to some extent to maintain continuity, avoid tensions, and mitigate debate, and it remains to be seen whether this will be Leo XIV’s form of governance or whether it will change over time and with new faces in the Curia. There are numerous arguments supporting the idea that Leo XIV’s pontificate actually began with his trip to Spain. His public pontificate, his imprint on the image and content of the message he was to convey, were undoubtedly evident throughout his stay in Spain. Leo XIV’s pontificate had not yet fully begun.
Sanctions on Russia and weapons to Israel.
Many commented on Cardinal Fernández’s complicated intervention in the consistory, in which he became entangled in a complex web during the opening speech of the consistory. Fernández stated that “the destruction of entire cities by Israel cannot be considered a proportionate defensive action.” “The European Union, in fact, imposes economic sanctions on one country and sends financial aid and weapons to another, without responding to other, even more serious invasions, with even more brutal consequences for entire populations.” The cardinal added that “the destruction of entire cities by Israel cannot be considered a proportionate defensive action. The enormous disproportion of military interventions in Gaza and southern Lebanon is evident.” “Since these are densely populated territories, the percentage of civilian deaths in relation to the total population, the enormous number of children killed, and the number of homes bombed allow us to speak of total destruction.” Fernández described the EU’s inaction toward Israel as symptomatic of a global order in which “there no longer exists a real and stable framework of truth and values.”
The position of «Messainlatino» on the schism.
“They are painfully illicit.” We understand the perplexity that may arise among many men of the Church today and their statements so far removed from the Magisterium; we also understand the discomfort felt by many Catholics of good will in the face of the heresies (more or less evident) that are spreading within the Church itself; we also understand that the bishops of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X are of a certain age and—from their point of view—feel the urgency to consecrate new bishops to ensure the apostolic succession transmitted according to the traditional rite; we understand everything, but we believe that the “state of necessity” to which the Society refers cannot exist.
The editorial team of the blog MiL-Messainlatino.it and Catholics with the traditionalist sensibility developed under Pope Benedict XVI and who today recognize themselves in the “popolus Summorum Pontificum”—while pleased with the openings granted to members of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X by Pope Francis (the possibility of marrying, hearing confessions, and imparting absolution)—prefer priests who have the celebret, that is, who are incardinated in a diocese or a religious institute.
We are surprised by Pope Leo XIV’s decision not to grant an audience to Don Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, and his concern over the announced “Lefebvrian” episcopal consecrations without a mandate, which would aggravate the schism. We are also concerned to observe that the same firmness and severity are not shown toward the terrible doctrinal statements—those bordering on schism—circulating in the Synod of Bishops and in the German Church, as well as toward those of many bishops and cardinals on doctrine, homosexuality, and the very structure of the Church. Therefore, we are truly saddened, but convinced that all of us Catholics must remain sub Petro et cum Petro, because—let us remember—there is no “traditionalist Church,” but only the “one holy Catholic and apostolic Church” (“una sancta catholica et apostolica Ecclesia”), which also includes the faithful with the traditional charism.
New deacons and priests of Saint Pius X.
On Sunday, June 28, John-Henry Westen, editor-in-chief of LifeSiteNews, was present at the SSPX headquarters in Écône, Switzerland, for the ordination of three young men to the diaconate and five transitional deacons to the priesthood. John-Henry will continue to cover the SSPX celebrations in Écône, with special attention to the episcopal consecrations on July 1. Both de Galarreta and Fellay were consecrated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the SSPX, and Bishop Antônio de Castro Mayer on June 30, 1988, without the promised but not granted papal mandate. The following day, the Vatican announced that they and two other newly consecrated bishops had been excommunicated; the excommunications of the four new bishops were lifted by Pope Benedict XVI in January 2009. The Vatican is expected to announce the excommunication of at least the four new bishops of the SSPX and their consecrators.
Paul VI and Lefebvre.
The first clashes between Cardinal Lefebvre and Paul VI occurred in the 1970s. Conservatives, opposed to the opening of the Second Vatican Council, celebrated Mass in Latin. With Ratzinger, a truce was reached; with Francis, hostilities resumed. Now, they are appointing four bishops without the approval of Leo XIV. It is all the fault of Pachamama. The Earth goddess, venerated by the Incas, is venerated by many in South America, but seeing her blessed by Pope Francis in Rome in 2019 during the Synod on the Amazon was too much. The Lefebvrians, and many Catholics, called it a “demonic and idolatrous act.” After Bergoglio’s death, the 600,000 members of the Society of Saint Pius X hoped that the new Pope would abandon his ecumenical and modernist proposals.
In 1976 Archbishop Lefebvre said: “We do not belong to this new religion. And the Pope cannot ask us to join it.” “I am well aware that there are numerous difficulties in this enterprise, which, we are told, is reckless. We are told that we are at a dead end. Why? Because from Rome, especially in the last three months, especially since March 19, the feast of Saint Joseph, we have received exhortations, pleas, orders, and threats, urging us to cease our activity, not to celebrate these priestly ordinations.” “And it is precisely because we know that these priests will be faithful to the Mass of the Church, to the Mass of Tradition, to the Mass of all times, that we are asked not to ordain them.”
“Have we been wrong to insist on maintaining the traditional rite? Certainly, we have prayed, consulted, reflected, and meditated to determine whether we were really wrong or whether we simply lacked sufficient reasons not to submit to this new rite. Well, the mere insistence of those sent to us from Rome to change the rite makes us doubt, and we are convinced that this new rite of the Mass expresses a new faith, a faith that is not ours, a faith that is not the Catholic faith.” “It is the expression of a completely new ideology: the ideology of modern man has been introduced into our most sacred rites. And this is what is corrupting the entire Church, because with this idea of power granted to the base in the Holy Mass, the priesthood is being destroyed.”
“Well, we do not belong to that religion; we do not accept this new religion. We belong to the religion of all times; we belong to the Catholic religion. We do not belong to this universal religion, as they call it today. It is no longer the Catholic religion. We do not belong to this liberal and modernist religion, which has its own worship, its own priests, its own faith, its own catechisms, its own Bible, its own ecumenical Bible. We do not accept them; we do not accept the ecumenical Bible. There is no ecumenical Bible; there is the Bible of God, the Bible of the Holy Spirit, which was written under the influence of the Holy Spirit.”
“Of course, we would like to receive a blessing, as happened in the past, from the Holy See: blessings were imparted from Rome to the newly ordained. But we believe that the good Lord is present, that He sees everything, that He also blesses this ceremony we are celebrating, and that one day He will bring forth from it the fruits He certainly desires, and that He will undoubtedly help us to preserve our faith and protect the Church.”
Fraternity of Saint Peter.
There are dioceses and dioceses, and that of Arlington, Virginia, has announced the creation of a chaplaincy entrusted to the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP) to offer the Traditional Latin Mass and the associated sacraments to Catholics faithful to the usus antiquior. The chaplaincy of Our Lady of Victory will begin its work on July 1, with Father Jonathan Romanoski and Father John Audino of the FSSP as the first chaplains. The diocese confirmed that Bishop Michael Burbidge announced the creation of the chaplaincy on June 19.
Another church burns in Ireland.
The 150-year-old former Convent of Our Lady of Mercy in Northern Ireland was deliberately set on fire on Sunday, according to the local fire department. In a statement on June 29, the Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service (NIFR) announced that more than 70 firefighters from various departments had extinguished a large fire the previous night at the now-disused Convent of Mercy, which they believe was intentionally set. The fire was contained before it reached St. Patrick’s Church, located next to the convent, but caused serious damage to the building.
In a statement issued after the fire, the parish family of Downpatrick, to which St. Patrick’s belongs, expressed gratitude to the firefighters for their work, not only in extinguishing the fire but also in preventing it from spreading to the church. The parish also lamented the damage suffered by the former convent, especially as it occurred just 24 hours after the priestly ordination celebrated in St. Patrick’s Church. The church and the former convent are located a few minutes from the tomb of Ireland’s patron saint, Saint Patrick.
Petro visits the Pope with the Italian snub.
Outgoing Colombian President Gustavo Petro assured this Monday that he was snubbed by the Italian government upon his arrival at Leonardo da Vinci Airport in Rome, where he claimed that no representative of the Italian executive came to receive him. He said he would hold a meeting with Pope Leo XIV to discuss “the danger of hiding the truth.” According to his account, only “the commander of the Italian and Colombian Air Forces” were present upon his arrival, while “no Italian government official came to receive me.” He stated that “the Italian government bowed to the far right,” although he made clear that this situation does not modify his political stance. “But I am a Garibaldian and I do not care about power.” Petro referred to his roots and pointed out that his ancestors “come from the Republic of Rome” and not from “the Italian Republic of the leopard.”
Petro confirmed that during his visit to Rome he will hold a meeting with Pope Leo XIV. “I will see the Pope to discuss the danger of hiding the truth,” and he believes that the Vatican flags today represent “the flags of humanity.” He regrets “not seeing the Garibaldian flags” during his visit to Italy, although he insisted that his priority will be the meeting with the pontiff to address issues related to truth, peace, and international conflicts.
Back to Latin.
Curiously, the survey by Il Giornale on: “If the Mass could be celebrated again in Latin, would you agree?” has generated enormous interest among readers. The proposal launched by Il Giornale’s editor, Tommaso Cerno, on the return to the original liturgy—because the future speaks Latin—is going around the world and sparking debate within the Catholic community and beyond. For the director, “the Latin Mass is not the crux of the schism.” But it could become the tool to remedy it: not with anathema, but with a gesture of intelligent tolerance. The question to readers is: “What do you think? If the Mass could be celebrated again in Latin, would you agree?”
“Lord, save us, we are perishing!”
Enjoy your reading.