Leo XIV, the challenge of tradition

The great goal of Leo XIV’s pontificate is to restore unity in the Church. The task, however, is particularly arduous. In short, it is something easier said than done.

The pontiff’s comments to journalists en route with him to Rome from Africa illustrate the point.

Leo took a question regarding Cardinal Reinhard Marx’s decision to formally bless same-sex couples, and his answer drew many different reactions both within Germany and from around the world, but the one that came from the head of the German hierarchy’s effective institution is instructive.

Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg, who is finishing his term as president of the German Bishops’ Conference, simply stated that he will continue with this pastoral practice because he does not believe it creates disunity in the Church.

That may be a parting shot from a fellow who is on his way out and doesn’t much care, or it may be Bätzing basically daring the pope to stop him.

We’ll see.

There is another challenge to unity looming, one that comes from the Traditionalist world.

The Priestly Society of Saint Pius X (FSSPX) is preparing to celebrate its first episcopal ordinations since 1988.

The ordinations would be valid, but not licit, because they are without a pontifical mandate. One who consecrates a bishop without papal permission incurs excommunication latae sententiae, that is, for simply having committed the act.

That’s what happened to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the bishops he ordained in 1988, after which a formal decree of excommunication was drafted and published.

Now, it is rumored that a similar document has already been prepared in case the Society decides to move forward with the planned consecrations.

In fact, these types of decrees are standard, so it’s not certain that the model wasn’t ready some time ago, regardless of how the discussions within the SSPX went.

The SSPX, for its part, believes that even excommunication is not actually applicable to them. They reason that canon law does not allow the imposition of the penalty – excommunication – if the act that would incur it is committed in response to a perceived grave danger to the Church, or if one believes one is acting in good faith.

That is actually true, but it is the same reasoning Lefebvre used in 1988, when a papal decree became a fact against which there was no declaiming.

In recent weeks, the SSPX also published a lengthy interview with its superior, Father Davide Pagliarani, who reiterated the Society’s sense of urgency and the need to ordain new bishops to ensure its survival.

In fact, the SSPX lacks even a genuine desire to engage in dialogue with the Holy See. Even in previous communications, it has been made clear that many of the Holy See’s decisions or approaches are considered borderline heretical, and therefore, there can be no dialogue on this issue.

In short, Leo XIV finds himself caught between two fires, both particularly stubborn.

On one side, those who want doctrine to evolve to the point of adapting to society, because otherwise—and this is a frequently recurring phrase—the Church will no longer be relevant. On the other hand, those who believe the Church has evolved too much, to the point of deeming anything emanating from the Holy See inappropriate, especially in doctrinal terms.

The question to ask is simply this: Which side is Leo XIV on?

The pope’s actions at least suggest a clear line somewhere, but not the line itself—not one drawn by the mere will of the pope—and certainly not one that he intends by force of will to trace.

Leo XIV supports manifestations in which the presence of God is felt, regardless of debates over their legitimacy.

Last year, for example, it was surprising that Leo XIV allegedly sent a message of greeting to the Paris-Chartres pilgrimage, attended by thousands, mostly young people, all attached to the traditional rite – it was actually said that the Pope was praying for the pilgrimage and read excerpts of a letter the Pope had sent to Catholic of France. Then, the nuncio to England, Archbishop Miguel Maury Buendía, announced that Leo XIV had asked that exceptions be made to celebrate according to the ancient rite whenever requested.

In short, Leo XIV extended a hand to the traditional world, trying to overcome the attitude of clear closure that had characterized the end of Pope Francis’s pontificate.

This attitude had also affected religious congregations considered traditionalist, such as the Heralds of the Gospel, an organization born in Brazil and then spread worldwide. For years, the Heralds of the Gospel had been prevented from ordaining new priests. They were placed under special administration—the commissioner is Cardinal Raymondo Damasceno Assis—for allegations that were never fully verified, and with all civil cases ultimately ending in their favor.

After many years of stalemate, however, on April 11 and 12, the Heralds of the Gospel were finally able to ordain 26 new priests, in a heartfelt celebration that also marked a return of hope.

The Heralds were just one example of groups deemed too traditional that were targeted under Pope Francis. In some cases, these were very small groups, which therefore failed to gain traction. In other cases, there was a veritable storm, as in the case of the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae —which then-Archbishop Prevost knew well—where accusations of abuse against the founder led not to a reform (as had happened in similar cases, such as the Legionaries of Christ), but to the actual suppression of the order.

It must be said that Pope Francis’s pontificate was also influenced by a sort of “Latin American civil war” that had arisen in the post-Vatican II years, where tensions between Liberation Theology and more traditional movements had become almost unbearable.

Leo XIV was not affected by those tensions, even though he experienced them as a missionary priest and bishop in Peru. For this reason, Leo XIV was called to find a difficult balance between the demands of those who wanted a more present and vibrant Church in social issues and the need to evangelize, to bring in new vocations and foster the growth of the Church.

This is the great challenge the Pope faces in managing the traditionalist case.

The traditionalists know it, and they are spreading the narrative of a Holy See that is unwilling to listen and with which no agreement should be reached. In fact, according to the SSPX, Leo XIV should let them do their thing, without threatening excommunication.

Excommunication, however, is necessary for the pope to demonstrate his standing within the Church, and this is why there is excommunication latae sentantiae, that is, for the mere fact of having committed an act.

Meanwhile, the idea that the Pope must accept anything in the name of an unclear principle of mercy is an argument that cannot hold up, although it has been promoted many times since the Second Vatican Council.

The theme, one can be sure, will recur repeatedly throughout Leo XIV’s pontificate. With time, it will become clear whether the Pope’s desire is to absorb the crisis or rather to address it, lifting the obstacles that create division and reasoning, in this case, too, in terms of the unity of the Church.