Posted on 08/26/2025 1:54:29 PM PDT by ebb tide
More than one hundred days since the beginning of his Pontificate, many small signs seem to confirm what has so far been said, analyzed, and foretold about the figure of Pope Leo XIV—both from the perspective of governance and of the magisterium.
As regards governance, it has become clear that Pope Leo XIV is a man who avoids authoritarianism and rashness. Here his “American spirit” emerges, distinguishing him both from Europeans and from South Americans, accustomed to a more centralist, despotic, or democratic style of governance—that is, listening to and imposing the will of the majority. Prevost, instead, is a man who listens to all parties, willingly consults, accepts counsel, and carefully weighs different solutions and approaches. Thus, the word “synodality” assumes for the first Augustinian and American Pope a very specific meaning, quite different from that of Francis, Jesuit and Argentine. For this reason, ultimately, he was chosen in the Conclave: a “man of unity”—and expectations so far have not been disappointed.
On August 22 Pope Leo XIV received in private audience Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke. We must not forget that Cardinal Burke was one of those prelates directly and publicly targeted by Francis.
Thus, the old curial motto cunctando regitur mundus—“by delaying the world is governed”—seems once again relevant. So far, the Pontificate of Leo XIV has been a reign of reflection and listening, likely slowed down by the inevitable demands of the Jubilee (lasting until January 6, 2026), as well as by his natural disposition toward method and order. It has also been hampered by a strongly Bergoglian curial environment, fearful that the situation may slip too far from its control and eager that Leo should act primarily as a “media puppet,” leaving the true governance of the Church to dicasteries working behind the scenes. To this risk is added—as is well known—his perhaps excessive trust in the very Curia itself.
Despite the absence of reforms or significant acts of governance, Pope Leo has won broad approval among Catholics. This element too is not to be underestimated: Pope Bergoglio also enjoyed wide approval at the outset—but among non-Catholics, especially atheists and progressives. They hoped to see seated upon the Chair of Peter the man who would at last dismantle the Catholic Church in her hierarchical and sacramental order—just as the Carbonari once hoped in the wake of the election of Pope Pius IX. Yet History remains, and will always remain, in the hands of God—not of men, nor of Satan.
The approval that Pope Leo receives among Catholics, including the young, is another hopeful sign. Indeed, today the Church needs hope more than cohesion. Not so much the hope that the crisis may end, but hope in the theological sense. The men and women of our time need a guide, indeed a father, capable of pointing and directing their desire toward the true good, toward that treasure “which moth and rust do not consume.”
Speaking of hope and listening, on August 22 Pope Leo XIV received in private audience Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, a key figure in the Catholic traditionalist world, and, like the Holy Father himself, an American. As has been reiterated on other occasions, we know that Burke and Dolan played a significant role in bringing Prevost to the Chair of Peter. What the two discussed is not known, but we can make some plausible hypotheses.
The American Pontiff is bringing preaching back to the heart of the Gospel: salvation is not an automatism, but a gift that requires freedom, repentance, and conversion.
First of all, we must not forget that Cardinal Burke was one of those prelates directly and publicly targeted by Francis, because of his criticism of the contradictions and grave errors inherent in his magisterium—so much for the oft-praised Synodality! Bergoglio decided to revoke from the American Cardinal the so-called “piatto cardinalizio”—that is, the stipend and subsidized Vatican apartment—because he deemed him a figure acting against the Church (read: against Francis).
According to some sources, this decision was even announced during a meeting with dicastery heads, where Francis expressed his displeasure at the Cardinal’s supposedly “divisive” stance.
It is therefore only fitting to expect that one of the issues addressed was the restoration of full prestige and dignity to a man who, far from having divided the Catholic Church, has instead—together with other eminent prelates—become the authoritative spokesman of a significant portion of the faithful who expect nothing less from the Holy See than the safeguarding of Catholic identity, doctrine, morality, and liturgy.
Secondly, it is highly likely that the question of the Traditional Mass was also on the table, together with Francis’s illiberal Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes, which has in effect forbidden for the past four years the celebration of this rite by priests. A document which, as publicly available evidence has shown, was marred by grave improprieties attributable not only to Francis himself but also to his entourage still operating within the Dicastery for Divine Worship.
Another small but positive sign became evident at the audience of August 13, when, reflecting on the betrayal of Judas, the Pope recalled that Judas Iscariot excluded himself from salvation by his own choice, thereby confirming the constant teaching of the Church and the solemn doctrine of the Council of Trent. “It would have been better for that man if he had never been born”—divine words that allow no ambiguity or suspension of judgment: Judas is damned.
With sobriety and firmness, Pope Leo XIV reaffirmed a truth uncomfortable to modern ears, but necessary for understanding the greatness of God’s Mercy, which is indeed gratuitous, but never without conditions. The contrast with the uncertain approach of his predecessor—marked by a skepticism and agnosticism typical of neo-modernism—is evident. Thus, the American Pontiff is bringing preaching back to the heart of the Gospel: salvation is not an automatism, but a gift that requires freedom, repentance, and conversion. Let us recall the teaching of the Catechism of the Council of Trent:
“No one can deny that it is a virtue to grieve at the time, in the manner, and to the degree required. To regulate sorrow in this way belongs to the virtue of penance. Some feel a grief that bears no proportion to their crimes. […] Others, on the contrary, yield to such melancholy and dejection as utterly to abandon all hope of salvation. […] Such certainly was the condition of Judas, who, repenting, hanged himself, and thus lost both body and soul. Penance, therefore, considered as a virtue, helps us to regulate with moderation our sense of sorrow.”
The correct relationship that should exist between man and the rest of creation is analogous to the relationship God has with humanity. God is at the service of man, but He is not man’s slave. Likewise, man is the guardian of creation, but he is not its servant.
Moreover, on the occasion of the meeting of the bishops of the Ecclesial Conference of the Amazon, held in Bogotá from August 17 to 20, Pope Leo XIV sent a telegram of encouragement and pastoral guidance, signed by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State. A noteworthy message: while employing two concepts dear to Bergoglian vocabulary—“respect for the peoples who live there” and “care for our common home”—it nonetheless gives them a meaning difficult to reconcile with the eco-idolatry manifested by the previous administration, which placed man at the service of the Earth, forgetting instead that the truth is the opposite: God created all that exists by setting man at its summit, as lord and guardian—not as servant or stepson.
In other words, the correct relationship that should exist between man and the rest of creation is analogous to the relationship God has with humanity. God is at the service of man, but He is not man’s slave. Likewise, man is the guardian of creation, but he is not its servant. In divine language, lordship is always exercised through justice and love.
“No less evident is the right and duty to care for the home that God the Father has entrusted to us as diligent stewards—reads the Message in question—so that no one irresponsibly destroys the natural goods that speak of the goodness and beauty of the Creator nor, much less, subjects oneself to them as a slave or worshiper of nature, since things have been given to us in order to attain our end of praising God and thus obtaining the salvation of our souls (cf. St. Ignatius of Loyola, Spiritual Exercises, 23)”.
Ping
“Thus, the old curial motto cunctando regitur mundus—“by delaying the world is governed”—seems once again relevant. So far, the Pontificate of Leo XIV has been a reign of reflection and listening,”
One thing that I noticed was that, after a burst of initial news stories, I haven’t heard much in the media since then.
Very encouraging.
Yes, hoping he will now reinstate Bishop Strickland.
I’m cautiously optimistic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.