Posted on 09/09/2025 9:43:49 AM PDT by ebb tide
An Italian parish priest has been suspended from ministry after hosting an online meeting in which he declared that the reforms of the Second Vatican Council were contrary to the Catholic faith.
Don Leonardo Maria Pompei, pastor of Santa Maria Assunta in Cielo at Sermoneta, in the province of Rome, was suspended a divinis on 4 September by Bishop Mariano Crociata of Latina, Terracina, Sezze and Priverno, a former Secretary of the Italian Bishops’ Conference.
The measure forbids Don Pompei from exercising any priestly functions, from wearing clerical dress, and from publicly presenting himself as a priest. The suspension followed his decision to defy a diocesan order to desist from social media activity and to proceed with a YouTube broadcast in which he explained his rejection of the post-conciliar liturgy.
In the livestream, he told parishioners that he had concluded the Second Vatican Council was incompatible with Catholic tradition and that the Church needed to return to the ancient Roman Rite. He described his priestly vocation and his deepening conviction—reached through the study of older Catholic writers such as St Alphonsus de’ Liguori and the Venerable María de Ágreda—that the reforms of the 1960s had distorted the faith.
Prior to his suspension, Don Pompei had been issued a penal precept instructing him “not to convene any parish meetings or assemblies with the faithful of the parish of Santa Maria Assunta in Cielo in Sermoneta, and to suspend any type of activity on social media.”
Don Pompei said he did not wish to form a following around himself or align with other controversial figures, but rather to promote the Catholic faith as he understood it. In his address, he cited the example of Don Enzo Boninsegna, who resigned from the priesthood in 1989 in protest against the Italian bishops’ permission for Holy Communion to be received in the hand.
The Diocese of Latina responded swiftly by naming Don Giovanni Castagnoli as the new parish priest of Sermoneta, with the aim of restoring calm within the community. Parishioners have been left unsettled by the sudden removal of their priest, which has become a subject of widespread discussion in the town.
The diocese has confirmed that Don Pompei’s case will be referred to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, which will evaluate his declarations and determine whether further disciplinary measures are required.
Earlier this year, The Catholic Herald reported on Fr Natale Santonocito, a priest originally from Catania, who was excommunicated by Bishop Domenico Sigalini of Palestrina for publicly rejecting the legitimacy of Pope Francis. Don Francesco D’Erasmo of Civitavecchia–Tarquinia also spoke against papal teaching but avoided censure by negotiating his position with his bishop.
Don Pompei’s prolific social media presence has attracted attention in recent years, with hundreds of videos in which he has urged Catholics to reject what he views as doctrinal errors. There is no evidence, however, that he has publicly questioned the validity of Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation or of Pope Francis’s election, a common heretical view held by some traditionalists.
Ping
Hitler would be smiling.
Butt if you wrap your whole life around the practice of sodomy, you and your buddies get a pilgrimage to St. Peters.
VatII is destroying the Church. In 2024 over 140 Churches were closed in Italy. VatII should be reversed and the Traditional Church reinstated to save Her. Stop the progressive homos in the Curia from taking over the Church.
There is no such thing as free speech within the church.
OH, OH ebby. According to your article it seems that: “publicly question(ing) the validity of Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation or of Pope Francis’s election, is a common heretical view held by some traditionalists.”
Are you going to admit guilt, ebby? Your Cartoon Network repeatedly makes these claims. Heretics all?
I can remember my Mom asking my Dad: “Why did they change it?”
The Catholic Herald is hardly the arbiter of heresy.
Publicly questioning the legitimacy of a papal resignation is not a matter of heresy. It is a matter of questioning, not a matter of the faith, but of canon law. It has nothing whatsoever to do with questioning a matter of faith or morals, but only with the facts surrounding a specific historical event, and whether or not those facts render the attempted resignation valid, according to canon law in force at the time.
There is nothing for ebb tide to admit guilt for, as regards Benedict's "resignation."
ebby can speak for himself. Pope Benedict, a Pope and noted theologian, after prayerful consideration spoke for himself and said it was time to resign. Pope Benedict didn’t look back. Pope Benedict continued to live a life writing and praying, things he loved. There is nothing to question.
As for the Catholic Herald and the looney, inflamatory, anti-Vatican, anti-Pope postings of ebby’s Cartoon Network of loons, they speak for themselves, too. This article quite clearly calls those species of postings heretical.
So today is a Pope Leo is bad day. I thought maybe Burke being allowed to do a Latin Mass in St. Peter’s would make it a good Pope Leo day. Who can tell?
“As for the Catholic Herald and the looney, inflamatory, anti-Vatican, anti-Pope postings of ebby’s Cartoon Network of loons, they speak for themselves, too.” You’re good with adjectives, if nothing else. I like Ebb’s threads, I think through him and God, I must go back.
But I have clearly demonstrated why it is not a matter of heresy. The point is not whether or not the hypothesis is correct or incorrect. It simply is not a matter of heresy to question the legitimacy of a papal resignation. It is a matter of canon law and history.
If someone were to believe that Benedict's resignation was not valid, that would imply that they also believe Francis was an antipope. That isn't heresy.
Canonized saints have been on both sides of the issue with regard to popes and antipopes in the past.
Nor would such a person be an apostate, because they would not be denying the Christian faith.
At worst, you might be able to make a case that they would be a schismatic, but that would require them to refuse submission to a man they were morally certain was a legitimate pope.
It is utterly irrelevant that the article erroneously calls it a matter of heresy.
I hope you do come home.
You're in my prayers, kawhill.
Bingo. The same goes for those of us who are morally certain that the Vatican II popes were not legitimate.
As Bellarmine said, one can doubt the validity of a Papal election as long as the person doubting the election accepts the legitimacy of the Papal Office. There have been many disputed papal elections throughout history, and there were saints on both sides of the argument.
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.