Leo XIV Helped Us Better Appreciate the Crisis. Here’s How to Combat It.

Every so often, it is worthwhile to survey how, if at all, our thinking about a particular topic has changed over time. For Traditional Catholics who share the vision of the crisis in the Catholic Church that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre set forth in his famous 1974 Declaration, the “news” about the daily events from Rome is sometimes fascinating, but it does little to alter our view of the crisis, which Archbishop Lefebvre articulated so well over fifty years ago:

“It is impossible to modify profoundly the lex orandi without modifying the lex credendi. To the Novus Ordo Missae correspond a new catechism, a new priesthood, new seminaries, a charismatic Pentecostal Church—all things opposed to orthodoxy and the perennial teaching of the Church. This Reformation, born of Liberalism and Modernism, is poisoned through and through; it derives from heresy and ends in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is therefore impossible for any conscientious and faithful Catholic to espouse this Reformation or to submit to it in any way whatsoever. The only attitude of faithfulness to the Church and Catholic doctrine, in view of our salvation, is a categorical refusal to accept this Reformation.”

In this light, there is a sense in which the only truly “transformational” news from Rome would be if it renounced what Archbishop Lefebvre called the Reformation (which we can refer to as the Vatican II revolution). Until that happens, the daily news could be summarized as, “the revolution continues with its predictably putrid fruits.” That said, there is another sense in which the “less transformational” news from Rome can be vital: to the extent that it allows people to see the true roots and causes of the crisis in the Church, it can allow Catholics to embrace Traditional Catholicism.

It is with that latter objective in mind that this reflection on the current state of the crisis begins with a look at the key ideas from articles of mine about Leo XIV that Mr. Matt has published in the Remnant during Leo’s papacy. After seeing the ways in which Leo XIV has helped us better see the roots and causes of the crisis, we can see how, if at all, the Traditional Catholic battle plan has changed.

On May 29, 2025, a few weeks after Leo’s election, the Remnant published an article based on Fr. Joachim Heimerl’s keen observation that it was Paul VI who caused the fracture that had become so evident under Francis. In that article, we observed both the encouraging and discouraging signs from Leo XIV:

“Now, with Leo XIV, we face a situation in which we know little about how he will attempt to address the fracture described by Fr. Heimerl. Pope Leo has voiced support for Vatican II and the Synod, but he also has a great devotion to St. Augustine, whose writings undermine all of the worst aspects of the Vatican II revolution. Maybe he will exacerbate the rupture, maybe he will cooperate with God’s grace to end the crisis by repudiating the errors of Vatican II — we simply do not know at this point and those who insist otherwise are mistaken.”

As we stated, it is only by repudiating the errors of Vatican II that Leo can end the crisis. He had not done that in the first three weeks of his papacy, and so the “news” was that the crisis continued.

The Remnant’s July 15, 2025 article about the Synod on Synodality asserted that Leo XIV had a moral obligation to stop the Synod on Synodality:

“It should be obvious from everything about the Synod we have witnessed for the past three years that Leo XIV has a moral obligation to stop the Synod on Synodality. This is not to suggest that it would be easy or painless for him to take the necessary steps to do so, but every day in which he neglects to stop the blasphemous Synod adds to ongoing scandal. . . . We can even see that a prolonged silence from Leo XIV on the evils of the Synodal process would be more scandalous owing to the fact that he sounds and looks much more Catholic than Francis. No matter what positive steps he might take — such as overturning Traditionis Custodes or reversing Fiducia Supplicans — his papacy would still be a grave scandal if he were to allow the Synodal process to hijack local churches to serve anti-Catholic agendas.”

Now, over a year later, the Synod on Synodality continues and it is a graver scandal that Leo XIV has not stopped it. This helps us better understand the way in which many Catholics grow more and more accustomed to worsening scandals as the crisis continues.

Later that month, on July 29, 2025, the Remnant’s article about the cruel reality of the Vatican II revolution concluded by saying that the first three months of Leo’s papacy provided more than enough time to speak out against the evils that plague the Church today:

“Leo XIV has inherited this Vatican regime that cruelly offers stones to those who ask for bread, and hurls serpents at those who ask for fish. We did not expect him to reverse the Vatican II revolution overnight, but three months is long enough to at the very least speak out against the rampant heresies prevalent among his bishops and assure Traditional Catholics that they will no longer be persecuted by Rome. Every passing day of Leo XIV’s silence adds to the cruelty of the Vatican II revolution, such that he risks incurring the judgment of his own Angelus message: ‘We cannot pray to God as ‘Father’ and then be harsh and insensitive towards others.’ We pray that he will heed his own words while he has time.”

During his first months as pope, Leo XIV had spoken at great length about various emerging political and social issues that are far simpler than whether or not his bishops ought to be in the business of publicly promoting mortal sin. Even if it might have taken longer for him to formulate a comprehensive response to the crisis, he could have at the very least rebuked those who were clearly opposing the unambiguous teachings on Catholic morality. As we wrote in that article, his silence adds to the cruelty of the Vatican II revolution.

With the August 25, 2025 article in the Remnant, we turned to Leo XIV’s own meaningful contributions to the crisis in the Church beyond silence and neglect. The article considered these words from his message to the participants in the ecumenical week in Stockholm:

“While the Catholic Church was not represented at that first gathering, I can affirm, with humility and joy, that we stand with you today as fellow disciples of Christ, recognizing that what unites us is far greater than what divides us. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has wholeheartedly embraced the ecumenical path. Indeed, Unitatis Redintegratio, the Council’s decree on ecumenism, called us to dialogue in humble and loving fraternity, grounded in our common baptism and our shared mission in the world. We believe that the unity Christ wills for His Church must be visible, and that such unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering.”

As the article went on to argue, these words signaled that Leo XIV was evidently committed to “prolonging the errors condemned by Pius XII, which have offended God, and led countless Catholics to lose the Faith, for over six decades.” He was no longer merely maintaining the status quo of Francis; he was deepening the crisis.

On September 1, 2025, the Remnant published an article related to the SSPX and the ongoing state of necessity in the Church. That article reiterated the point that the crisis continues until we have a pope who truly restores the true Faith throughout the Church:

“[A]lthough we and the SSPX pray for Pope Leo XIV, and would do everything in our power to assist him, the state of necessity will persist until he or a successor truly restores the Faith. Moreover, it is clear that the most important work that the SSPX can do in helping to bring an end to the state of necessity in the Church is to remain a faithful witness to the need to restore the faith in its complete integrity. This is also the greatest service that the SSPX can render to Leo XIV.”

Leo XIV had not ended the crisis in September 2025; and he has not ended the crisis now; so the crisis continues and the greatest service we can render him and the Church is to remain faithful to the unadulterated Catholic Faith.

The Remnant’s article from September 23, 2025 dealt with an interview in which Leo XIV said the following related to the issue of whether Rome should permit the Tridentine Mass:

“I have not had the chance to really sit down with a group of people who are advocating for the Tridentine rite. There’s an opportunity coming up soon, and I’m sure there will be occasions for that. But that is an issue that I think also, maybe with synodality, we have to sit down and talk about. It’s become the kind of issue that’s so polarized that people aren’t willing to listen to one another, oftentimes. I’ve heard bishops talk to me, they’ve talked to me about that, where they say, ‘we invited them to this and that and they just won’t even hear it’. They don’t even want to talk about it. That’s a problem in itself. It means we’re into ideology now, we’re no longer into the experience of church communion.”

This was interesting because it suggested that Leo XIV did not have much familiarity with the issues related to Traditional Catholicism but was already biased against it based on input he had received from certain bishops.

In an October 11, 2025 article, the Remnant considered Leo XIV’s apostolic exhortation, Dilexi Te, directed to all Christians about the love of the poor. That document was newsworthy not because it exalted Francis’s legacy (which it did) but because it gave us another indication of his thoughts about Traditional Catholicism, with a not-so-subtle jab at “defenders of orthodoxy”:

“Finally, in a document that was not initially well received by everyone, we find a reflection that remains timely today: ‘The defenders of orthodoxy are sometimes accused of passivity, indulgence, or culpable complicity regarding the intolerable situations of injustice and the political regimes which prolong them. Spiritual conversion, the intensity of the love of God and neighbor, zeal for justice and peace, the Gospel meaning of the poor and of poverty, are required of everyone, and especially of pastors and those in positions of responsibility. The concern for the purity of the faith demands giving the answer of effective witness in the service of one’s neighbor, the poor and the oppressed in particular, in an integral theological fashion.’” [quoting paragraph 18 of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s “Instruction on Certain Aspects of the ‘Theology of Liberation’” (6 August 1984)]

This was one of the clearest signs from 2025 that Leo XIV’s desire for unity has its limits. The 1984 document from which he quoted had indeed featured this criticism of orthodox Catholics, but its main thrust was to critique the errors promoted by Francis and Leo. Thus, our article observed the hypocrisy on display in Leo’s apostolic exhortation:

“So Leo XIV took a random paragraph of the 1984 document to obliquely condemn Traditional Catholics while neglecting the preceding paragraph, which condemns the Francis revolution that he seems committed to perpetuating.”

The fact that Leo took the opportunity to gratuitously show his bias against Traditional Catholics was not entirely bad because it provided clarity and allowed us to brace for the hostility we have seen since then.

Skipping ahead, the Remnant’s February 13, 2026 article was written as a letter to Leo XIV (which, of course, we had no expectation that he would read). In it, we attempted to show why it would be hypocritical for Rome to condemn the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). Given Rome’s cruel punishments of the SSPX, we now have the verdict on the plea from the letter’s conclusion:

“There are many in Rome who see the SSPX as an obstacle to ecumenism and Synodality, and surely they will be telling you that it is best to cast them off. Whatever you decide, though, God will protect the SSPX, just as He protected Daniel in the lion’s den. Even so, your decision will of course be immensely important for the Church and the world. If you cast off those who simply want to faithfully serve the Church in accordance with their consciences, the world will recognize that all of the talk related to ecumenism, Synodality, and compassion is hypocritical and motivated by unholy desires.”

Thus, it seems that those with eyes to see have plenty of reason to conclude that “all of the talk related to ecumenism, Synodality, and compassion is hypocritical and motivated by unholy desires.”

The Remnant’s June 1, 2026 article related to Leo XIV’s May 28, 2026 address to participants in the plenary assembly of the dicastery for evangelization, in which he bemoaned the “crisis of faith” that has given rise to religious indifference:

“We cannot underestimate the fact that, especially in Western countries, the crisis of faith, together with other socio-cultural factors, has given rise to widespread religious indifference. To many, faith no longer appears relevant to their lives.”

Assuming Leo is sincere yet deeply confused and infected with the errors of Vatican II, it seems possible that he truly laments the crisis that has been obvious for decades. But, as our article concluded, the only way to effectively address these evil fruits is to reject the tree that bore them, including the roots:

“It seems entirely possible that Leo is genuinely concerned about the crisis in the Church in general and religious indifferentism in particular. However, the remedies for these evils have been rejected by Rome since the Council and replaced by the false ecumenism movement that invariably promotes religious indifferentism. It is as though the answer is right in front of him, but he is blind to it because he is infected with errors that have defined Rome since the Council. If Leo truly wants to address the crisis of faith and indifferentism he bemoaned in his address, he has no choice but to return to what Gregory XVI taught in Mirari Vos. Until he (or a successor) does that, the Vatican will continue to spread the heretical message that any set of Christian beliefs — other than Traditional Catholicism — is sufficient for salvation. For this reason, the true friends of the Catholic Church, and even of Leo, are those who would rather die than abandon the Faith that Gregory XVI sought to safeguard.”

These last words again pointed to the central idea of Archbishop Lefebvre’s 1974 Declaration, as well as the justification for the SSPX taking the necessary steps to ensure that it can continue its God-given mission of forming priests, religious, and faithful who resist the unholy Vatican II revolution.

Finally, in the aftermath of Rome’s punishments of the SSPX, the Remnant’s July 23, 2026 article pointed out that the Traditional Catholic resistance involves far more than efforts to secure the Traditional Latin Mass:

“Rome’s opposition to Archbishop Lefebvre began before 1974, but the famous 1974 Declaration amounted to a declaration of war against the Vatican II revolution. If Archbishop Lefebvre had simply wanted the Traditional Latin Mass, there would have been room for cooperation with Rome’s attacks on the Faith. But Archbishop Lefebvre’s 1974 Declaration made it clear that he wanted something more than the Traditional Latin Mass.”

God and the Church Triumphant see the great harm caused each day by the continuation of the Vatican II revolution. We, the Church Militant, have been given the great blessing of being able to live in a time in which we can wage war in defense of the Mystical Body of Christ. The Church’s enemies do all to distract us from the real fight in any way they can. But, as we have seen from Leo XIV, the real conflict is the Vatican II revolution’s opposition to the immutable Catholic Faith. For this reason, the words with which Archbishop Lefebvre ended his 1974 Declaration remain the battle plan for Traditional Catholics, no matter what anti-Catholic fruits Rome happens to offer us tomorrow:

“That is why we hold fast to all that has been believed and practiced in the faith, morals, liturgy, teaching of the catechism, formation of the priest and institution of the Church, by the Church of all time; to all these things as codified in those books which saw day before the Modernist influence of the Council. This we shall do until such time that the true light of Tradition dissipates the darkness obscuring the sky of Eternal Rome. By doing this, with the grace of God and the help of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and that of St. Joseph and St. Pius X, we are assured of remaining faithful to the Roman Catholic Church and to all the successors of Peter, and of being the fideles dispensatores mysteriorum Domini Nostri Jesu Christi in Spiritu Sancto. Amen.”

The article considered these words from his (Pope Leo's) message to the participants in the ecumenical week in Stockholm:

“While the Catholic Church was not represented at that first gathering, I can affirm, with humility and joy, that we stand with you today as fellow disciples of Christ, recognizing that what unites us is far greater than what divides us. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has wholeheartedly embraced the ecumenical path. Indeed, Unitatis Redintegratio, the Council’s decree on ecumenism, called us to dialogue in humble and loving fraternity, grounded in our common baptism and our shared mission in the world. We believe that the unity Christ wills for His Church must be visible, and that such unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering.”

Ping

From Pope Bl Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors:

Error 80: The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” March 18, 1861.

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.