If serious Catholics remain unwilling to condemn the “benign heresies” promoted by Vatican II and John Paul II, then perhaps it is better for Leo XIV to sustain the most visible aspects of the crisis. In that way, we might not be deceived into thinking the cancer is cured merely because the most painful symptoms have temporarily subsided. But the far better course would be for all sincere Catholics to finally renounce the errors condemned by Pius XII that have become so prevalent today.
When Robert Francis Prevost was born on September 14, 1955, it was just over five years since Pope Pius XII had published his Humani Generis, which remains one of the most forceful papal condemnations of the errors that still seek to undermine the Catholic Church. The final error that Pius XII condemned in that encyclical was “false irenism”:
“Let the teachers in ecclesiastical institutions be aware that they cannot with tranquil conscience exercise the office of teaching entrusted to them, unless in the instruction of their students they religiously accept and exactly observe the norms which We have ordained. . . . finally, let them not think, indulging in a false ‘irenism,’ that the dissident and the erring can happily be brought back to the bosom of the Church, if the whole truth found in the Church is not sincerely taught to all without corruption or diminution.”
As we can glean from the context, false irenism seeks to diminish or alter the Catholic Faith for the sake of drawing heretics back into the Church. Somewhat surprisingly, Paul VI provided an even clearer definition of false irenism in his 1964 encyclical Eccelsiam Suam:
“An immoderate desire to make peace and sink differences at all costs (irenism and syncretism) is ultimately nothing more than skepticism about the power and content of the Word of God which we desire to preach.”
Thus, fitting this definition within Pius XII’s Humani Generis, we can see that this false irenism seeks to achieve peace and unity among Christian religions through the process of diminishing the differences between religious beliefs. In practice, this false irenism has been one of the most common tools wielded by the proponents of the Vatican II revolution to implement false ecumenism.
Protestants put their private interpretations of the Bible over the authority of the Church, which was established by God to safeguard divinely revealed truth. So what separates us on the level of belief is not merely one or more points of doctrine but the primary basis for believing that doctrine.
To see an alarming example of false irenism and false ecumenism in practice, we can look to Pope Leo XIV’s recent 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.”
With these few words, Leo XIV appears to confirm that he is 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. To better appreciate this, four problematic aspects of Leo XIV’s message deserve attention: false humility, lack of respect for orthodoxy, the fallacy of a shared mission with Protestant sects, and a willingness to scandalize the faithful.
False Humility. In this passage, Leo XIV used the words “humility” and “humble” to describe how he — and by extension the Catholic Church — should approach discussions with heretics. True humility, though, requires us to see God and His Catholic Church as they are, and ourselves as we are in relation to God. To lower the Catholic Church for the sake of putting it on the same level with heretical religions is blasphemous. We and the Protestants are not “fellow disciples of Christ,” as Leo XIV expressed it: Catholics follow the religion that Christ established, and Protestants perpetuate man-made religions that lead souls away from the religion established by Christ. If we actually love our Protestant neighbors, true humility calls us to be willing to charitably tell them that they must abandon their false religions.
Lack of Respect for Orthodoxy. When Leo XIV said that “what unites us is far greater than what divides us,” he was presumably referring both to baptism and shared Christian belief. As nice as this sounds, though, it belies the reality that the difference between the unadulterated Catholic Faith and even most similar non-Catholic religions is immense. Pope Leo XIII explained this well in his 1896 encyclical on the unity of the Church, Satis Cognitum:
“But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. ‘In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them’ (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19).”
Protestants put their private interpretations of the Bible over the authority of the Church, which was established by God to safeguard divinely revealed truth. So what separates us on the level of belief is not merely one or more points of doctrine but the primary basis for believing that doctrine. In attempting to understate the differences between the true Faith and heretical religions, Leo XIV engages in the type of behavior that Pius XII condemned in 1950.
It seems that the greatest risk of the Leo XIV papacy is that he would be “good enough” to convince otherwise sensible Catholics that the crisis is over, while leaving untouched the foundational errors of false ecumenism, irenism, and religious liberty.
Fallacy of Shared Mission with Protestant Sects. By stating that the Catholic Church and heretical religions have a “shared mission in the world,” Leo XIV again put the Church established by Our Lord on the same level as those sects that are opposed to the true Church. We know the true mission of the Church from the final lines of St. Matthew’s Gospel:
“And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Matthew 28:18-20)
Non-Catholic religions may indeed baptize souls, but they do not teach them to observe what Christ commanded. As such, it is a fallacy to suggest that the Protestant sects share the mission of the Catholic Church.
Willingness to Scandalize the Faithful. We can also see that Leo XIV encouraged Catholics to worship along with non-Catholics: “unity grows through theological dialogue, common worship where possible, and shared witness in the face of humanity’s suffering.” However, as Pope Pius XI clearly wrote in his 1928 encyclical on religious unity, Mortalium Animos, Catholics cannot take part in “the assemblies of non-Catholics”:
“Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. “
Certainly this has been abandoned in practice since Vatican II, but Pius XI’s words remain true. If, as Leo XIV stated, we should dialogue with non-Catholics and worship together “where possible,” why would anyone think that they must be Catholic?
Of course Leo XIV did not invent any of these erroneous beliefs, and perhaps he does not fully understand the theological implications of his own platitudes. As he expressed in his ecumenical week message, he simply follows the path taken by his predecessors:
“This mission has grown stronger through recent ecumenical milestones. In 1989, Pope John Paul II became the first Roman Pontiff to visit Sweden and was warmly welcomed at the Uppsala Cathedral by Archbishop Bertil Werkström, Primate of the Church of Sweden. That moment signaled a new chapter in Catholic-Lutheran relations. It was followed by the joint commemoration of the Reformation in Lund in 2016, when Pope Francis joined Lutheran leaders in common prayer and repentance. There, we affirmed our shared journey ‘from conflict to communion.’ This week, as you dialogue and celebrate together, I am pleased that my Delegation is able to be present as a sign of the Catholic Church’s commitment to continuing the journey of praying and working together, wherever we can, for peace, justice and the good of all.”
All of these ecumenical gatherings since Vatican II have tended to diminish the importance of the Catholic Church and obscure the need to belong to it. For this to be sponsored and promoted by the putative authorities of the Catholic Church is gravely sinful and scandalous.
The far better course would be for all sincere Catholics to finally renounce the errors condemned by Pius XII that have become so prevalent today. In so doing, we would be rendering one of the most faithful and charitable services possible to the Church and Leo XIV.
However, as bad as this false ecumenism and irenism are, who will condemn them today? To criticize these errors is to call into question not only Francis but also Vatican II, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, which many serious Catholics have no intention of doing. This refusal to condemn the errors that Pius XII and his predecessors condemned has yielded a unique type of religious indifference, which we might term “the heresy of accepting seemingly benign heresies because we adore the pope who promoted them.” This heresy is everywhere today, and those who openly reject it are often excommunicated from Catholic circles.
For this reason, it seems that the greatest risk of the Leo XIV papacy is not that he would simply fail to unwind Francis’s disastrous initiatives, or promote some of his own. Rather, it seems that the real danger is that he would be “good enough” to convince otherwise sensible Catholics that the crisis is over, while leaving untouched the foundational errors of false ecumenism, irenism, and religious liberty. He could “free the Traditional Latin Mass,” correct Fiducia Supplicans and Amoris Laetitia, grant permission for the Society of St. Pius X to consecrate new bishops, and censure the most heretical bishops, but he would still be perpetuating the errors which have undermined Catholic teaching for over sixty years if he maintained the false irenism he recently displayed.
If, then, serious Catholics remain unwilling to condemn the “benign heresies” promoted by Vatican II and John Paul II, then perhaps it is better for Leo XIV to sustain the most visible aspects of the crisis. In that way, we might not be deceived into thinking the cancer is cured merely because the most painful symptoms have temporarily subsided. But the far better course would be for all sincere Catholics to finally renounce the errors condemned by Pius XII that have become so prevalent today. In so doing, we would be rendering one of the most faithful and charitable services possible to the Church and Leo XIV. If we are not willing to do this — by insisting that it is an error to put Catholicism on the same level as Protestantism — why would we bother remaining Catholic? Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!
