Reflection by Pope Leo XIV Dear friends, the historic and cultural differences in our Churches represent a wonderful mosaic of our shared Christian heritage, which is something we can all appreciate. At the same time, we should continue to support each other, so that we may grow in our shared faith in Christ, who is the ultimate source of our peace. This requires that we learn to “disarm ourselves.” (Address to the Participants in the Study Visit of Young Priests and Monks from the Eastern Orthodox Churches - February 5, 2026)
“We should continue to support each other”.. but we will excommunicate the SSPX for defending the Catholic faith..
@myunkie, unlike you and that theologian from Rome, I agree more with Catherine of Siena who says; shout at the top of your voice, because of the silence I see how the world burns and perishes. What is also necessary to know is not to mix pears and apples, that is, not to mix the times in which it is necessary to do one thing and not to refer to the other...
As the preacher teaches us, there is a time for everything;
A time to be born and
a time to die;
a time to plant and
a time to uproot what is planted.
A time to kill and
a time to heal;
a time to tear down and
a time to build.
A time to cry and
a time to laugh;
a time to mourn and
a time to dance.
A time to throw stones and
a time to gather stones;
a time to embrace and
a time to forsake embracing.
A time to seek and
a time to lose;
a time to keep and
a time to throw away.
A time to shout and
a time to sing;
a time to keep silence and
a time to speak.
A time to kiss and
a time to hate;
a time to war and
a time to peace.
We see in the passage that it is not said here that there is a time for humility. No, we should always be humble. But this absolutely does not mean that we can be cowards in calling for humility, in fact, with a desire to remain in security and comfort.
So when such a theologian, and there are many of them, says: "I don't have the competence to say that.", - To say WHAT, I ask him? To ask the question: can a non-Catholic be pope? Or can a heretic be pope?
So do I need to say, or even silently think how that is simply possible? Because I have no authority for WHAT? To ask that question? That, my friend, is not humility, but a great mistake. And it reflects human lukewarmness and languor, and not at all humility. That is why I say at the beginning, that we should not mix apples and oranges.
All of us, including that theologian from Rome, and there are many of them, are obliged to shout from the rooftops at the top of our voices if we see a wolf coming to devour the flock entrusted to us. And let alone when the wolves have already penetrated the fold.
We must shout, my friend. We shout at the top of our voices. And not to be smart about theology and humility, while Mother Church burns in a flame set by the enemy.
What the theologian was saying was that he was not competent to answer the question. He provides many examples from prior popes and councils which indicate the (then) pope being a material heretic, and was very "shouty" about the need to hold fast to the Apostolic Faith. He was not competent, i.e. did not have the authority, to pass judgement on a the Pope.
My own approach, as a layman, is a bit different. We, as Christians, believe that the soul is immortal and Peter and some 200 Popes are very much alive in Heaven (other popes are less fortunate). Peter, for example, left the earthly chair of Peter but lives on in Heaven. When John-Paul II contradicted St Peter, he was not simply contradicting some old doctrine but contradicting the living Saint and Pope. As a matter of fact, he contradicts 200-ish popes who are also living. As a good member of the Catholic and Apostolic church, I listen to the 200 even if it contradicts the individual currently in that role. I think that is a competence of my station in life and I pass that on to others as opportunities arise.
ru.news and 9 more users link to this post
"He simply was never taught the Apostolic Faith."
But he should be concidered as Catholic Pope?
The best response I have heard to that question, and it is a valid question, was from a priest with a doctorate in theology from a papal university, "I don't have the competence to say that." It takes humility to say, "I will defer to the competent authority."
It certainly is frustrating, but there is a peace in saying, The apostacy at the top of the church was foretold 400 years ago by Our Lady of Good Success. While apostacy in the Vatican is bad, it is clearly allowed by God which means that some greater good will come from it. It is worth noting that the full title of our Lady of Good Success is "Our Lady of Good Success of the Purification." We can see that the corruption is there and have good hope, as foretold, there will be purification in God's time.
myunkie The true Title is Our Lady of Buen Suceso of The Purification. Translation is Our Lady of Good Event! Not success. Once an SSPX Priest Father Purdy said, it's not success. We aren't going to win the lottery. It is an event. An important time. More or less.
This is not the video I was referring to. But it should help. (Below)
Nuns from Ecuador came to America to teach the true title. That's how serious the translation is.
This is why there is so much confusion. People aren't told the truth. They make up what they want us to know. There is a great difference in just that one word. And the true meaning.
Ask Father Purdy: Why Do You Say Buen Suceso Instead Of Good Success?
I think it is important not to treat Leo harshly on this matter. He simply was never taught the Apostolic Faith. He does not know that over 40 groups of "Christians" were declared heretics over the centuries (Arian-Christians, Nestorian-Christians, Monophysit-Christians, etc.). Using the title "Christian" and even believing in "Christ", does not give access to the promises of Christ. Those promises apply to those who believe and act on the fullness of the Apostolic Faith and none other.
When one says that "all faiths are true", the only thing we know is that the speaker's faith is not true.