Latest

Archbishop Arrieta speaks to AdVaticanum on his retirement, his first impressions of Pope Leo XIV, the Order of Malta, and the ongoing canonical tensions surrounding the SSPX Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru, Secretary of the Dicastery for Legislative Texts, has reached the age of 75, the mandatory retirement age for a bishop, on April 10. To mark the milestone, the Spanish canonist sat down with AdVaticanum to reflect on nearly two decades of service as secretary across three pontificates, his plans for retirement, and the evolving work of the dicastery. He shared his impressions of Pope Leo XIV as he approaches the anniversary of his election, offered a candid assessment of the irregular situation of the Society of St Pius X, and evaluated the 2021 reform of Book VI of the Code of Canon Law, as well as addressing current canonical questions regarding the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, liturgical unity under Traditionis Custodes, and the dubia from priests of the Diocese of Charlotte. Born on April 10, 1951 in Vitoria, Spain, Archbishop Arrieta was ordained a priest of Opus Dei in 1977. A distinguished academic and jurist, he helped establish the faculty of canon law at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross in Rome, where he has taught for many years. Appointed Secretary of the then Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007, he was ordained a titular bishop in 2008. AdVaticanum: Your Excellency, having just turned 75 and therefore being at the point of submitting your resignation in accordance with canon 401 §1, many in the Church are curious about the next chapter for a canonist of your stature who has served the Dicastery for nearly two decades. After such an intense period of service in the Roman Curia, what would you most like to do in retirement? Archbishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru: We will have to take things one step at a time, always trusting in divine providence. As for me, I have always been involved in the field of canon law, both in the Roman Curia and at the university. I plan to continue living in Rome, also because I am a member of various commissions and working groups within the Roman Curia. Furthermore, if possible, I intend to spend more time in the academic environment, continuing my studies and publications on canon law. I am still teaching courses on canon law and Vatican law, both at the Faculty of Canon Law of the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross and at the Faculty of St Pius X in Venice: two institutions I have seen come into being and to which I feel particularly attached. God willing, in the near future I will be able to carry out these teaching duties with greater peace of mind and collaborate with both faculties. Furthermore, I hope to be able to devote myself a little more to pastoral work, which I have missed for many years. AV: As Secretary since your appointment in 2007, spanning the final years of St John Paul II’s pontificate, the entire Benedict XVI era, the full Francis pontificate, and now the early months under Pope Leo XIV, you have had a uniquely continuous vantage point on the work of what was then the Pontifical Council and is now the Dicastery for Legislative Texts. In your view, what are the most significant shifts you have witnessed in the dicastery’s day to day functioning? +JA: In a way, the major changes the dicastery has undergone in recent years are also reflected in the changes to its name over the years. At the beginning of John Paul II’s pontificate, the dicastery was called the “Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law”; it was later renamed the “Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts”, because, starting in 1990, it also had to deal with the Eastern Code of Canon Law in addition to that of the Latin Church. Subsequently, it was renamed more generally the “Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts”, since the role of “interpreting” universal laws had become rather secondary, and the dicastery devoted itself more to revising the universal norms of the Church or to offering consultative opinions on normative documents of the Holy See or of the Episcopal Conferences. Now, however, the name is “Dicastery for Legislative Texts”, and while retaining all the other functions it had in the past, most of its time is devoted to assisting bishops and superiors in the application of canon law in light of new circumstances arising throughout the world. This is very interesting work, because canon law is a body of law in force throughout the world and is confronted with the legal systems of every country in the world, as well as with vastly different cultures and sensibilities. AV: Having served under several Popes, what are your first impressions of working with Pope Leo XIV? +JA: In addition to his personal qualities, his profound spirituality, practical mind and missionary heart, the Pope has a particular fondness for institutional and orderly governance. I believe this stems from his experience leading a religious institute with a long standing tradition within the Church and a widespread presence throughout the world. Furthermore, I believe that, with regard to his style of governance and, in particular, his attitude towards justice and the law, we must appreciate the fact that the Pope received a university education as a canonist and, above all, that he did not limit himself to studying canon law, but had to teach it as a professor of canon law in Peru and, for some time, also practised it as an ecclesiastical judge in the courts. He therefore possesses a very concrete and comprehensive experience of the law that not everyone has, ranging from the purely theoretical to the didactic, and to the practical exercise and application of the law in the service of justice. AV: The SSPX continues to occupy a unique and, for many, pastorally sensitive place in the Church, with the announcement of the July 1 episcopal consecrations. With the recent proposal from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith for a structured theological dialogue aimed at identifying “minimum requirements” for full communion and a possible canonical status, contingent on suspending the announced July 2026 episcopal ordinations without papal mandate, what is your canonical assessment of the current irregular situation of the Society? +JA: For me, this is a very painful matter, especially because during Pope Benedict’s time I had the opportunity to familiarise myself with their situation and to meet with some of their superiors on several occasions. They feel the need for ministers to celebrate certain sacraments, but I believe it was a grave mistake to have presented this matter as an imposition on the Holy See, announcing directly, as if it were a fait accompli, that they intended to carry out episcopal ordinations. This is the attitude of those who, from the outset, consider themselves outside the Church, a stance that contradicts their own awareness that they do not possess ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In fact, when they had to impose disciplinary sanctions for certain conduct by some of their priests, they turned to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which granted them the authority to do so. Moreover, Pope Francis had directly granted their priests the authority to hear confessions worldwide and issued instructions so that diocesan bishops could grant them the authority to assist at weddings, thereby ensuring that the marriages would not be invalid for the Catholic Church due to a lack of canonical form. Now all of this risks being compromised, which is a heavy responsibility for those who decide not to obey the Pope’s instructions. AV: Your Excellency, you personally spearheaded much of the work on the 2021 revision of Book VI of the Code (Pascite gregem Dei), which updated sanctions to better address contemporary situations such as clerical abuse, the attempted ordination of women, and offences against the sacraments. With several years of application now behind us, how do you evaluate the effectiveness of these changes in practice? +JA: The dicastery’s reform of Book VI of the Code has been one of the primary tasks since the pontificate of Pope Benedict, who, drawing on his many years of experience as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was well aware of the practical limitations of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which, in fact, was rarely enforced. It was the future Pope Benedict who laid the groundwork for effectively combating child abuse beginning with the promulgation of the Curia’s 1988 law, the apostolic constitution Pastor Bonus. He was the one who promoted, in the final years of John Paul II’s pontificate, the new penal regulations against abuse, assuming jurisdiction over the matter within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which he himself presided over, because the local episcopate was not managing it effectively. However, the reform of canon penal law required more in depth work, because it was necessary to overcome the prejudices and naivety of the immediate post conciliar period, which had in fact influenced the drafting of the penal norms promulgated in the 1983 Code. Now the principle of criminal legality has been explicitly restored, along with the duty of the ecclesiastical authority to act, without thereby losing the necessary humanity that the penal law of the Catholic Church necessarily entails. VA: The reforms of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta initiated under Pope Francis, particularly the appointment of a special delegate, the drafting of a new constitutional charter, and the emphasis on the Order’s religious character, have raised interesting canonical questions about the relationship between a sovereign subject of international law and the Holy See. Some observers have described it as the Vatican effectively “regulating another country”. Canonically speaking, how do you understand the Holy See’s authority over the Order in light of its dual nature as both a lay religious institute and a sovereign entity? +JA: I have little information on this subject, apart from some theoretical reading and study: I am unfamiliar with the practical realities and concrete needs, so I cannot offer an opinion. I have always believed that, in Church law, concrete situations cannot be resolved with “off the shelf” solutions, but must be tailored to fit, like a suit. Since the Church is a spiritual reality, in which it is the Holy Spirit who moves the initiatives of Christians, “copy and paste” or cookie cutter solutions are of little use; therefore, it is necessary to go through an evaluation by the authority that gives the appropriate legal form in accordance with the flexibility inherent in Church law. With that in mind, it has always seemed to me that, from a legal standpoint, the solution under canon law regarding the institution you mention should have begun with the recognition of its international legal personality and, within the framework of that formal recognition, resolved the religious issues and the remaining matters of various kinds. More specifically, since this is an entity that many countries recognise as sovereign, I believe greater consideration should have been given to the instrument of a concordat: a concordat between the Holy See and the Order, similar to those signed with many countries, would have provided a formal framework consistent with how it is actually perceived in the international arena, and within that framework, the various spiritual and charitable issues raised by this important entity could have been resolved with realism and practicality, etc. AV: A question frequently raised by faithful Catholics attached to the Vetus Ordo concerns how recent liturgical norms, such as those in Traditionis Custodes and its dubia, are to be reconciled with the broader canonical framework for divine worship and the rights of the faithful. From your perspective, how does one provide a clear and authoritative interpretation that safeguards both the unity of the Roman Rite and the legitimate spiritual needs of the faithful who find deeper nourishment in the earlier form? +JA: It seems to me that the Holy Father is fully aware of all these experiences and that he seeks to address them in the best possible way by appealing to everyone’s sense of unity and sensitivity, so that we may coexist with expressions of diversity that do not undermine unity and respect for authority. I believe that promoting unity is one of the central themes we find in the Pope’s words throughout these months of his pontificate. It is not permissible, however, to use the banner of the liturgy to shatter unity or the reverence due to legitimate ecclesiastical authority. Balance is needed. It is important to move forward while respecting the rights of the Christian faithful, and at the same time, we must obey and share in the spirit of unity. AV: Your Excellency, on January 5, 2026, thirty one priests of the Diocese of Charlotte, roughly one quarter of the active clergy and two thirds of them pastors, submitted a formal dubia to this dicastery seeking clarification on whether Bishop Martin’s practices, which explicitly permitted or even favoured by universal liturgical law, such as the use of altar rails, kneelers and prie dieux for the reception of Holy Communion, as announced in the bishop’s pastoral letter of December 17, 2025. The dubia raise fundamental questions about the limits of a diocesan bishop’s liturgical authority in relation to the rights of the faithful and the stability of universal norms. As the dicastery’s Secretary responsible for the authentic interpretation of ecclesiastical law, what is your canonical assessment of the core issues presented in this dubia? +JA: For several years now, our dicastery has been publishing on its website the various opinions and consultations we are asked to provide, omitting, of course, any personal references, whenever we believe they may be of general use to the Church. For us, it is also a way to engage with the legal world and with new situations arising in various parts of the world, seeking to stimulate studies and in depth analysis of specific aspects of canon law. Regarding individual cases, however, as is logical, we are bound to maintain absolute confidentiality, also out of respect for the individuals involved. AV: Thank you very much for your time, Your Excellency, and for your many years of service to the Church.

The Vatican has accepted an appeal from Benedictine monks at Valle de Cuelgamuros against government plans, with ministers claiming an agreement with Cardinal José Cobo and the Vatican, while bishops deny any sign-off The Vatican has formally accepted an appeal lodged by the Benedictine monks of the Valle de Cuelgamuros against plans to “re-signify” the historic and religious monument. Pedro Sánchez administration’s initiative, officially titled “La base y la cruz” (The Base and the Cross), emerged as the winner of an international architectural competition. The winning proposal envisions transforming parts of the complex, including the entrance atrium, the side chapels dedicated to Marian devotions along the nave, and the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament near the main altar. The formal presentation of the project is scheduled for June 2026, deliberately timed to coincide with the anticipated apostolic visit of Pope Leo XIV to Spain. However, Minister Félix Bolaños has claimed that an accord was reached with Cardinal José Cobo of Madrid and the Vatican, declaring: “we reached the agreement with Cardinal Cobo and with the Vatican.” The Spanish Episcopal Conference has, however, pushed back strongly. Monsignor Francisco César García Magán, secretary general and auxiliary bishop of Toledo, stated after the bishops’ 129th plenary assembly that “the Vatican has not been a signatory, there has been no signatory from the Vatican”, and he repeated on several occasions that “no representative of the Vatican has signed”. This is similar to the Archdiocese of Madrid’s statement from March 2025, which clarified that Cardinal Cobo had acted only as a designated interlocutor within an ecclesial commission, without a formal mandate from Rome over the pontifical basilica. Cardinal Cobo has consistently maintained that neither he nor the Archdiocese of Madrid holds canonical authority over the Basilica of the Holy Cross or the Benedictine community. He has insisted that ultimate responsibility rests solely with the Holy See. The Benedictine monks argue that the alleged agreement lacks proper ecclesiastical authority because it was advanced by Cardinal Cobo without the direct involvement of the monastery’s prior or the Holy See, which retains direct jurisdiction over this pontifical basilica, elevated by Pope John XXIII in 1960. The monks have raised particular objections to changes planned for the entrance atrium, a space integral to their liturgical life that has hosted major ceremonies, including priestly ordinations. One such ordination took place there in October of last year, with Cardinal Cobo himself in attendance. Church officials emphasise that canonical norms protecting consecrated spaces remain fully in force, prohibiting any uses unrelated to worship until authorised works can legitimately begin. Further complications surround the status of the Benedictine community. Former prior Santiago Cantera was removed from his post last year amid reported government pressure and internal ecclesiastical decisions. Parallel legal challenges have also emerged. Appeals have been lodged citing procedural deficiencies, including the absence of required licences from the San Lorenzo de El Escorial town hall and the Community of Madrid. Monsignor Luis Argüello, president of the Spanish Episcopal Conference, has called for renewed dialogue. He urged both the government and the Benedictine community to reach “a reasonable and satisfactory agreement for both parties.” His intervention notably made no reference to any prior agreement involving Cardinal Cobo. As of April, the Vatican’s acceptance of the monks’ appeal has moved the entire dispute into a structured canonical process that runs alongside ongoing proceedings in the Spanish courts. The government continues to insist it will begin work on the surroundings and parts of the basilica in June. The Valle de Cuelgamuros, with its massive underground Basilica of the Holy Cross and the world’s tallest Christian cross, remains one of Spain’s most symbolically charged locations. It combines profound religious significance as a consecrated pontifical basilica with its complex historical and political role as a burial site for tens of thousands from both sides of the Spanish Civil War. Pedro Sánchez has taken an interest in the memorial site since the beginning of his time in office, commenting in August 2018, just months after his election, that it should be a “resting place” for those buried there and “a civil cemetery.” In 2022, under the Democratic Memory Law (Ley de Memoria Democrática), Sánchez’s government changed the name from “Valle de los Caídos” (Valley of the Fallen) to “Valle de Cuelgamuros” (the geographical area in which it is located). However, Sánchez’s minority government is coming under increasing pressure from a growing conservative bloc. Among those voters, typically characterised by Vox and People’s Party supporters, there is strong opposition to government intervention at the site and significant criticism of what is seen as his attempts to politicise a religious and historical monument.

Bishop Bernard Fellay has warned that the faithful may face excommunication, as indications from Rome suggest a response is being prepared to possible episcopal consecrations without papal mandate In a surprise turn, the former superior general of the Society of Saint Pius X has warned that the faithful may face excommunication, as indications emerge that Rome has prepared a response to possible episcopal consecrations without a papal mandate. In an exclusive sermon transcript obtained by Advaticanum , Bishop Bernard Fellay told those present at confirmations on Good Shepherd Sunday at the Immaculata in St Mary’s, Kansas, that such a development was increasingly likely. “I prefer not to be a prophet here, but I’m pretty sure that there is an enormous probability that all of you, we included, may be excommunicated, declared schismatic, there is a very high probability because they already said it in public. So, they are so to say forcing themselves to do it. But whatever, God can do miracles. It’s not the end.” He continued by framing the homily in spiritual terms, telling the congregation that “our history shows that God wants us to be a sign of contradiction, a sign that reveals hearts. And a sign of contradiction means the Cross. We must be ready to carry it.” Beyond his warning on possible excommunication, Bishop Fellay used the homily to deliver an extended meditation on the nature of the Church, drawing repeatedly on the theme of Good Shepherd Sunday and the Gospel’s declaration that there shall be “one shepherd and one fold”. He began by stressing that the Church, like the human person, possesses both a visible and an invisible dimension, cautioning against what he described as a tendency to remain at the surface. “God has created us with both body and soul,” he said. “There is a visible part and an invisible part, and both are absolutely real. Indeed, the invisible part, the soul, is far more important. Yet we must not set them in opposition. To separate body and soul is to have death, nothing more.” Developing the point, he compared the Faith to a lake whose depths are often ignored. “Many people are content to admire its beautiful surface and believe they know everything about it. But if you truly wish to understand the lake, you must look beneath the surface.” The same, he said, applies to the Church, which cannot be reduced to outward appearances alone. He referred to the longstanding principle Ecclesia de internis non judicat , that the Church does not judge interior dispositions, and linked this to the sacraments, explaining that while matter and form are visible, intention remains hidden and is presumed when the rites are followed. Faith itself, he continued, is likewise interior, but must be outwardly professed. Citing Scripture, he warned: “These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.” Turning to the liturgy, Bishop Fellay urged the faithful to deepen their engagement with the prayers of the Holy Mass, recommending that they be read in advance so that participation would not remain merely external. He drew on Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre’s Spiritual Journey, describing the liturgy as “the breathing of the soul” when properly united to interior prayer. He contrasted two approaches to worship, saying that one could remain at “the beautiful surface” or “dive deeper”, and insisted that this distinction applied to all aspects of Christian life. Even ordinary daily actions, he said, could be transformed if consciously offered to God: “If, every morning, we offer our entire day to God, all our actions, joys, and sufferings, then everything becomes an act of charity, praise, and glory to God.” The bishop also employed a more pointed comparison when speaking about the liturgy, likening it to a vessel containing grace. “The surface is important. Consider a glass: the liquid inside is more valuable, but without the glass the liquid is lost,” he said, before adding: “This is precisely what has happened with the new liturgy. They have made holes in the vessel of grace. The Traditional Mass is like a full-flowing river of graces, while the new rite often yields only a few drops.” He went on to describe what he called three pillars of the Church’s visible unity: unity of faith, unity of liturgy and unity of government. Each, he argued, had been “severely struck”. On the unity of faith, he claimed that belief had diminished significantly in various parts of the Church, asserting that outward profession did not always correspond to interior conviction. “They may still recite the Creed outwardly, but interiorly the faith is dead. Whoever denies even one truth of the faith has lost the faith entirely.” The homily was delivered in relation to the question of episcopal consecrations and possible sanctions. According to this publication’s Vatican correspondent, Niwa Limbu, officials within the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith are preparing for the possibility of a formal declaration of excommunication not only of bishops but also of priests belonging to the Society. Vatican correspondent Nico Spuntoni, writing for Il Giornale, relayed that “as far as I know, the Dicastero for the Doctrine of the Faith is already prepared for the possibility of excommunicating the SSPX following the ordinations.” The Holy See has already set out its position in clear terms. In a statement issued following a meeting between the prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the superior general of the Society, it reiterated that episcopal ordinations carried out without pontifical mandate would have grave consequences. The statement said that “the ordination of Bishops without a mandate from the Holy Father, who possesses supreme, full, universal, immediate and direct ordinary power (cf. CIC, can. 331; Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, chapters I and III), would imply a decisive rupture of ecclesial communion (schism) with grave consequences for the Fraternity as a whole.” Other less official reporting suggests that a similar course may now be under consideration. The blog Rorate Caeli, citing anonymous Roman sources, reported on April 25 that Pope Leo XIV has “decided to follow the ‘1988 jurisprudence’” in relation to any forthcoming consecrations by the Society. According to the report, a decree has already been prepared “similar in tone and content to the one promulgated by Pope John Paul II through Cardinal Bernardin Gantin … on 1 July 1988.” For now, both the warnings from the Holy See and the words of the Society’s leadership indicate that a decisive point may be approaching.

Pope Leo has reaffirmed that the Holy See does not approve the blessing of same sex couples, as Cardinal Marx advances new pastoral provisions in Munich. Pope Leo has reaffirmed that the Holy See does not approve the blessing of same sex couples, in remarks delivered to journalists on the return flight to Rome on April 23 following his recent apostolic journey to Africa. The Pope addressed the issue directly when asked about the divergence with developments in Germany after Cardinal Reinhard Marx confirmed new pastoral provisions permitting such blessings in his archdiocese. He cautioned against reducing ecclesial doctrinal questions to a single moral issue, stating: “First of all, I think it’s very important to understand that the unity or division of the Church should not revolve around sexual matters.” He added that “there are much greater, more important issues, such as justice, equality, freedom of men and women, freedom of religion”. Turning to the specific question, the Pope said: “The Holy See has made it clear that we do not agree with the formalised blessing of couples, in this case, homosexual couples … or couples in irregular situations, beyond what was specifically … allowed for by Pope Francis in saying all people receive blessings.” His Holiness emphasised that blessings given at the end of Mass or major liturgical celebrations are “for all people”, adding that Pope Francis’s phrase “Tutti, tutti, tutti” reflects that universal invitation. He warned that “to go beyond that today … can cause more disunity than unity”. The intervention follows confirmation earlier in the week, reported by AdVaticanum, that the Archdiocese of Munich and Freising will implement the guidelines Segen gibt der Liebe Kraft (“Blessing Gives Love Strength”) as a foundation for pastoral practice. The text, adopted by the German Bishops’ Conference and the Central Committee of German Catholics, is now to be applied across the archdiocese. In a letter to clergy and pastoral staff, Cardinal Marx wrote: “To all couples who love each other and seek a blessing from the Church for their partnership, I wish that they may feel God’s grace in this blessing.” The directive states that “no couple should be turned away” if they request such a blessing, and establishes that access is not to depend on the personal position of individual priests. The archdiocese has also announced that training sessions will begin in June to prepare clergy and lay pastoral workers to carry out the ceremonies. Those unwilling to perform the blessings themselves are expected to refer couples to another minister. Cardinal Marx acknowledged likely resistance, asking that the “theological meaning” of the practice be explained to those who “still struggle with this blessing”. The guidelines insist that such blessings are not equivalent to marriage, while stating that this distinction should not result in exclusion. “This does not mean that the blessing of a non sacramental union … pushes the couple to the margins of the community and the Church,” the text says, adding: “Couples should be welcomed in the heart of the community. Therefore, the Church asks God to bless and grant good things to these couples.” The developments in Munich come within the increasingly differing trajectory of the German synodal way. The Holy See has intervened on several occasions, including a 2021 declaration from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stating that the Church “does not have, and cannot have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex”.

Bishop David Waller has dismissed reports that Ordinariate clergy were instructed by Rome to concelebrate Holy Mass, calling the claim a “mischievous lie” The Bishop of the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham has rejected claims that priests of the ordinariates have been instructed to concelebrate Mass, insisting that no such directive has been issued by Rome and describing the reports as false. The story first circulated on April 23 on the website Rorate Caeli, which claimed that the Prefect of the Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Cardinal Arthur Roche, had “ordered” ordinariate clergy to concelebrate and had further prohibited priests from functioning as deacons or subdeacons within ordinariate liturgies. The claims were penned by the liturgist Peter Kwasniewski, who suggested that the measures followed a meeting in Rome and reflected concerns about liturgical practice within the ordinariates. However, Bishop David Waller told Niwa Limbu, AdVaticanum Vatican correspondent, that the reports were unfounded. “It is totally untrue,” he said. “It is a mischievous lie!” He said that no new instructions had been issued and that recent discussions among the three ordinaries had been limited to reiterating existing norms. “What is true is that the three Ordinariate bishops had a conversation about liturgy and have reminded our priests that Divine Worship: The Missal is governed by the rubrics printed in the rite, its rubrical directory and the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. Nothing new there, it’s all printed in the missal. It is not permissible to introduce different rubrics from different rites – never was.” He added: “The three bishops have simply reminded people what the rubrics of our rite require. Any rite is both words and rubrics and must be followed.” Subsequently, Peter Kwasniewski acknowledged that Bishop David Waller had denied that a meeting with Cardinal Arthur Roche had taken place. He wrote that this “may be technically correct”, adding that his source had clarified that the meeting in question involved Bishop Steven Lopes rather than the three ordinaries together, although originally it was noted that it was the “Bishops of the Ordinariate”. “This may be technically correct; when queried, my source specified that it was a meeting of Bishop Steven Lopes with Cardinal Roche, which makes sense if Roche perceived a problem specifically with the more traditionally minded members of the Anglican Ordinariate in the United States,” he wrote. In a separate communication with The Pillar, Bishop David Waller reiterated that no priest would be compelled to concelebrate. The bishop said that concelebration was “permitted and encouraged” but added: “Any priest has the right to celebrate individually. That’s law, not just for the ordinariate.” He also denied that any meeting with Cardinal Arthur Roche had taken place during a visit to Rome in March. The visit, he said, included an audience with Pope Leo and meetings with officials of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, which has oversight of the ordinariates. In the email cited by The Pillar, he explained that he had discussed liturgical matters with Bishop Steven Lopes and Archbishop Anthony Randazzo. “The three bishops did discuss some liturgical matters and note, as a matter of fact, that, as is the case with any rite, ‘Divine Worship’ must be celebrated according to its rubrics,” he said. “The rubrics are: those in the text of the rite itself, the rubrical directory printed in the missal, the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, and the Ceremonial of Bishops.” He added: “In some places, very few in the UK, there has been a tendency to draw on rubrics from other rites, and that is not permissible.” As an example, he said that a priest might use the text of the ordinariate missal while adopting the manual actions of the older Roman Rite. “Any rite is words and rubrics, and it is a liturgical abuse to mix and match,” he said. Rorate Caeli later amended its report, removing the reference to a meeting between the three bishops and Cardinal Arthur Roche. In a note appended to the article, it said that Bishop David Waller had denied such a meeting, while maintaining that a separate encounter involving Bishop Steven Lopes may have taken place. A source close to Bishop Steven Lopes told AdVaticanum that a message had circulated internally within Ordinariate priestly circles in America but indicated that it was unlikely that he had met Cardinal Arthur Roche, noting that all three bishops had followed similar itineraries in Rome. The Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham was established in 2011 following the promulgation of Anglicanorum coetibus by Pope Benedict XVI, providing a structure for groups of former Anglicans to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church while retaining elements of their liturgical and spiritual patrimony. It was followed by the establishment of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter in 2012 for North America and the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross for Australia and parts of Asia.

Pope Leo has brought his first African journey to a close with a final Mass in Malabo, ending an 11 day visit across Algeria, Cameroon, Angola and Equatorial Guinea The final Mass in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea, has brought to a close the first African journey of Pope Leo XIV, ending an 11 day visit that has taken him across four countries. Speaking at the end of the Mass, the Pope told the faithful plainly: “The time has come” to depart, thanking “the Archbishop, the bishops, the clergy and all the people of God journeying in this land”, and marking the conclusion of a visit that has combined large public gatherings with pointed addresses to political authorities. The journey, which ran from April 13 to 23, brought the Pontiff to Algeria, Cameroon, Angola and Equatorial Guinea, covering more than 11,000 miles and including 18 flights, alongside a programme of Masses, formal addresses and meetings with civil and religious leaders. It is the first apostolic journey of his pontificate to Africa, a continent now home to almost 300 million Catholics. In Malabo, closing the visit, the Pope spoke of what he described as “an immeasurable treasure of faith, hope and charity”, adding that “this treasure consists of stories, faces and testimonies, both joyful and sorrowful, which will greatly enrich my life and ministry as the Successor of Peter”. He thanked the country’s civil authorities for their welcome and entrusted the people of Equatorial Guinea and the wider continent to the care of the Virgin Mary. The Pope made several brief greetings to journalists aboard the papal plane on key legs of the journey. These were not full press conferences with questions and answers but short, unprompted or lightly interactive addresses. During the outbound flight from Rome to Algiers, Pope Leo addressed early comments from the US President Donald Trump criticising his stance on geopolitical issues. His Holiness said: “I have no fear of neither the Trump administration nor of speaking out loudly about the message of the Gospel. And that’s what I believe I am called to do and what the Church is called to do. We’re not politicians. We’re not looking to make foreign policy, as he calls it, with the same perspective that he might understand it. But I do believe that the message of the Gospel, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers’, is a message that the world needs to hear today.” The visit began in Algiers on April 13, where the Pope was received with official honours and met President Abdelmadjid Tebboune. Addressing civil authorities and the diplomatic corps, he spoke of the importance of coexistence before visiting the Great Mosque of Algiers. There, His Holiness said: “To seek God is also to recognise the image of God in every creature … it is very important to learn to live together with respect for the dignity of every human person.” He added that such encounters show that “we can learn to respect one another, live in harmony and build a world of peace”. Later the same day, the Pope met the small Catholic community at the Basilica of Our Lady of Africa, describing them as a “humble and faithful sign of Christ’s love”. The following day, Leo travelled to Annaba, the ancient Hippo Regius associated with St Augustine of Hippo. Visiting the ruins and celebrating Holy Mass, Pope Leo said: “God’s heart is torn apart by wars, violence, injustice and lies … God’s heart is with the little ones, with the humble, and with them he builds up his Kingdom of love and peace day by day.” Speaking to journalists aboard the flight from Algeria to Cameroon on April 15, Pope Leo XIV offered a brief but reflective account of the opening stage of his journey, describing it as “a very blessed trip” and “a special blessing for me personally”. He did not take questions, instead delivering a short prepared reflection in a notably relaxed tone. He expressed gratitude to the Algerian authorities for their welcome, including the military escort for the papal plane, stating: “It is a sign of the goodness, of the generosity, of the respect that the Algerian people and the Algerian government have wished to show to the Holy See, to myself.” Turning to the visit to the Great Mosque of Algiers, he underlined its significance, saying: “I think the visit to the mosque was significant and to say that although we have different beliefs, we have different ways of worshipping, we have different ways of living, we can live together in peace.” Reflecting on the Catholic presence in Algeria, he described the local community as “very small, but very significant”, before returning to the previous day’s visit to Annaba, associated with St Augustine of Hippo: “It was a special honor for me to return to Annaba yesterday also to offer the Church and the world the vision that St Augustine offers us in terms of that search for God and the struggle to build community, to seek for unity among all people, and respect for all peoples in spite of the differences.” From Algeria, the Pope travelled to Cameroon on April 15, where His Holiness met President Paul Biya in Yaoundé and addressed authorities, civil society and diplomats. In one of the most direct passages of the journey, Leo said: “In order for peace and justice to prevail, the chains of corruption must be broken. Hearts must be set free from an idolatrous thirst for profit.” The Pope added that “authentic peace arises when … the law serves as a secure safeguard against the whims of the rich and powerful”. The following day, he travelled to Bamenda, the centre of the country’s Anglophone crisis, where he met Christian and Muslim leaders. Speaking at a peace gathering, he said: “The world is being ravaged by a handful of tyrants, yet it is held together by a multitude of supportive brothers and sisters.” He warned against those who “manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic or political gain”, adding: “Peace is not something we must invent: it is something we must embrace.” Large public gatherings followed, including Holy Mass in Douala attended by tens of thousands, where he urged young people to resist corruption and remain rooted in faith and family life. During the subsequent flight from Yaoundé to Angola on April 18, the Pope delivered a more extended in-flight address in which he both reviewed the Cameroon leg and addressed media interpretations of his remarks. Opening with a multilingual greeting, “Buongiorno. Bonjour. Good morning everyone. Good afternoon already. I hope you had a good time in Cameroon. And, as you know of course, we are on our way now to Angola”. He referred to a monument at the Catholic University depicting St Augustine of Hippo at the centre of the continent, before restating his purpose: “I primarily come to Africa as a pastor, as the head of the Catholic Church to be with and to celebrate with, to encourage and accompany all of the Catholics throughout Africa.” Addressing reports that his peace remarks in Bamenda had been directed at US President Donald Trump, he rejected that interpretation, saying: “At the same time, there has been a certain narrative that has not been accurate in all of its aspects … Much of what has been written since then has been more commentary on commentary trying to interpret what has been said.” His Holiness added a specific clarification: “Just one little example: the talk that I gave at the prayer meeting for peace a couple of days ago was prepared two weeks ago, well before the President ever commented on myself and on the message of peace that I am promoting.” Concluding, he reiterated the continuity of the journey’s message: “So we go on the journey, we continue proclaiming the Gospel message … promote fraternity, brotherhood, trusting in the Lord, but also looking for ways to promote justice in our world, promote peace in our world.” The visit continued in Angola from April 18, where the Pope met President João Lourenço in Luanda. Addressing authorities, the Pope criticised what he called the “logic of extractivism” and the “cycle of interests” that has long shaped the exploitation of resources. At the Marian shrine of Muxima, he led the Rosary and told pilgrims: “It is love that must triumph, not war”, calling on the faithful to become “messengers of life”. In Saurimo, addressing a large crowd, His Holiness said: “We can see today how the hope of many people is frustrated by violence, exploited by the powerful and defrauded by the rich … when injustice corrupts hearts, the bread of all becomes the possession of a few.” The final leg of the journey brought him to Equatorial Guinea on April 21, where His Holiness was received by President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo. Addressing authorities, he drew on the City of God to frame a contrast between political choices, asking leaders to consider whether they wished to serve “the city of God” or “the earthly city”. He said that governance must be rooted in “authentic liberty, justice, respect and promotion of the rights of every person”. During the visit, he met young people, cultural representatives and the country’s bishops, and visited a psychiatric hospital, where he told patients: “God loves us just as we are.” In Bata, he visited a prison, telling inmates: “You are not alone. Your families love you and are waiting for you … If any of you fear being abandoned by everyone, know that God will never abandon you, and that the Church will stand by your side.” He added: “No one is excluded from God’s love.” He also prayed at a memorial to victims of the March 7, 2021 explosions, before meeting families and young people, urging them to form “free and responsible consciences” and to work for the common good. The journey concluded on April 23 with the final Mass in Malabo Stadium, attended by large crowds. In his closing words, the Pope returned to the themes that have marked the visit, thanking those he had encountered and pointing to the enduring presence of the Church.