(Summary: Thoughts, Comments, and Observations of Eric Sammons recent article titled “Is a Leonine Unity Even Possible?”)
Last year, after Prevost was ‘elected’ to the papacy, I wrote a few blogs capturing what Prevost as ‘Pope’ Leo, had outlined as one of his priorities: ‘Unity’ (large caps, being the theme of this blog). In these previous blogs I held a fundamental presumption. The presumption was that the “Unity” which Leo was referring to being an internal one – based on what I saw was fractures & divisive views emanating within Catholicism. I also summarized this picture in a few separate Substack blogs (which you can read here [Unity or Division – An analysis of the changing Catholic Landscape under Pope Leo XIV] and here [Michael Matt’s strategic ‘wait and watch’ paralysis] in case you missed them), where I wrote in one of them of the state of Catholics today:
Apart from the garden variety Novus Ordo and Conservative Catholics, Traditional Catholics, also called ‘Trads’, are highly diverse in their outlook, and range from Semi Trads, Rad Trads, SSPX only Trads, Sedes (Sedevacantist and Sedeprivationists), & some who hold to a ‘Benevacantist’ position (that Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation was invalid, and therefore Francis wasn’t a valid Pope).
With this background, it ‘appeared’ (at least to me) that the Unity being pursued by Leo would be an internal one – After all, it was important to fix one’s house in order before trying to help your neighbour, at least in my humble opinion. I therefore predicted that Leo would restore allowances to the TLM though with due changes to Traditionis Custodes. For brevity, I can just say that I have since changed my view. The reasons, or essence of my beliefs were articulated in the below blog
Subsequent to the above blog, and in addition, the recent news coming out of the recently concluded Consistory held by Leo can also be interpreted as a ‘negative’ to the hopes of us Trads desiring the restoration/permission for the TLM.
In summary: I earlier presumed that the Unity that Leo was referring to was internal. In order for the restoration of internal unity, I further presumed that Leo would allow for the TLM as a quid pro quo move (I also ‘hoped’ that he would restore cancelled priests such as Fr. Altman, Bp. Strickland, Abp. Vigano – silly me). Ergo, my faulty presupposition made me make further faulty (albeit hopeful) predictions.
Why do I bring this up?
Eric Sammons (Crisis Magazine), posted recently asking the question: Is Leonine Unity Even Possible
In this article, Sammons says the following in context with the background of Unity.
“One significant clue pointing to Leo’s efforts at internal unity is the Church figures he has already met with. From Cardinal Burke to Fr. James Martin, the pope seems intent on listening to every perspective within the Church. He’s committed to bringing those with diverse viewpoints and worldviews together in order to end—or at least reduce—the fierce battles raging among Catholics. It’s a noble goal, and it makes sense that this is a papal priority” [emphasis mine]
Sammons actually believes that Leo’s method or “way” is to foster “dialogue” and be a true “bridge-builder”. To his credit Sammons asks a valid rhetorical question,
Can unity actually be achieved in the way the pope seems to desire? Can Fr. James Martin be united with Cardinal Burke, not just de jure, but de facto?
which he answers to some degree later by stating,
Here we must remember the key ingredient in any real unity, which is truth.[…]
And
The reality is that unity between a Fr. James Martin and a Cardinal Burke is not possible without repentance on the part of Fr. Martin and those aligned with him. Those who teach error must repent for their rejection of Catholic doctrine[…]
He went on to state that the remedy for such unrepentant “wolves” is excommunication:
But what if the wolves in shepherd’s clothing do not repent? What is the path to unity then? Sadly, it means bringing back an ancient and harsh medicine little used today: excommunication. [emphasis mine]
As you can see here, Sammons makes the same mistake as I did. He believes that Leo is hoping for an internal unity amongst Catholics.
This presumption, colours his lens. And this skews Sammons ‘hopes’ & predictions.
Yes Leo does talk a lot about Unity. But it is never (if not rare) in context with Unity of all Catholics who ought to hold fast to the Depositum Fidei (Deposit of Faith) until the Second Vatican Council. More often than not, Leo on the rare occasion that he speaks of Unity, is speaking in context with his other manifesto-mandate: Synodality. Other than that, on the several occasions he has spoken about Unity, it has always been in context with the “Separated Brethren” espoused since Vatican II: i.e. The Orthodox, The Anglicans, The myriad Protestants, and even the Jews/Muslims.
Leo has made this clear on multiple occasions, a few of which I list below:
- “My priority is that of seeking the re-establishment of full and visible communion among Christians”
- Pope Leo XIV’s Nicaea moment and the missing Filioque (The Filioque was omitted to placate the Orthodox – note that Sammons himself, who wrote a book titled ‘Deadly Indifference’, called Catholics who criticized it as being “knee jerk”, although he does not support suppressing of the filioque by Pope Leo)
- Pope calls for unity among world’s religions to promote peace, justice, ethical AI (This was stated during the 60th anniversary marking “Nostra Aetate”)
- Pope Leo XIV says the unity of the Church ‘is nourished by forgiveness and mutual trust’ (Here again, the context was extending a call to unity to all Christian denominations).
Sure, there is the odd, rare occasion where Leo does allude to ‘Catholic’ unity, such is in this article, where he addresses Catholics in a vague, generalized way, speaking of mission, charism, talents, etc. This has generally been the exception; a seeming formality, if you will. Note that there is no real intervention to build bridges to that TLM hoped for by Trad Inc. and many an esteemed Cardinal or Bishop (looking at you Burke, Zen, Schneider, Müller, Sarah)
In reality, Leo has been gravitating towards “Christian Unity” (read as “Separated Brethren”, thanks to that ‘Council’ to rule all Councils) right from the get-go. So it would be incongruous to think that he is going to do anything remotely helpful in healing the wounds experienced by Trads – who are literally hung out to dry, and don’t have any say in the question of Unity.
So when Sammons says,
Leo’s desire for internal Catholic unity is a noble goal, and it’s one that all Catholics should work toward […]And a key ingredient of unity, …is truth.
We must agree with him.
However, if Sammons is unable to see through the equivocation involved when Leo uses the word Unity, he will continue to see Leo with the rose-tinted lens that most Trads today are using, viz; agreeing that we have to be united in truth, but unable to be critical of those who cannot articulate where that ‘truth’ lies – even if it be the ‘Pope’. Recall that we are dealing with a ‘Pope’ who in context to abortion could not even muster up the courage to call it evil, unable to forthrightly state the truth on the subject, shamefully stating that these were,
“…very complex issues. I don’t know if anyone has all the truth on them […]”
How can Sammons pin his hopes to a ‘Unity’ in ‘Truth’, when the ‘Pope’ cannot even whisper what is truth in context with a no-brainer fundamental Christian issue such as abortion? Maybe this is something that Sammons ought to ponder about, and perhaps my own initial judgmental flaw can perhaps help him relook at things with a different lens.
As an anecdotal aside, I still frequent the Novus Ordo church near me for daily Mass (well, at least most days). Just this week, a couple of days back, there was a ‘pastor’ introduced to the congregation after Mass, on the occasion of “Christian Unity week”, who took the pulpit to deliver his message to those who cared to stay back. Needless to say, I walked out. Rest assured, many other parishes in the city of Mumbai, apart from India would have faced a similar fate. I hope that Sammons can appreciate that in the name of unity, we have now begun hopelessly comprising not only our structures, but also the message that go out to Catholics in the pews. Sure, with YouTube & other social media tools, Catholics could listen to Pastor Bob’s message. But the fact that Pastor Bob now has the microphone on the pulpit, makes the idea of ‘Unity’ a different and real worry, viz: Is this Unity meant to preserve Catholicism, or to make it indistinguishable from any other Christian or other world religion? I would like to leave this question for Sammons, if he does happen to read this blog. I think he may already know the answer to this. Question is, will he hold Leo accountable to it? is what I am interested in knowing.
At the time of writing this, I note that Chris Jackson has already addressed a specific aspect which Sammons avoids (namely: “The entire Trad Inc psychology is as follows: Ignore. Wait. Pray. Keep the brand intact. Hope the next management team fixes the mess”), in his article. You can refer Chris’s article here if you haven’t read it already.
Ave Maria
(This article was originally published on my Substack Account on 22nd Jan 2026)
