Leo XIV has repudiated the authority of the Catholic Church: here’s how
Synodality not only diminishes ecclesiastical authority but destroys it.
Pope Leo XIVShutterstock
- 21
Wed Jul 1, 2026 - 6:47 pm EDT
Listen to this article
27 min
(LifeSiteNews) — On June 26, Leo XIV told an “extraordinary consistory” of cardinals that they “are called to be builders of Christ’s communion, a communion that takes shape in a synodal Church.” [1]
The construction of the Synodal Church, which accompanies the building of a new society called variously the “city of God,” the “new Jerusalem,” and the “civilization of love,” was a central theme of his recent “encyclical letter” Magnifica Humanitas.
Leo told the cardinals that during the consistory they would “explore Magnifica Humanitas in greater depth, examining the contribution that the Church can make to building up the common good,” which “(f)or the church takes on a very specific form: a synodal style at the service of the mission of the Kingdom.”
Leo explained that:
Synodality is not, first and foremost, a set of procedures; as I have said on several occasions, synodality is an attitude, an openness, a willingness to understand.
He acknowledged that:
At times it has been interpreted as a diminishment of authority.
But insisted:
In reality, it helps us to understand more deeply the meaning of authority itself, which exists to safeguard communion, to foster the participation of all, and to guide the Church’s common journey.
In fact, synodality not only diminishes ecclesiastical authority, it destroys it. To understand why, let’s follow Leo’s own advice and examine Magnifica Humanitas in “greater depth.”
Haut du formulaire
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY HEADLINES
Bas du formulaire
The destruction of authority in Magnifica Humanitas
In an earlier article on Leo XIV’s first “encyclical,” Magnifica Humanitas, I argued that the document was “a blueprint for the destruction of the Catholic Church.”
Throughout the text, Leo XIV undermines – or outright denies – the authority of the Catholic Church to teach, sanctify, and govern mankind.
As I wrote in the previous article:
For the new society, there will be a new church. For Leo, the age of the Catholic Church, established by God and exercising divine authority, is over. Leo’s church is one which carries out “her particular vocation of listening, dialogue and service, and of being responsive to everything concerning the lives of contemporary men and women.” [2]
This church “stands alongside the world without overpowering it” because its doctrine is not “a handbook of principles and norms to be applied, but a process of shared discernment.”[3] It is “committed to reflecting on the concrete reality of historical situations, rather than abstract concepts.” [4]
This church has the “mission” of “transforming the structures of society from within and forging paths toward a greater humanity.” [5]
Such a church cannot, of course, be the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ, hence Leo XIV gives it a new name: “a synodal Church, a Church that ‘walks together.’” [6]
In this article, I will focus on Leo’s use of the concept of “dialogue” and how it is incompatible with the authority of the Catholic Church. Other aspects of Leo’s treatment of authority will be dealt with in future articles.
The concept of ‘dialogue’
In the introduction of Magnifica Humanitas, we are told that the Church wishes “to engage in dialogue with all men and women of our time, with whom we share in the events, questions and aspirations of humanity” and also “that openness to dialogue is an integral part of the Church’s vocation.” [7]
If we are to build Leo’s new “City of God,” we must accept the task of “transforming diversity into a resource and of making listening and dialogue the common ground upon which to cultivate justice and fraternity.” [8]
Leo holds that “dialogue with the world is not a tactical choice for the Church, but a concrete expression of her mission,” and that in order “to build the civilization of love, we must engage in dialogue, for this is the primary means of coexistence between people and nations.” [9] In particular, “interreligious dialogue plays a decisive role, because at the heart of the great spiritual paths lies a message of peace.” [10]
Leo XIV has made “dialogue” a major theme of his putative pontificate; the term appears repeatedly in sermons, catechesis, and teaching documents. Yet, it is not a term that the Catholic Church has used in her teaching.
Professor Romano Amerio, in his study of the changes after Vatican II, noted:
Some words that had never been used in papal documents and which occurred only in specific fields have acquired an enormous popularity in the short space of a few years. The most notable of these is the word dialogue, which was previously unused in the Church. [11]
He continued:
Vatican II used it twenty-eight times and coined the famous formula which expresses the axis or main intention of the council: dialogue with the world and mutual dialogue between the Church and the world. [12]
Leo XIV has far surpassed Vatican II. The council may have used it 28 times across all 16 documents, but Leo uses it 36 times in Magnifica Humanitas alone.
Amerio explained how the word was used by the council and by those who applied its approach in the years that followed:
The word became a category embracing the whole of reality, going far beyond the ambit of logic and rhetoric within which it had previously been confined. Everything had a dialogical structure. Some even went so far as to imagine a dialogical structure in the divine essence (considered as one, not as three), a dialogical structure in the Church, in religion, in the family, in peace, in truth and so on. [13]
And this has had the following consequence:
Everything becomes dialogue, and truth in facto esse dissolves into its own fierias dialogue. [14]
That is, truth is no longer considered as an objective unchanging reality but is presented as always being in a process of becoming.
This is what Leo XIV is doing when he states that Catholic doctrine is not “a handbook of principles and norms to be applied, but a process of shared discernment.” [15]
In other words, he is saying that the Church does not possess objectively true principles but rather discovers the truth through dialogue with the world.
Hence, Leo also writes that the Church is “committed to reflecting on the concrete reality of historical situations, rather than abstract concepts” and states her doctrine “is not an inert set of concepts, but a living corpus of truth that safeguards and interprets humanity’s vocation to a full and just life.” [16]
The Catholic Church has authority from Jesus Christ
St. Mark relates that those who heard Jesus at the beginning of his ministry “were amazed by his teaching, for he sat there teaching them like one who had authority, not like the scribes.” (Mk 1:22)
Jesus taught with authority because He was God.
After His Resurrection, He told His apostles:
All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. (Mt 28: 18)
And He continued immediately:
You, therefore, must go out, making disciples of all nations, and baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all the commandments which I have given you. And behold I am with you all through the days that are coming, until the consummation of the world. (Mt 28: 19-20)
The Catholic Church possesses an authority given to her by God for the salvation of mankind. Our Lord Jesus Christ, who created and sustains all things, and who is King and Ruler of the whole universe, absolutely commands all men to enter His Church on pain of eternal damnation. His last instruction to His Apostles before His Ascension into Heaven was:
Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mk 16: 15-16)
The Church preaches with His authority and must be obeyed. She does not “dialogue” with mankind about what the gospel requires. On the contrary, as St. Paul teaches, she calls “all nations” to “the obedience of faith.” (Rm 1:5)
The role of authority in the Catholic Church
The exercise of authority is essential to the existence of every society. This is because, as Aristotle noted, every society “is established with a view to some good; for mankind always acts in order to obtain that which they think good.” [17]
For example, the family is ordered to the raising of children, a hospital to the care of the sick, a seminary to the formation of priests, and so on.
To achieve its proper end, it is necessary that the members of a society be directed toward the end by the exercise of authority. In the absence of authority, the members, no matter how well intentioned, will not be able to coordinate their actions.
Imagine the condition of a family that consisted only of young children without parents, a hospital without management, or a seminary without a rector. Chaos and disorder would result that would prevent the society achieving its proper end.
If there is no authority, there is no society, merely an aggregate of human beings.
The Catholic Church is a divine society established by God Himself for the salvation of souls. Like all societies, it is presided over by authority. The Church is ruled by her Divine Founder and Divine Head, Jesus Christ, whose Mystical Body she is.
Our Lord exercises authority over His Church by means of His threefold power:
· by His teaching power He infallibly teaches the entirety of Divine Revelation to every generation.
· by His sanctifying power He makes souls holy through His sacraments, and other sacred rites.
· by His governing power He directs souls toward eternal union with Himself, through holy disciplines, laws, and commands.
There is no legitimate authority exercised in the Catholic Church except that which proceeds from Jesus Christ.
The threefold power is exercised by the Bishop of Rome, Christ’s Vicar on Earth and the visible head of the Church Militant, and by the ordinaries, that is, the bishops who head the local churches in communion with him.
The pope and the ordinaries may delegate aspects of their authority to those who collaborate with them, for example, parish priests, religious superiors, or cardinals who head the Roman Congregations.
The Church commands and teaches, she does not ‘dialogue’
The ecclesiastical hierarchy exercises the threefold power bestowed by Jesus Christ when she teaches, gives laws and commands, and celebrates the sacraments and other sacred rites.
The doctrine she teaches is not her own discovery; it has not been arrived at by the operation of the human intellect considering naturally known truths.
It is a body of doctrine that has been revealed by God himself, and which includes mysteries beyond the full comprehension of the human intellect, such as the doctrines of the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation.
Likewise, the means of grace – the sacraments – have been ordained by God. He has established their matter and form and the manner in which we are to receive them. Man has no power to establish sacraments for himself or create means by which grace is to be received.
Again, the moral law is ordained by God and not by man. We must humbly obey it whether we discern it in his eternal law imprinted on our own being (the natural law) or receive it as revealed to the Church and proposed to us by her teaching office (the divine law).
As the Church’s doctrine and rites come from God, and surpass the knowledge and power of man, they are not matters for dialogue. The Church receives them from God, and we must receive them from the Church.
The Church also possesses a governing authority by which she makes laws and gives commands. These laws regulate how we live out our Christian life, regulating such things as reception of the sacraments, fasting and abstinence, and the holding of ecclesiastical offices. Without such laws, the Church would not exist as a unified society but would be a mere agglomeration of persons with no true unity.
Authority of this kind is accepted by everyone as regards the state. The vast majority of citizens obey the laws and recognize that their enforcement by police and courts is for the common good. We also accept the exercise of authority in other areas of life, for example in the family, in our places of work, and even in our voluntary activities, such as sports.
It is clear, therefore, that the hierarchy of the Church of Christ must also exercise a real authority over her members. She must be able to make laws and issue commands that demand obedience – and threaten punishment – and that are not matters for “dialogue.”
Dialogue vs authority in Magnifica Humanitas
Leo XIV denies the authority of the Church to correct error, teaching instead that “building for the common good means accepting the limits and weakness of humanity without considering them an error to be corrected.” [18]
He also writes:
I too have reaffirmed that the Church “does not claim to possess a monopoly on truth,” because truth is not a territory to be defended, but a good to be shared. [19]
The Catholic Church does in fact possess a monopoly on truth when it comes to the fullness of the divine revelation in Christ. Any truths of this revelation that are held by those outside the Church have their origin in the revelation made to her.
The Church alone has the authority to teach this doctrine, and she alone has the divine protection by which she transmits this revelation infallibly in every generation. She also has the authority – and the obligation – to safeguard this revelation by condemning errors contrary to it.
Leo, on the other hand, believes that:
Understanding that the truth is a gift to be shared, not a possession to be monopolized, frees the Church from the temptation of seeking forms of presence based on power.
But power is exactly what the Catholic Church does possess, and not merely human power but supernatural power received from God Himself. The Church can teach truths beyond the grasp of natural knowledge and can make men holy through her sacraments. This is power indeed!
Leo continues:
What matters most is not occupying positions of power or defending cultural strongholds, but initiating good processes and enabling them to mature. In this way, the truth of the Gospel is not imposed from above, but grows over time within the concrete interweaving of lives, communities and cultures.
This is false. The Church does occupy a position of power that she must use for the good of mankind. She is obliged to defend all that is good in Christian culture. She does, in a certain sense, impose the gospel on mankind according to the command of Christ already noted:
Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mk 16:15-16)
The Church never forces people to receive baptism, which must be a free choice, but nonetheless her preaching creates a moral obligation for all those who hear it.
And the Church does have coercive power over her members, and may punish heretics, schismatics, and apostates.
Leo continues:
This is not a truth that fears diversity, but instead welcomes and guides it.
This is incorrect as far as error is concerned. Throughout her history, the condemnation of error has been a central function of the Church’s teaching authority. She “fears” error in the sense that she knows that it offends God and threatens mankind’s possession of natural and supernatural happiness.
Yet Leo writes:
It does not eliminate conflicts, but transforms them, reuniting that which history tends to scatter.
The truth is that the exercise of ecclesiastical authority has in fact eliminated many doctrinal conflicts by condemning error and making the truth clear to all. The Church will one day bring peace to our own age by condemning the very errors that Leo proclaims in Magnifica Humanitas.
Does the Church direct mankind?
Our Lord Jesus Christ entrusted the Catholic Church with a mission. But Leo XIV thinks the Church discovers her mission in “dialogue” with mankind. He writes:
We wish to engage in dialogue with all men and women of our time, with whom we share in the events, questions and aspirations of humanity. Together with them, we seek to identify new paths for the common good and for promoting a dignified life for all. [20]
This is misleading to the point of being a falsehood.
The Church alone among human societies has a supernatural life and a supernatural end. She has an “aspiration” that unredeemed mankind does not, that has been revealed to her by her Divine Savior. She knows that man’s destiny is to share in His divine life for all eternity.
Mankind cannot have this “aspiration” until it has been proposed by the Church, for no one before the foundation of the Church – not even the people of the Old Covenant – could have conceived that man’s destiny was to share in the very life of the Most Holy Trinity.
The salvation of souls is the Church’s mission. She does not exist to get involved in a process of identifying “new paths for the common good.” She exists to teach the eternal truths that remain the only path for mankind to attain both natural and supernatural happiness.
While no one would deny that the men and women who make up the Church always have more to learn and can benefit from the knowledge and wisdom of their non-Catholic neighbors, the Church herself is not engaged in a joint effort to discover the truth or discern her destiny. The Catholic Church always knows her mission and always possesses the means to fulfill it.
Leo continues:
Indeed, openness to dialogue is an integral part of the Church’s vocation because, constituted in Christ as “a sacrament… of communion with God and of the unity of the entire human race,” she recognizes history as the place where the Gospel challenges and directs human experience. [21]
On the contrary, the exercise of authority, not dialogue, is an integral part of the Church’s vocation because she is called to bring every human being into union with Christ in His Church.
Only in the Church can mankind find unity, and this can only be achieved through the submission to the threefold power of Christ in His Church. Every human being must:
· submit to the teaching power by believing and publicly professing all the truths proposed for our belief by the Sacred Magisterium of the Church
· submit to the sanctifying power by receiving the sacrament of baptism, and participating in the sacramental and liturgical life of the Church
· submit to the governing power through submission to the lawful authority of the Roman Pontiff and the ordinaries.
All those who are not baptized (infidels), not submissive to the magisterium (heretics), or not submissive to lawful authority (schismatics) are outside the unity of mankind willed by Christ, both in this life and in the next, if they persist in their disunity.
Tragically, Leo XIV never calls mankind to this true unity that is found only in obedience to God but rather to a false unity which is to be found in dialogue.
The Synodal Church is the church of dialogue, not of truth
Leo XIV believes “it is necessary to begin a shared discernment process” to help mankind answer “crucial questions” that “impose themselves on our conscience and can no longer be avoided: Where are we going? Toward what goal do we wish to orient ourselves? What direction should we choose as a people and as a human community?” [22]
As has been made clear above, the Catholic Church has been given the answers to these questions by God Himself, and it is for the Church to direct mankind along the paths He has ordained for us.
But Leo’s new church is not founded on unity in truth but on unity in dialogue.
He writes that the construction of his new “City of God”:
(M)eans recognizing that, precisely from the plurality of voices and visions which, even though they sometimes remind us of the confusion caused by the diversity of spoken languages, a bright possibility emerges. [23]
This “city” is not united in truth but rather:
(T)he possibility of building together, of transforming diversity into a resource and of making listening and dialogue the common ground upon which to cultivate justice and fraternity. [24]
Leo writes that “within this shared task, Christians discover their unique role.” This church will no longer be exercising the authority bestowed by Jesus Christ but merely “guiding actions toward God so that, in his light, pluralism does not dissipate into disorder, but instead, through the practice of synodality, it becomes the space in which humanity rediscovers its solid foundations and its final end.” [25]
Synodality, not the gospel, thus becomes the means for achieving our final end, which is no longer the eternal beatific vision of God (which is not mentioned at all in the document) but rather “a peaceful, just and dignified life in community within today’s ‘cities.’” [26]
Leo’s “new Jerusalem” is an earthly utopia, a new world order founded on the principles of liberalism, as explained in the previous article, and to be explored in more depth in a future piece.
This new world order needs a new church “that ‘walks together,’ that seeks to read the signs of the times.” [27] Leo calls this “a synodal Church.” [28]
The example of Nehemiah
Throughout Magnifica Humanitas, Leo XIV repeatedly returns to the image of two cities, or societies, that are placed before the reader as the only two choices for mankind.
One is symbolized by the image of the Tower of Babel and the other is presented as “Jerusalem” or the “civilization of love.” However, as I explained in the earlier article, the “Jerusalem” he describes is not the Catholic Church but rather a new temporal earthly society founded on the principles of liberalism. The “Synodal Church” is a new church for this new society.
In the introduction to the document, Leo retells the story of how Jerusalem was rebuilt after the return of the exiles from Babylon. But Leo has no interest in faithfully relating the biblical narrative.
Instead, he presents Nehemiah, who led the reconstruction efforts, as a model for the “Synodal Church,” the church of dialogue not of authority.
This is Leo’s vision of the “Synodal Church”:
He did not impose solutions from above. He convened the families, assigned each of them a section of the wall to rebuild, listened to their concerns, coordinated their efforts and addressed any opposition. The narrative shows how the city is reborn, not through the initiative of one man, but through the shared responsibility of all: men, women, priests, artisans, heads of households and young people all play a part. It is an undertaking with God at the center, which rebuilds relationships before rebuilding with stones. Thus, ancient Jerusalem rediscovers a common language — not one of uniformity, but one of communion, namely the harmony that arises when all persons assume their own role and recognize that their strength comes from the Lord. [29]
The ‘Synodal Church’ is not the Catholic Church
It should be clear from everything above that there is no identity between the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ and the “Synodal Church” envisioned by Leo XIV.
The former is a divinely established society that teaches supernatural truths and elevates its members to life in the supernatural order.
The latter is a human society in possession of no fixed body of truths that engages in dialogue to seek the improvement of man’s life on earth.
Leo XIV and his collaborators want you to believe that the Catholic Church can be transformed into the Synodal Church.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Our Lord has conferred upon His Church the attribute of indefectibility. She will remain unaltered in her fundamental constitution until He returns at the end of time.
All the proponents of “synodality” achieve is to separate themselves from her while she remains forever as she is.
Leo XIV wants to lead us out of the Catholic Church. We must not follow him.
