Leo Recognizes Heretical Invalid Bishopress as Archbishop of Canterbury. Invokes “The Blessings of Almighty God” Upon Her

From Canterbury to Germany, Leo XIV keeps honoring frauds, rewarding rebels, and dressing the public humiliation of Catholic truth in the language of charity.

There are moments when the postconciliar crisis shows itself as a program. Leo XIV’s message to Dame Sarah Mullally was one of those moments. He addressed her as “Archbishop of Canterbury,” spoke of the “weighty” office to which she had been chosen, acknowledged her responsibilities across the Church of England and the Anglican Communion, prayed that the Holy Spirit would guide her in serving “your communities,” and then concluded with the line, “Dear sister,” asking that she be made “fruitful in the Lord’s service.” That is the language of public ecclesial recognition.

That is why this matter is so repellent. Leo XIII settled the central issue long ago in Apostolicae Curae: Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void.” Even John Paul II later declared in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, and the CDF ruled that this teaching must be held definitively. Once those two points are in place, the rest follows with brutal clarity. A woman cannot be a bishop. An Anglican minister cannot be treated as possessing valid Catholic orders. Yet Leo XIV chose to speak as though a female head of an invalid communion were a genuine ecclesiastical counterpart with a real spiritual office to exercise.

The defenders of this kind of language always retreat into the same excuse: diplomacy, goodwill, fraternity, the demands of ecumenical contact. But diplomacy has a border. Courtesy is one thing. Sacramental and ecclesiological make-believe is another. The old Catholic instinct knew the difference. The new one seems determined to erase it.

The reply makes the scandal even clearer

Mullally’s response exposes the logic of Leo’s gesture. She thanks Leo XIV for his “invocation of the Holy Spirit,” praises the fruits of ARCIC and IARCCUM, quotes Leo’s May 2025 remarks about seeking “full and visible communion,” says that she too is called “to serve as an instrument of communion within the Anglican Communion,” asks him to pray for the Church of England and the wider Anglican Communion, and then folds Mary into the whole ecumenical tableau as an image of the Church receiving and bearing the Word.

That is exactly how false ecumenism works. Rome speaks first in a blurred register, and the separated body immediately steps into the space Rome has opened. Once Leo XIV publicly talks this way, the Anglican side answers as though the two communions were sister branches walking toward institutional reunion, each with its own valid ministry, each animated by the same Spirit, each laboring side by side for “full and visible unity.” The response letter is the natural harvest of the original message.

And this is why the language matters so much. Words teach and public gestures catechize. Once the man in Rome speaks as though a woman in Canterbury has a genuine pastoral office over a genuine ecclesial body, the faithful are instructed, whether intentionally or not, to unlearn what Catholicism used to say with simplicity and force.

Leo chums it up with the heretical Leadership Conference of Women Religious

The above image captures the conciliar church with precision. In 2012, the Vatican’s own doctrinal assessment said LCWR assembly addresses contained serious theological and doctrinal errors, described “policies of corporate dissent” regarding women’s ordination and homosexual ministry, and warned of radical feminist themes “incompatible with the Catholic faith.” The same assessment also noted LCWR’s failure to promote the Church’s teaching on Ordinatio Sacerdotalis and homosexuality.

Yes, the formal Vatican process ended in 2015 with a joint final report couched in conciliatory language. But the deeper trajectory hardly reversed. LCWR’s own materials later advertised a webinar called “God’s Transgender People.” Its 2021 annual report described a webinar on “Accepting and Embracing Sexual Diversity” organized with an LCWR working group on LGBTQ matters and paired that with a public pledge of inclusion across gender identity and sexual orientation. Its 2022 annual report said LCWR continued offering formation on an “evolving understanding of sexuality,” including a session featuring two transgender individuals and another with Margaret Farley. When Leo XIV was elected, LCWR publicly welcomed him “with joy.”

That is the pattern. Rome scolds for a season, negotiates for a season, smiles for a season, and before long the old disciplinary language survives only as a museum label while the actual movement of power runs in one direction. Outwardly, everyone is “walking together.” In practice, the left wins.

A Cardinal in a Pink Shawl

There was a time when a Catholic prelate was expected to rebuke public disorder, call sinners to repentance, and defend the moral law even when the world sneered. Now we are asked to watch a cardinal smile through a transgender pageant, hand out gifts, receive honors, and sit through dance performances staged under the banner of a movement built on rebellion against nature itself. Anthony Poola does not appear here as a shepherd rescuing souls from confusion. He appears as a churchman blessing the confusion with his presence.

That is the scandal. A successor of the Apostles is standing in public as though this were some charming outreach event, some harmless exercise in compassion, some colorful example of the Church meeting people where they are. But when a cardinal lends his office, his applause, his ceremonial gestures, and his public warmth to spectacles like this, he is teaching far more loudly than any catechism class. He is teaching that the revolution in sex and identity has a place of honor in the conciliar church. He is teaching Catholics to mute their disgust, soften their judgment, and eventually accept as normal what Scripture, nature, and Catholic tradition have always treated as gravely disordered.

And that is why the accompanying videos matter. The sight of it says what the press release tries to hide. A Catholic cardinal, dressed in the dignity of his office, presides over an atmosphere of affirmation and celebration while souls trapped in sexual and personal delusion are publicly confirmed in it. The whole thing has the grotesque feel of a parody: a prince of the Church reduced to smiling through choreography that belongs in a decadent nightclub culture, while the faithful are expected to call this mercy. Mercy tries to save the sinner. This performance flatters the sinner in his captivity and calls the flattery pastoral.

No serious Catholic should shrug this off as a cultural quirk or a local misjudgment. This is part of the same poison that spread under Francis and now keeps moving through the hierarchy: the replacement of moral clarity with therapeutic symbolism, the substitution of sentiment for doctrine, the transformation of pastors into endorsers of disorder. Poola should have been denouncing this scene, not honoring it. A man who publicly uses the Roman purple to dignify gender confusion and sexual inversion disgraces the office he holds. He should be removed from positions of honor, stripped of influence, and treated as what he has shown himself to be here: an agent of the public humiliation of Catholic morality.

Münster is a reward.

The appointment of Heiner Wilmer as Archbishop of Münster belongs to the same story. The Vatican announced on 26 March 2026 that Leo XIV had appointed Wilmer, until now bishop of Hildesheim, to one of Germany’s largest dioceses. The same Vatican notice also identified him as president of the German bishops’ conference in 2026. This was a promotion to one of the central thrones of the German Church.

What was being rewarded? Hildesheim’s own public materials answer that question. The diocese now offers “queer-sensitive pastoral care” for situations including a lesbian couple seeking baptism for their child, a trans person wanting to celebrate a “transition” with a blessing ceremony, and the mother of a nonbinary child seeking accompaniment. The page says this work is grounded in Synodal Way texts on the reevaluation of homosexuality, blessing ceremonies for couples, and gender diversity. Another official diocesan document states that Wilmer publicly sided with the #OutInChurch employees who came out and that he stands behind the Synodal Way’s reform proposals and advocates a change in Catholic sexual morality.

That is what must be said without euphemism: this is not Rome trying and failing to restrain Germany. This is Rome elevating men who embody the German program. The old conservative fantasy, that the center remains sound while only the peripheries go mad, becomes harder to maintain every month. The center keeps promoting the periphery.

The common thread

Put Canterbury, LCWR, Hyderabad, and Münster together and the outline becomes impossible to miss. Leo XIV keeps lending moral and symbolic capital to whatever weakens old Catholic boundaries: invalid ministry treated with ecclesial warmth, women’s usurpation of sacred office treated as dialogue partner material, princes of the Church turning transgender spectacle into pastoral theater, and left-liberal religious networks treated as credible interlocutors rather than long-running symptoms of collapse.

This is why so many traditional Catholics feel the sickness in their bones even before they line up every document on a table. They can sense the substitution taking place. Dogma remains in the archive. Sentiment governs the podium. The old condemnations are never formally denied when that would be too costly, yet everything in the public style of the regime works to neutralize them, soften them, or bury them under gestures of fraternity and inclusion. One no longer needs to reverse doctrine on paper when one can simply train the entire Catholic world to speak as though doctrine has already been surpassed.

The Canterbury letter shows the language. The reply shows the uptake. The smiling photo shows the mood. When men entrusted with guarding the Catholic line keep honoring those who stand outside it, blur it, mock it, or dissolve it, the line does not hold. It fades.

And that, in the end, is the real scandal of Leo XIV’s ecclesiastical style. Not noise. Not crude heresy screamed through a megaphone. Something more effective than that. The patient normalization of unreality.

---

If you value independent Catholic analysis and want to help keep this work going, you can make a contribution or subscribe below. Every donation and subscription directly supports the writing, research, and production of Hiraeth in Exile.

Thank you for helping preserve independent Catholic journalism rooted in truth and tradition.