To clarify or not? Pope Leo's action plan

“The first task of a pope – as Our Lord said to St. Peter – is to strengthen all the faithful in faith, to confirm them in the faith,” Bp. Schneider has said.

(PerMariam) — Pope Leo XIV’s style of governance and communication will be key in determining the efficacy and health of his pontificate, especially against the backdrop of the controversies of his predecessor, but there are certain aspects which will require more force than is perhaps natural to his diplomatic style.

Amid the flurry of interviews given by cardinals after the conclave, one of the constant refrains in their varying assessments of the nascent pontificate has been their description of Pope Leo himself. He has been portrayed as a quiet character, almost shy but not quite; good at listening and making informed decisions on that basis; being able to build bridges between warring parties and leave both sides happy.

Pope Leo at general audience, June 2025. ©Vatican Media

Such has seemingly been evidenced by Leo’s actions so far.

He has been diplomatic in his speeches. Notably, he has stuck to his prepared remarks far more than Pope Francis did, which is a happy relief for journalists and curial officials alike.

He has also presented himself with a reservation and bearing of character which seems rather appropriate to his new office.

Nothing hugely controversial (at least, compared to the common style of Pope Francis’ addresses) has been present in his speeches or meetings, and he has emphasized enough the practice of the Faith to reassure concerned Catholics that his will be a calmer papacy than the previous.

Indeed, this style is very much in line with what PerMariam anticipated upon the revelation of Leo as Pope. Leo is neither the hard-line traditionalist hero nor the raging synodal pioneer that representatives of both parties have tried to make him out. Vatican insiders close to him still urge caution when judging his reign, as the pontificate has yet to find its feet.

The careful observer should expect to see Leo employ words and themes of Pope Francis, but perhaps interpret them in a different manner – as it appears he might be doing with synodality.

Even if he wished to – and as yet it seems perhaps he does not – Leo does not seem to be on the cusp of fulfilling the dreams of many online who have spoken of their desire to see him swiftly work through a bullet point action plan, such as re-instating Bishop Joseph Strickland, denouncing the Synod on Synodality, declaring the German Synodal Way to be in schism, etc.

In addition to all else, Leo is likely to have a lengthy pontificate and thus he is most likely to take time to settle in to his stride and avoid making any allies or enemies too early in his reign which he might come to regret. As such, new appointments to leadership positions in the Roman Curia might reasonably be expected only in the autumn at the earliest, after Leo has used the summer break to acquaint himself with his surroundings.

So what ought one to make of his reign at this stage?

Writing on July 1, Cardinal Joseph Zen warned about being hasty to produce a reading or a ‘take’ on Leo, saying:

Let us continue to pray for the Pope, without rushing or putting pressure on him, without creating fake news, and without overanalyzing his every action or word. Let us help him successfully dispel confusion and restore unity, not only within the Church, but also among Christians, so that the unity of Christians may soon become a reality.

In the hours and days immediately following Leo’s election, the world and the Church have seen a variety of commentators rush to give analyses on the American Pope, with readers and viewers eager to ‘decide’ about him, his future, and whether they will like him or not.

Opinions and analyses from commentators can change, and indeed have, often remarkably so. With the passage of each day Leo’s actions, audiences, speeches and appointments give further clues about the longer term future of his pontificate.

Approaching two months of his papacy – a short time in what might reasonably be expected to last many years – opinions are often still divided about the significance of his various moves.

But aside from opinions, takes or ‘readings,’ there are certain aspects of the previous papacy and this one which are clearer and demand more forthright attention. They include the crisis of moral confusion surrounding Amoris Laetitia and Fiducia Supplicans, among others.

Citing Fiducia Supplicans in his July 1 article, Cdl. Zen wrote that:

The chaos and division within the Church in recent years (especially those sparked by “Fiducia Supplicans”) have made us feel as though Jesus has fallen asleep. Thankfully, we, with our “little faith,” have awakened Him, and He has risen to give us a Pope who can calm the storm.

Earlier this month, prominent canonist and parish priest Father Gerald Murray outlined the destructive confusion of Fiducia Supplicans and the blessing of same-sex couples, saying that with this text the Church is entering the world of “make believe.” Clarity is desperately needed:

The need for such a formal clarification of certain notable points of the Francis papacy remains paramount, as highlighted repeatedly in recent weeks by Astana’s auxiliary, Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

Speaking on the monthly webinar for the Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima, Schneider offered assessments of the new papacy and the issues which need to be addressed in the current pontificate.

“The first task of a pope – as Our Lord said to St. Peter – is to strengthen all the faithful in faith, to confirm them in the faith,” said the bishop. {Video clip accessed by clicking on image below}

Continuing, he issued a forthright call for Leo to take action regarding the Francis pontificate:

Regarding the current situation of the Church, of the tremendous doctrinal confusion which reigns in the life of the Church which is so evident, therefore it would be most urgent act of the new Pope to issue a document or magisterial act – he can do this in various forms as an encyclical or apostolic exhortation or an even more solemn way – to clarify, rectify, those issues in doctrine and morals which were in the last decades and especially in the last pontificate undermined and disfigured, or sometimes even denied.

This, said Schneider, “should be done as the most urgent act of the new pope.”

Such calls to calm the storm have been echoed by leading prelates – think of the Dubia cardinals who have for so long called for clarity about Amoris Laetitia.

Pope Francis infamously declared there is “no other interpretation” of Amoris Laetitia except the one provided by the bishops of Buenos Aires allowing Communion for the divorced and remarried. Within months, a group of Catholic scholars issued a letter to all the cardinals and patriarchs, warning that Amoris Laetitia contained “dangers to the faith” and appealing for a correction; then came the action of the Dubia cardinals, who were so concerned about the public confusion of the pope’s text that they called for a public response.

Their request remains unanswered.

One of the Dubia signatories, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, had previously warned that the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia Francis approved would be heretical.

That disastrous confusion needs publicly and formally clarifying, since there is nothing less than the future of souls at stake.

Diplomatic words from the Pope, or the occasional mention at an audience or Angelus about some relevant aspect of Catholic teaching, will do little to stem the spread of scandal and confusion which is now so prevalent.

As it stands, many professing to be Catholic have been subject to widespread confusion in their Faith on several key aspects of Catholicism, but especially with regards the moral issues contained in Amoris Laetitia and Fiducia Supplicans. These form a raging storm which must be addressed with utmost urgency, and since the future of souls is at stake, such issues must not be left to the delicate words and timing of diplomatic language.

When one adds to this moral storm the raging liturgy wars – rekindled arbitrarily by Pope Francis’ Latin Mass restrictions – and the continued “persecution” of Catholics devoted to the Church’s ancient liturgy, then the need for urgent action is ever clearer.

Catholics concerned about the integrity of the faith and the spread of confusion are thus met with a two-fold task, as exemplified by Cdl. Zen.

Firstly, prayer, patience and a certain sense of realism should be practiced as to how Leo XIV will tackle the troubled and varied legacy of his predecessor.

But secondly, those concerned about the integrity of doctrine and who have been calling for formal clarifications of Church teaching on weight matters should not abandon this campaign, as clarity is needed for the Church and the world as much as ever before.

As Leo now begins his summer period at Castel Gandolfo, where he is reported to be considering his first major appointments and writings, the future of many aspects of the Church’s life remain of notable concern.