<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">
<h1 class="gmail-gb-headline gmail-gb-headline-ebb8a439 gmail-gb-headline-text">How Well Does Pope Leo Know Pope Leo?</h1>
<div class="gmail-gb-container gmail-gb-container-ac66a2e9"><div class="gmail-gb-inside-container">
<p class="gmail-gb-headline gmail-gb-headline-66cb49cb gmail-gb-headline-text gmail-gb-headline-excerpt">Leo
XIII not only wrote about modern social and economic issues, but he
also wrote massively against Liberalism, Freemasonry, and the errors of
modern philosophy.</p>
</div></div>
<a href="https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/how-well-does-pope-leo-know-pope-leo?utm_source=Crisis+Magazine&utm_campaign=7e3c3be557-Crisis_DAILYRSS_EMAIL&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a5a13625fd-7e3c3be557-27989997&mc_cid=7e3c3be557&mc_eid=b9d3f7c6f0">https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/how-well-does-pope-leo-know-pope-leo?utm_source=Crisis+Magazine&utm_campaign=7e3c3be557-Crisis_DAILYRSS_EMAIL&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a5a13625fd-7e3c3be557-27989997&mc_cid=7e3c3be557&mc_eid=b9d3f7c6f0</a> <br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">
<p><strong>I know it is early</strong> in the pontificate of Pope Leo
XIV, and maybe it would be a bit too hasty of me to claim any miracles
have resulted from it, but something seemingly miraculous happened
recently during Pope Leo’s audience with the Eastern Catholic leaders.
No, I am not speaking of something like levitation or a miraculous
healing but something much more subtle, albeit as improbable as anything
given the context. </p><p>You see, Pope Leo did something that I didn’t
think we would ever see again; he quoted a pope from before Vatican II.
I couldn’t believe it. Not only that, but he didn’t quote the Second
Vatican Council. How refreshing that a pope seemingly doesn’t feel the
need to write and speak as if Catholicism began in 1965<span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">. <a href="https://x.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcrisismagazine.com%2Fopinion%2Fhow-well-does-pope-leo-know-pope-leo%3Futm_source%3Dtwitter%26utm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_campaign%3Dnovashare&via=CrisisMag&text=Pope+Leo+did+something+that+I+didn%E2%80%99t+think+we+would+ever+see+again%3B+he+quoted+a+pope+from+before+Vatican+II.+I+couldn%E2%80%99t+believe+it." class="gmail-ns-ctt" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" style="border-color:rgb(253,159,1)" aria-label="Share on X"><span class="gmail-ns-ctt-tweet">Pope
Leo did something that I didn’t think we would ever see again; he
quoted a pope from before Vatican II. I couldn’t believe it. </span><span class="gmail-ns-ctt-cta-container"><span class="gmail-ns-ctt-cta"><span class="gmail-ns-ctt-cta-text">Tweet This</span><span class="gmail-ns-ctt-cta-icon"></span></span></span></a></span></p>Now,
I am sure if I were to comb through the works of the post-conciliar
pontiffs, I would find pre-conciliar citations, but we must all admit
that the scale has been overloaded in favor of post-1965 Catholicism in
the writings and speeches of every pontiff since Vatican II. I am under
no illusion that Pope Leo will reject or ignore Vatican II and the
post-conciliar corpus, but it was refreshing, to say the least, to
witness something other than the self-referential post-conciliar echo
chamber we have become accustomed to. <br></div><div dir="ltr">
<p>In any event, he quoted Pope Leo XIII in his address to the Eastern Churches, stating: </p><blockquote class="gmail-wp-block-quote gmail-is-layout-flow gmail-wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow"><p><em>Over
a century ago, Leo XIII pointed out that “preserving the Eastern rites
is more important than is generally realized.” He went so far as to
decree that “any Latin-Rite missionary, whether a member of the secular
or regular clergy, who by advice or support draws any Eastern-Rite
Catholic to the Latin Rite” ought to be “dismissed and removed from his
office.”</em> </p></blockquote><p>What is fascinating is that not only
did Leo XIV lead with Leo XIII, but he chose a strikingly strong
quotation that happily seems out of place in our effeminate and
modernist milieu. It is one thing to compliment the Eastern
Churches—every post-conciliar pope has done that—but it is quite another
to speak of dismissing and removing clerics from their offices if they
step out of line and then to say, “We willingly reiterate this,”
directly after quoting the 19th-century pope. </p><p>I was under the
impression that only Traditionalists were removed from their offices in
the post-conciliar Church, although maybe Pope Leo has other ideas. </p><p>In
any event, we know that the pontiff chose his name as an homage to Leo
XIII especially because of Leo XIII’s encyclical on Catholic Social
Principles, <em>Rerum Novarum</em>, but it seems evident that Pope Leo XIV is aware of more of his namesake’s corpus. </p>
<p>So, the question to be asked is, “How well does Pope Leo know Pope Leo?” </p><p>Leo
XIII not only wrote about modern social and economic issues, but he
also wrote massively against Liberalism, Freemasonry, and the errors of
modern philosophy—which are all trends and ideologies that thrive in the
post-conciliar Church environment. </p><p>Pope Leo XIII began his encyclical on Freemasonry by stating: </p><blockquote class="gmail-wp-block-quote gmail-is-layout-flow gmail-wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow"><p><em>The
race of man, after its miserable fall from God, the Creator and the
Giver of heavenly gifts, “through the envy of the devil,” separated into
two diverse and opposite parts, of which the one steadfastly contends
for truth and virtue, the other of those things which are contrary to
virtue and to truth. The one is the kingdom of God on earth, namely, the
true Church of Jesus Christ; and those who desire from their heart to
be united with it, so as to gain salvation, must of necessity serve God
and His only-begotten Son with their whole mind and with an entire will.
The other is the kingdom of Satan, in whose possession and control are
all whosoever follow the fatal example of their leader and of our first
parents, those who refuse to obey the divine and eternal law, and who
have many aims of their own in contempt of God, and many aims also
against God.</em> </p></blockquote><p>And from whence did Leo XIII
receive the inspiration to write about the warring forces fighting for
supremacy on earth? From St. Augustine. Leo XIII added: </p>
<blockquote class="gmail-wp-block-quote gmail-is-layout-flow gmail-wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow"><p><em>This
twofold kingdom St. Augustine keenly discerned and described after the
manner of two cities, contrary in their laws because striving for
contrary objects; and with a subtle brevity he expressed the efficient
cause of each in these words: “Two loves formed two cities: the love of
self, reaching even to contempt of God, an earthly city; and the love of
God, reaching to contempt of self, a heavenly one.”</em> </p></blockquote><p>Does
our new Leonine pope who is also an Augustinian hold the same view as
his namesake on the matter of the City of God versus the City of Man? I
sure hope he does. Leo XIV said in his words to the Eastern Churches,
“Today more than ever, the splendour of the Christian East demands
freedom from all worldly attachments…” </p><p>Freedom from worldly
attachments sounds similar to Augustine and Leo XIII’s appeal that
Christians reject the earthly city which leads to contempt of God. </p><p>In
his address, Leo XIV also stated, “Let us reject the Manichean notions
so typical of that mindset of violence that divides the world into those
who are good and those who are evil.” He made this statement in the
context of an appeal to peace. It makes sense an Augustinian pope would
reference Manicheanism, considering St. Augustine, a former Manichean,
dismantled the errors of Manes. </p><p>Inherent in Manicheanism is a
dualistic notion that pits matter and spirit against each other. While
modern philosophers such as Descartes, Hegel, and Kant do not explicitly
cite Manes as their inspiration, we see in their works the same
bifurcation of reality into the interior and exterior realms—matter and
spirit, physical and psychological. </p><p>Leo XIII eviscerated modern philosophical trends, especially those of Kant, when he wrote: </p><blockquote class="gmail-wp-block-quote gmail-is-layout-flow gmail-wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow"><p><em>We
renew our condemnation of those teachings of philosophy which have
merely the name, and which by striking at the very foundation of human
knowledge lead logically to universal skepticism and to irreligion…thus
sacrificing to a radical subjectivism all the certainties which
traditional metaphysics, consecrated by the authority of the strongest
thinkers, laid down as the necessary and unshakable foundations for the
demonstration of the existence of God, the spirituality and immortality
of the soul, and the objective reality of the exterior world.</em> (<em>Depuis le Jour</em>, 1899) </p></blockquote><p>Is
Pope Leo XIV well-versed in Leo XIII’s condemnation of modern
philosophical trends that resurrect ancient errors? Let us hope he is. </p><p>Let us hope Pope Leo knows the corpus of Pope Leo <em>very well</em>.
</p>
<br></div>
</div>
</div>