The article from VaticanNews reports that “Pope” Leo XIV will meet the newly installed Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, in April 2026. The meeting commemorates the 60th anniversary of the 1966 Common Declaration between Paul VI and Archbishop Ramsey, with Cardinal Koch delivering Leo XIV’s letter praising Mullally’s call for “full and visible unity.” The article presents this as a positive development in ecumenical relations, framing Mullally as an “instrument of communion” and highlighting shared commitment. This narrative, however, is a stark manifestation of the post-conciliar apostasy, directly contradicting the unchanging Catholic Faith and the solemn condemnations of the pre-1958 Magisterium. The event is not a step toward unity but a public ratification of doctrinal surrender and religious indifferentism, fulfilling the Masonic strategy of destroying the Church from within by diluting her exclusive claim to truth.
Factual Level: The 1966 Declaration—A Foundational Error
The article anchors the meeting in the 1966 Common Declaration, a document that marks a decisive rupture with Catholic doctrine. The declaration states that “the separation between our two communions… is a contradiction of the will of Christ” and expresses a “common determination to work for the unity which Christ wills.” This language is gravely erroneous. The pre-conciliar Magisterium, as defined in Pope Pius IX’s *Syllabus of Errors* (1864), explicitly condemns the very premise:
> “Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which form it is given to please God equally as in the Catholic Church.” (Error 18)
The 1966 Declaration implicitly equates the Anglican “communion”—a schismatic sect that denies the sacrificial Mass, the Papacy, and the Real Presence—with the one true Church. This is a direct repetition of the condemned error. Furthermore, the declaration’s call for “unity” without conversion to the Catholic Faith violates the *Syllabus*:
> “It is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship… conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism.” (Error 79)
The article’s presentation of this 1966 event as a milestone to be celebrated is therefore a celebration of condemned heresy. The “full and visible unity” sought by Mullally and Leo XIV is not the unity of the Catholic Church, but a syncretistic amalgamation that nullifies the unique authority of Christ’s Church.
Linguistic Level: The Language of Apostasy
The article’s vocabulary is saturated with Modernist euphemisms that mask doctrinal collapse. Phrases like “instrument of communion,” “shared commitment,” and “strengthen the bonds of friendship” are naturalistic and humanistic, reducing the Church’s supernatural mission to a mere ethical partnership. The tone is bureaucratic and celebratory, devoid of any reference to the necessity of Catholic Faith for salvation, the gravity of Anglican schism, or the duty of the Church to convert all nations to Christ. The silence on these supernatural realities is deafening and constitutes the gravest accusation. As St. Pius X’s *Lamentabili sane exitu* (1907) condemns:
> “The principal articles of the Apostles’ Creed did not have the same meaning for the first Christians as they do for contemporary Christians.” (Proposition 62)
The article’s language assumes an evolution of meaning, where “unity” now means coexistence rather than incorporation into the one true Fold. The term “Anglican Communion” is used without qualification, treating it as a legitimate Christian body, which is a direct denial of the *Syllabus*:
> “The Church has not the power of defining dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion.” (Error 21 – condemned)
This linguistic shift is not neutral; it is the vehicle of apostasy, eroding the Catholic dogma *Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus* (“Outside the Church there is no salvation”).
Theological Level: Christ’s Kingship vs. Ecumenical Indifferentism
The theological error is categorical. Pope Pius XI’s encyclical *Quas Primas* (1925), on the feast of Christ the King, establishes the absolute and universal reign of Our Lord, which demands the submission of all individuals, families, and states to His law and His Church. Pius XI writes:
> “His reign… extends not only to Catholic nations… but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.”
This subjection is not a vague spiritual influence but a concrete obligation to enter the Church, the “Kingdom of Christ on earth.” The encyclical further declares that secularism—the removal of Christ from public life—is the “plague” of our times. The ecumenical meeting, however, treats the Anglican “Archbishop” as a peer, a “partner” in a shared mission, thereby denying Christ’s exclusive kingship over the Anglican Communion, which remains in schism and heresy. As *Quas Primas* warns:
> “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.”
By honoring a schismatic leader, Leo XIV and the “Archbishop” jointly remove Christ from the governance of their respective “communions,” reducing His reign to a mere inspirational idea. This is the precise secularism Pius XI condemned. The article’s omission of any call for Mullally’s conversion is a tacit admission that the “unity” sought is one that leaves Anglican doctrine untouched—a clear endorsement of religious indifferentism, which Pius IX anathematized in the *Syllabus*:
> “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which… he shall consider true.” (Error 15 – condemned)
> “Man may… find the way of eternal salvation… in the observance of any religion whatever.” (Error 16 – condemned)
Symptomatic Level: The Masonic Operation of Ecumenism
The file on the False Fatima Apparitions exposes a strategic “disinformation strategy” by which Modernism infiltrates the Church. Stage 3 (1958-2000) describes the “takeover of the narrative by modernists, concealment of the Third Secret, ecumenical reinterpretation.” The current ecumenical spectacle with the Anglican “Archbishop” is the logical culmination of this stage. The “imprecise formulation” of goals (like “full visible unity”) is identical to the Fatima file’s critique of “conversion of Russia” (without specifying Catholicism) which “opens the way to religious relativism.” Here, “unity” is deliberately vague, allowing for a partnership with a sect that denies the Catholic Mass and Papal Infallibility. The file notes that such operations aim to “legitimize dialogue with schismatic Orthodoxy”; Anglicanism is a prime target of the same strategy.
Moreover, the article’s focus on “friendship” and “shared commitment” mirrors the “ecumenical project” that diverts attention from the true danger: the “modernist apostasy within the Church since the beginning of the 20th century,” as the Fatima file states. The meeting is a public relations stunt that presents the conciliar sect’s leadership as engaged in noble dialogue, while silently abandoning the Church’s duty to rebuke heresy and schism. This is the “diversion from apostasy” in action. The “Archbishop’s” statement about being “called to serve as an instrument of communion” is pure Modernist jargon, echoing the “evolution of dogmas” condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi Dominici gregis* (1907) and *Lamentabili*:
> “Dogmas, sacraments, and hierarchy… are merely modes of explanation and stages in the evolution of Christian consciousness.” (Proposition 54 – condemned)
The “communion” she serves is not the Catholic Church but the amorphous “Anglican Communion,” a human construct. The meeting thus symbolizes the final merger of the conciliar sect with the world’s fragmented Protestantism, forming the “paramasonic structure” foretold by Pius IX in his warnings about secret societies.
God’s Law vs. Humanistic Dialogue
The entire framework of the meeting is built on the naturalistic principle of “dialogue,” which has no basis in Catholic theology. The *Syllabus of Errors* condemns the idea that the Church should “tolerate the errors of philosophy, leaving it to correct itself” (Error 11) and that “the civil power may interfere in matters relating to religion” (Error 44). Here, the “dialogue” is an interference in religion, treating Anglican errors as legitimate perspectives to be discussed rather than condemned. The true Catholic duty, as expressed by Pius XI in *Quas Primas*, is:
> “Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ… The state must leave the same freedom to the members of Orders and Congregations… who are indeed the most valiant helpers of the Pastors of the Church.”
The state and all human powers must be subject to Christ the King. The “dialogue” between Leo XIV and Mullally inverts this order: it subjects the claims of Christ the King to the humanistic principle of mutual respect. This is the essence of the “cult of man” denounced by Pius XI. The article’s silence on the necessity of the Anglican Communion’s return to the Catholic Faith—a return that requires abjuring all Anglican errors—is a denial of Christ’s kingship. As Pius XI thundered:
> “The Kingdom of our Redeemer encompasses all men… He is the source of salvation for individuals and for the whole: And there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”
There is no “salvation” or “unity” in the Anglican “communion.” To suggest otherwise is to preach a false gospel.
Critique of the Usurper “Pope” and the Schismatic “Archbishop”
The article refers to “Pope Leo XIV” and “Archbishop of Canterbury Sarah Mullally.” Both titles are used illegitimately. The See of Peter has been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958; the line of antipopes beginning with John XXIII represents the “abomination of desolation” (Mt 24:15). Leo XIV (Robert Prevost) is an antipope, a member of the conciliar sect that has systematically dismantled Catholic doctrine. His promotion of ecumenism is a direct continuation of the errors of John XXIII, Paul VI, and their successors, all of whom are guilty of public apostasy as defined by St. Robert Bellarmine (quoted in the Defense of Sedevacantism file):
> “A manifest heretic… by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head… he is deprived *ipso facto* of his personal jurisdiction.”
Similarly, Sarah Mullally, as a woman “ordained” to the Anglican episcopate, participates in a sacrilegious simulacrum of holy orders. The Anglican “archbishopric” is null and void, as Anglican orders are absolutely invalid (denied by Pope Leo XIII in *Apostolicae Curae*, 1896). Her “installation” is a theatrical event in a schismatic sect. The article’s neutral reporting of these titles confers a false legitimacy on both the antipope and the schismatic leader. This is the “democratization of the Church” in practice: the Church’s authority is replaced by the moral authority of a public relations event.
Omission of Supernatural Realities: The Acid Test
The article’s gravest sin is its total omission of the supernatural. There is no mention of:
– The **Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass**, which is the central act of Catholic worship and the sole true sacrifice for sin. The Anglican “Eucharist” is a mere memorial, invalid and sacrilegious.
– The **state of grace** and **salvation of souls**. The article speaks of “unity” but never of the necessity of Catholic Faith for salvation. This silence is a denial of *Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus*.
– **Final judgment** and the **damnation of heretics and schismatics**. The article’s tone of cheerful cooperation ignores the eternal consequences of persisting in Anglican schism.
– The **Papacy** as the divinely instituted Vicar of Christ. The meeting treats the “Pope” as a fellow Christian leader rather than the Supreme Pastor to whom all must submit.
These omissions are not accidental; they are the necessary consequence of the Modernist hermeneutic that reduces religion to human experience and social action. As Pius IX’s *Syllabus* declares:
> “The Church is not a true and perfect society… but it appertains to the civil power to define what are the rights of the Church.” (Error 19 – condemned)
The article implicitly accepts this error by presenting the “Pope” and “Archbishop” as equals negotiating terms, rather than the Vicar of Christ commanding the submission of a schismatic.
Conclusion: A Public Act of Apostasy
The meeting between Leo XIV and Sarah Mullally is not an ecumenical gesture but a public act of apostasy. It ratifies the Modernist errors condemned by St. Pius X in *Lamentabili*:
> “The Church is incapable of effectively defending evangelical ethics, because it steadfastly adheres to its views, which cannot be reconciled with modern progress.” (Proposition 63 – condemned)
Here, the “Church” (the conciliar sect) abandons evangelical ethics—the exclusive claim to truth—to reconcile with “modern progress” (religious indifferentism). The article’s framing of this event as news to be celebrated is a lie. It is a milestone in the systematic dismantling of the Catholic Faith, a fulfillment of the Masonic operation described in the False Fatima file, and a direct violation of the *Syllabus of Errors* and *Quas Primas*. The only legitimate Catholic response is absolute rejection and a call to return to the immutable Tradition of the Church before the 1958 apostasy. There is no “unity” with heretics and schismatics; there is only the duty to convert them, or, failing that, to shun them as the “enemies within” warned by St. Pius X.
Source:
Pope Leo to meet the new Archbishop of Canterbury in April (vaticannews.va)
Date: 27.03.2026