By 
Pope Leo XIV met with the archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, at the Vatican on Monday. Mullallyʼs first official visit to Rome as the spiritual leader of the Church of England comes amid strained ecumenical relations and division among Anglicans.
Mullally’s delegation for her April 25–28 visit included representatives from the Anglican Communion and the recently appointed Catholic archbishop of Westminster, Richard Moth.
A more difficult path to full communion
In his address to Mullally and her delegation on April 27, Leo said ecumenical dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion has recently become more challenging.
“While much progress has been made on some historically divisive issues, new problems have arisen in recent decades, rendering the pathway to full communion more difficult to discern,” Leo said. “I know that the Anglican Communion is also facing many of these same questions at this time. Nevertheless, we must not allow these continuing challenges to prevent us from using every possible opportunity to proclaim Christ to the world together.”
The pope added that it would be “a scandal if we did not continue to work towards overcoming our differences, no matter how intractable they may appear.”
Beyond Catholic-Anglican dialogue, Mullallyʼs election has further caused significant theological and ecumenical divides within the Anglican Communion, particularly regarding the ordination of women and sexuality.
Pope Leo has affirmed the Catholic Church’s teaching on a male-only priesthood. In the Anglican Communion, notable splits have arisen over the ordination of Mullally as a female bishop, particularly among the Global Anglican Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (GAFCON) and other conservative branches of Anglicanism. In March, GAFCON announced its break with the See of Canterbury.
In 2023, the General Synod of the Church of England controversially voted to approve the blessing of same-sex couples in civil marriages, another point of division among Anglicans.
Hospitality despite differences
After their meeting, the pope and the archbishop recited daytime prayer, part of the Liturgy of the Hours, together in the Chapel of Urban VIII in the Apostolic Palace.
In her address to the pontiff, Mullally thanked him for the opportunity to pray together and encouraged mutual hospitality despite differences.
“In our ecumenical journey, I believe the Holy Spirit is inviting us into a deeper practice of hospitality, not simply as welcome, but as a form of ministry,” Mullally said. “As I begin this ministry, I hope to be a shepherd who loves and cares for the Church, who encourages hospitality despite our differences, who speaks prophetically into our present reality, and who proclaims Christian hope with the confidence that the Gospel of Jesus Christ remains good news for our world today.”
Over the weekend, Mullally also visited the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls and St. Peter’s Basilica. On Monday evening, she will preside over choral evensong at the Church of St. Ignatius of Loyola, during which she will commission Bishop Anthony Ball as the archbishop of Canterbury’s official representative to the Holy See.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
This event more than anything else made me lose respect for Pope Leo. He gave credence to a complete fraud of a LARPing female bishop who advocates for heretical and gravely evil things. What for? Receive her in a private audience as a courtesy, perhaps. But to put on such a public show that appears to validate her claim to ordination and office? Preposterous and scandalous. Pope Leo, I respect you no more.
His strange actions are on all fronts:
Counter-Islamists Accuse Vatican of Promoting ‘Islamophobia’ Regime Catholics Join in Protesting Holy See’s and U.S. Bishops’ Use of Ideological Term
A global organization monitoring Islamism has reprimanded the Vatican for embracing the disputed term “Islamophobia” while turning a blind eye to the threat of Islamic ideology, Sharia, and the persecution of Christians in Muslim nations.
The Center for the Study of Political Islam International (CSPII) issued a strongly worded statement on April 23 after the Vatican condemned the “persistence of Islamophobia” in an intervention at the United Nations marking the International Day to Combat Islamophobia.
Is there no end to their appeasement of Islam?
“While framed as a defense of universal liberty, the Vatican’s intervention adopts a highly contested political term—‘Islamophobia’—without addressing the ideological and legal dimensions of Islam that generate legitimate public concern,” CSPII warned.
https://www.meforum.org/fwi/fwi-news/counter-islamists-accuse-vatican-of-promoting-islamophobia-regime
“First of all, I think it’s very important to understand that the unity or division of the Church should not revolve around sexual matters,” he said. “We tend to think that when the Church is talking about morality, that the only issue of morality is sexual, and in reality, I believe there are much greater and more important issues, such as justice, the equality, freedom of men and women, freedom of religion, that would all take priority before that particular issue.”
His pontifications prioritize Marxist Liberation Theology, not Holy Scripture or even St. Augustine, the patron of his order:
Romans 1:26-27
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
1 Corinthians 6:9-11
9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a]
10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. AND SAINT AUGUSTINE:
“Those sins which are against nature, like those of the men of Sodom, are in all times and places to be detested and punished. Even if all nations committed such sins, they should all alike be held guilty by God’s law” (Confessions 3.8).
An Imam, a woman Protestant “Bishop” and a Pope all entered a bar at the same time. Which one of these three was Catholic.
(Gold Medal of the Day to anyone who gets the answer corret)
Not a one for $1000, Alex.
Well, if the pope was Pius V, it was the pope. Then again, maybe there was good Irish bartender too.
Is that real gold?
None, as in 0.00, of these pagans, heretics, and apostates
The Holy Father refers to the Anglicans distinctly and correctly as a “communion” and not as a “church,” and then we also read of its: “…significant theological and ecumenical divides… particularly regarding the ordination of women and sexuality.”
In the first instance, the vocabulary reflects the clarity of Vatican II and the follow-up “Dominus Iesus” (August 6, 2000) regarding the absence of valid Holy Orders in “ecclesial communions” that have historically amputated themselves from the sacramentality of the Apostolic Succession. In the second instance, within the Anglican ecclesial communion some 80 percent of Anglicans do not recognize Canterberry’s (female…and laywoman) Mullally nor the Anglican blessing of gay “marriages.”
Meanwhile, in the Catholic Church a similar divide lingers over the doublespeak half-blessing of gay couples as “couples” (Fiducia Supplicans). A wording slippery slope predictably now being fully Anglicanized by der Synodal Weg. And, which was called out early by the Catholic Church in all of continental Africa, and in Poland, Hungary, the Netherlands, Ukraine, Peru, Kazakhstan, and parts of Argentina, France and Spain, and by others.
But, yes, to Pope Leo’s steps of “hospitality” as a form of “ministry”…
But how, exactly, to fully witness and evangelize a fallen world now in freefall? It’s almost as if words matter, and as if marginalized Natural Law—moral theology and sexual “ethics”— is the canary in a coal mine.
The Church has to inform even declare that in spite of hospitality some things are deviations from truth and well-being and remain integrally un-Christian that can’t attain the “being Christian together”.
Tell them to look at the muddles in their own “societies” and their own patterns in psychological badgering that hard or soft don’t make anything right and can’t.
What’s there to talk about?
You’re a confused man Brother. Phony gestures of solidarity with influential “Christians” forcefully advocating crimes against humanity is a crime against humanity in itself.
Forgive them, Father, for they should know better. And shame on the author for calling her archbishop. In charity, she’s a confused woman. It’s not different than calling her a man or husband, for that is what an archbishop is: the manly husband of his bride the (local) church.
Since Robert Prevost chose to insinuate himself into American politics, I no longer have faith in him as a spiritual leader (NB I am NOT saying that Robert Prevost is not the Pope).
An extremely unfortunate (to use a very mild term) event. I agree that as a courtesy the pope could have had a private meeting with her. But the big hoopla surrounding this visit just gives impetus to indifferentism – one faith as good as another. The treatment given to her makes it seem that she has valid orders.
I mean no offense to women, but in her full “bishops” garb she looks like someone going to a Halloween costume party.
Surely, for the 2 people in the photograph, DAVID AXELROD IS THE WAY.
Classic damned if you do damned if you don’t. Although, at closer exam, is that in the end false?
Protocol demands Leo Meets with a woman who represents a Church fallen into the embrace of radical progressive irreligiosity. Anglicanism no longer represents Christ’s revelation to the world. In a real sense its religiosity is on par with the German ‘Catholic’ Synodaler Weg.
Benefit in Leo XIV meeting with Mullally is the image of magnanimity. An expected politeness. That the Catholic Church is big enough to be tolerant. After all, the Church meets with Muslim leadership.
Then there’s the opposing perception of tolerance that borders on complacency, a form of accommodation. Accommodation to worldly values was evident in Leo’s predecessor. Leo claims discipleship.
If weighed in the balance the difference here is a Church that once validly, at least in common beliefs with Catholic Christianity, represented Christianity. That has changed. Anglicanism now represents the digressive process of the repudiation of what Christ revealed to the world. In that context, particularly in consideration of a like tendency to dilute Christ’s message within our Church it would have been better to offer a polite refusal. Perhaps a compromise proposal to privately meet with Mullally if and when the Pope visits Britain.
@Donald. The Supreme Governor of the Church of England is the King or Queen of England. This impetus for the beginning of the C of E was Henry VIII’s desire to commit adultery, which he did. She was later beheaded and Henry married a third time. My guess is the Holy Spirit was not around for Henry’s second and third marriages
BY the time of Henry VIII’s third marriage to Jane Seymour, his first two wives were dead, so he was canonically free to enter a new union. He didn’t pursue reconciliation with Rome then because he’d already confiscated the monasteries.
A long-winded retired and resident Monsignor made a rare appearance at the ambo in my parish, but then put us all at ease: “As Henry VIII said to each of his six wives, I won’t keep you long…”
Please clarify: Were his first two wives dead because he had them murdered? If so, I not certain he’d be “free” to marry another.
Katharine of Aragon wasn’t murdered – though I don’t imagine being put under terrible stress for years helped her health.
WIKIPEDIA has a graphic showing the lifespan of Catharine of Aragon relative to Anne Boleyn and Jane Seymour. If you wish to do all the reading needed you will see there is clear evidence that the King was involved with Seymour during the life of his wife and during his adultery with Boleyn. A pattern with all the future women -constantly abusing women.
It could possibly be that while he was involved with Boleyn before Catherine had died, he was also involved with Seymour.
Henry VIII had an illegitimate child Henry FitzRoy born 1519, by Elizabeth Blount. He died 1536. She died 1540. Apparently the King had kept up relations with her for as many as 8 years until she got married to another in 1522.
I think Henry VIII had a kind of “confidence: he could and would have a male heir for whom he would arrange the inheritance of the Kingdom at any cost. He demonstrated he had no respect for women which fell also onto his true wife and sacrament, hatred that gave him into rage at the Church and murder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wives_of_Henry_VIII
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Blount
Pope Prevost will only NOT meet with those for whom Catholic orthodoxy is preeminent in their spirituality.
I succumbed to Francis-Fatigue with the previous occupant of Peter’s Chair. I now sense an incipient case of the same syndrome with the current one. I guess it will remain for orthodox laity to preserve the patrimony of the Catholic faith. Our prelates are not up to the task. They’re too busy jumping into bed with Moloch.
Finally, in refusing to meet with the SSPX while meeting with and praying the Liturgy of the Hours with Ms Mullally mean that what she represents is acceptable and that the SSPX does not?
Add to this that an entire national Church now called the Synodaler Weg drifting off into something akin to congregationalism our Christian world has become a bewildering wilderness. Fortuitously and miraculously it appears Protestant converts to the faith are presenting, as evident in the editors of Catholic websites a growing light in the enveloping darkness.
We might muse, did the Reformation contain some mysterious alter purpose to be revealed centuries later among a unique corps of men with the complete sense of analytic freedom to research and discover where and what the truth is?
Quote: Finally, in refusing to meet with the SSPX while meeting with and praying the Liturgy of the Hours with Ms Mullally mean that what she represents is acceptable and that the SSPX does not?
Yes. It is a fake and easy “unity” which is not based in Christ that feels good and comfortable.
I do not idealize trads and know only basics about SSPX but they are straight Catholics. They have their own temptation, of swapping Christ with various “trad things” and many already went for that, refusing to criticize PL in exchange for his preservation of their little “trad ghetto”. But SSPX seems not to belong to that category, at this point at least. They will fall however if they begin to put their “traditionalism” above Christ, being attached to it more than to Our Lord.
The true basis for unity, Christ, exposes the fake unity based on “niceness” and “all-acceptance”. Hence, the true unity together with Christ must go away. This is, in a nutshell, what is happening now. This process will speed up and increase in magnitude.
As I see it, the would and the Church are tested now re: Christ, their attitude to Him (and to the Truth and true Love, for those who do not believe in Him but have conscience). Only putting Him above and beyond anything and clinging on Him will do.
Finally, in refusing to meet with the SSPX while meeting with and praying the Liturgy of the Hours with Ms Mullally mean that what she represents is acceptable and that the SSPX does not?
Add to this that an entire national Church now called the Synodaler Weg drifting off into something akin to congregationalism our Christian world has become a bewildering wilderness. Fortuitously and miraculously it appears Protestant converts to the faith are presenting, as evident in the editors of Catholic websites a growing light in the enveloping darkness.
We might muse, did the Reformation contain some mysterious alter purpose to be revealed centuries later among a unique corps of men with the complete sense of analytic freedom to research and discover where and what the truth is? That God might turn the tables on Satan and draw some good from evil?
I look at the CofE episcopacy as children playing dress-up. The old saw “smells and bells”.
Some years ago a coworker, an attorney who did pro bono work for the Episcopal community, conceded his concern for the future of it, and this was before its surrender to new temporal powers.
Very sad indeed. Yes the Pope is a very kind and good man, and yet I wonder what the great English martyrs of the 1535-1681 period view this? They took would look and react with sadness. Would the pope meet someone who dressed up as Napoleon, of course not! And yet he gives this woman who dresses up as a “bishop” and whose orders were declared by his named predessor as null and utterly void!!!?? With respect, Holiness I would have used the time by meeting with the SSpx that with this clown, who actually didn’t think it was worth her time to vote in the recent parliament decision to bring in infanticide! Again, such a sad photo 😢