The two interviews at the top of the Catholic World News headlines today are both fascinating, but for very different reasons.
Diane Montagna’s interview with Cardinal Gerhard Müller is terrific, and needs no explanation. The Vatican’s former top doctrinal official says “I don’t want to be diplomatic,” and he isn’t. His comments on Charlie Kirk, Pope Leo (and by implication Pope Francis), Muslim immigration, the collapse of European culture, “woke” ideology, and the LGBTQ pilgrimage in Rome are clear and cogent, provocative and invigorating. See the whole interview; you won’t need to read between the lines.
The interview of Pope Leo by Elise Ann Allen — actually a set of excerpts from her forthcoming book—is a very different sort of conversation. Where Cardinal Müller take pride in being undiplomatic, the Holy Father is scrupulously careful in his speech. Where the cardinal obviously wants to stir up his audience, the Pontiff just as obviously wants to maintain the calm. Consequently the interview with Pope Leo provides much less headline-grabbing material, and journalists who try to work the contents into stories that will justify dramatic headlines are distorting the Pope’s message. Still, for the careful reader, who can digest information without extra spice, the interview provides some useful insights into the personality and the likely plans of the new Pontiff.
Pope Leo is clearly hesitant to make bold statements off the cuff. That is not a bad thing, by any means; indeed it is a welcome relief after the tumultuous reign of Pope Francis. Here is the first insight into what sort of changes the first American Pontiff will bring to the apostolic palace. He will not make statements without prior reflection and consultation; when he speaks he will try to be precise. Throughout the interview he shows a marked tendency to presume that the current teachings and practices of the Catholic Church are right and should not change. In all these respects he contrasts sharply with his predecessor.
Although he frequently pays homage to his predecessor, Pope Leo explains his policies in very different ways. For instance, on the question of homosexuality, he endorses the pastoral approach of Pope Francis (”todos, todos, todos”), emphasizing that everyone is welcome in the Church, but then qualifies that statement: “I don’t invite a person in because they are or are not of any specific identity.” He steadily resists gender ideology and dismisses the idea that Church teaching on sexuality might change.
Similarly, Pope Leo strongly supports synodality, but stresses that synodality does not mean questioning Church authority. In fact his definition of synodality strips the initiative of any sort of radical intent: “I think that synodality is an attitude, an openness, a willingness to understand, speaking of the Church now, that each and every member of the Church has a voice and a role to play.” Who could possibly disagree?
When asked about pleas for greater access to the Traditional Latin Mass, the Pontiff replies, “I’m not sure where that’s going to go.” At first glance that reply seems noncommittal. But it does suggest that Vatican policy is going to “go” somewhere—that there will be a change. After the draconian restrictions imposed under Traditionis Custodes, the likely change can only be in one direction.
On another controversial issue, the Pope drops the same sort of hint that he is weighing a Vatican policy change. When asked: “Do you know yet what your own approach to engagement with China will be?” he answers simply, “No.” He explains that he is taking advice from Chinese Catholics “on both sides of some of the issues.” Perhaps more revealing, when he reports that some advisers suggest the Ostpolitik approach, he adds, “I’m certainly taking that into consideration”—thereby implying that he is by no means sold on the argument that has dominated Vatican policy in recent years.
Pope Leo reassures us that the Vatican financial picture is not as bleak as it has been portrayed—“I’m not losing sleep over it”—but acknowledges that donors are looking for assurance that their funds will be used wisely, and quietly indicates that more changes are coming: “I don’t know how I’m going to handle it yet, but I’m getting some clear ideas.”
Only once, in the extensive interview excerpts posted on Crux, did Pope Leo make the sort of statement that might cause a stir in political and (especially) diplomatic circles. He spoke about the suffering of the people in Gaza, and the urgent need to provide humanitarian aid. Those are now familiar themes in Vatican statements. But then the Holy Father volunteered: “The word genocide is being thrown around more and more. Officially the Holy See does not believe that we can make any declaration at this time about that.” Thus the Pope signals that the Vatican is not going to say that Israel is engaged in genocide: not officially, not “at this time.” But the implication is quite clear.
By Phil Lawler in Catholic Culture
Yes Cardinal Muller’s interview was direct and needs no explanation. Muller said, “The Catholic Church must proclaim the truth but also contradict lies.” On Charlie Kirk the Cardinal said, “Kirk was a victim of atheistic ideology “and martyr for Jesus Christ-not in the sense of those who are canonized, but as one who bore witness through his life.” Pope Leo prays for Charlie Kirk’s family. The Pope calls for “dialogue not polarization.” He went on to say he has no intention of changing the Sacramental Marriage of a man and woman. He believes in the traditional family unit with man woman and children. This is from a NewsMax interview.
Is it possible the Pope and Cardinal Muller have different approaches?
They have different roles in the Church and the world. The Pope has a unique role which requires, or should require, him to speak very carefully. A retired cardinal, on the other hand, has more freedom. Not every word he writes or speaks or every gesture is scrutinized and spun like that of the pope. They may not be as different as they might seem. Differences may be more in personality and office than in doctrine. Time will tell.
I miss Pope Francis.
Your moniker is crude.
Cardinal Muller used to be the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation (now called the “Dicastery”) of the Doctrine of the Faith. He will turn age 78 on Dec. 31st. He is now free of clerical duties– and is very free to speak his mind. Loved his intelligent and excellent interview. Pope Leo is in a much less free position to speak. He was just elected by his fellow College of Cardinals to lead the Church– which has many problematic divisions, today. The media really should not be allowed so close to the Pope– he and his holy religion should be respected.
If I were the pope, I would not be so public. I would stay out of sight for so long people would wonder whether I had died. I would study, pray, consult, think, and then issue edicts, encyclicals, appointments, orders, transfers, promotions, demotions, and letters for the good of the church. You can’t be the pope in the proper sense if you have to maintain a packed schedule of public appearances.
A pope is certainly not a mere common “man in the street”– a layman, like you. He is a holy man of God, in the very highest position of religious leadership. He must be respected. He is not a cheap political figure to be hounded and possibly exploited by the Godless secular media.
I have read several books, so far, about Pope Leo. One of them, “Pope Leo XIV– Inside the Conclave, The Dawn of a New Papacy” by Christopher White, was, I thought, poorly done– it had a distinctively liberal slant. Another book, “Portrait of the First American Pope: Leo XIV” by Matthew Bunson, the EWTN News Vice President and Editorial Director– was outstanding! Very well-researched, objective, well-written, with an unusually thoughtful, excellent eye for history, and the historical, cultural and religious background and facts that shaped Pope Leo’s life and ministry, in the Catholic Church. Very good! Will be interested to read the book about Pope Leo by Elise Ann Allen, when the English translation is published.
There was a very good article in “Crux” on Sept. 22, 2025, titled “Roman notebook: What it’s like to interview the Pope” by Elise Ann Allen, “Crux” Senior Correspondent. Elise and her husband, John, have known the Pope for many years. She said he hadn’t changed a bit, since becoming Pope. He was not stiff and formal. He was reportedly very warm, completely at ease, very comfortable with himself and with the interviewer, Mrs. Allen, and very genuine, thoughtful, and reflective with his answers to her questions. I look forward to reading Elise Ann Allen’s book about the interview, when the English translation is published.
Before the modern era, and Vatican II, popes did not give public formal interviews to journalists. They were primarily concerned with religious matters. Pope Pius XII was controversial, however, for not giving to the world a direct public condemnation of Nazi regime atrocities, during WWII. However, the Pope did all he could, secretly, to help rescue the Jews. In 1937, a secret document, “Mit brennender Sorge” (“With burning anxiety”), was drafted by the help of Vatican Secretary of State and former German Papal Nuncio, Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pope Pius XII) in German, not Latin– condemning Nazi ideology. It was smuggled into Germany secretly, by agents of Pope Pius XI, and read in every Catholic church on Palm Sunday, March 21, 1937. A horrific Nazi persecution of Catholic churches and clergy resulted.
Pope Ven. Pius XII was declared “Venerable” by Pope Benedict XVI. He has a Cause for Sainthood at the Vatican.
When will Pope Francis be declared venerable?
On what basis do you think a Sainthood Cause should be opened for Pope Francis? Heroic Virtue? Miracles? Standing up valiantly and preaching the true, orthodox Catholic Faith– and as a result, shot by a “trans” kid– and dying as a holy Martyr?
I think Pope Leo XIV is learning that lesson. He was just asked by reporters what he thought of the situation in Chicago after Federal Troops were sent there, and he said right away that he did not want to even discuss it and left. I think that was a very wise move on his part. He knows that no matter what he says, some are going to distort it for their own purposes.
When I sent the above post out, it was written at the top “Reply to If I were Pope”. Somehow it got misplaced as it was meant in reply to the poster “If I were Pope” on Sept. 23 at 9:09 pm, and I was careful to make sure that is what it said. This one says at the top “Reply to Anne TE”.