VATICAN CITY (VATICAN CITY)
LifeSiteNews [Front Royal VA]
April 23, 2025
By Matthew McCusker
Peter Erdő is often spoken of as a potential candidate to succeed Francis. Therefore, it’s crucial to know where he stands: is he faithful to the teaching of the Catholic Church, or has he followed Francis and the self-proclaimed Conciliar/Synodal church?
Peter Erdő was in born in Hungary in 1954. He is currently Archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest. He is one of the longer serving members in the putative College of Cardinals, having been appointed by John Paul II in 2003.
There are many who put Erdő forward as a conservative orthodox candidate and point to positive attributes: his focus on evangelization, his Marian devotion, his defense of the hierarchical nature of the Church, his support for clerical celibacy, and his orthodox statements on some moral questions, such as abortion and the use of contraception.
On the other hand, Erdő has played a leading role in the synodal process and directly cooperated in facilitating its progress towards its heretical and sacrilegious ends.
Erdő’s role in the Synod on the Family
Erdő was the Relator General at the 2014 Extraordinary Synod on the Family. It was his responsibility to produce the Relatio Pre Disceptionem, the midterm report which is supposed to summarize the interventions of the synod fathers during the first week of the synod and provide the agenda for the discussions of the small groups during the second stage.
The 2014 Relatio Pre Disceptionem, which was published under Erdő’s name, and which he read out to the Synod Fathers, was incompatible with the profession of the Catholic faith. Not only did it lay the foundation for the sacrilegious reception of Holy Communion by public adulterers (established in Amoris Laetitia in 2016) and the blessing of same-sex unions (established in Fiducia Supplicans in 2023) but the whole text is underpinned by a Modernist theological approach.
The defense which has been put forward on Erdő’s behalf is that someone else wrote some, or all, of the text, and that Erdő then presented it to the synod, despite disagreeing with its content.
His defenders argue that in allowing the text to be published in his name, and by reading it out though it were his own, Erdő was guilty of cowardice and timidity, but was not manifesting his own heretical convictions. The recently published Cardinals Report describes Erdő as “cautious, risk-averse, even timid.” Erdő himself denied authorship of at least some passages the following day. At a Vatican press conference, when asked was meant by the passages on homosexuality, he pointed at Fr. Bruno Forte, and said “he who wrote the text must know what it is talking about.”[1]
There may be much truth in this defense. Yet, it remains the case that Erdő allowed this text to be published under his name, and that he personally read it out in the presence of the man he regards as pope, and before a gathering of bishops. He publicly made its errors his own and because he has never publicly retracted them, it continues to cast a long shadow over his reputation.
It is by a man’s public words and actions that his orthodoxy is judged, not by what his friends tell us about his private beliefs.
Erdő‘s betrayal of the Church has had terrible consequences for the eternal destiny of souls; the midterm relatio set the agenda for the discussion in the second half of the synod and proved to be a key step towards Amoris Laetitia and Fiducia Supplicans. The text itself caused immediate scandal, confusion, and demoralization among the faithful. Erdő is fully responsible for the consequences of his actions. He allowed himself to be used as a steppingstone by the enemies of the Catholic Church.
Some have suggested that Erdő learned his lesson the following year, and indeed the Relatio Pre Disceptionam of 2015 is markedly less scandalous, though still scarcely what would be expected of an exposition of Catholic doctrine from a prince of the Church.
If Erdő did take courage in 2015, and resist what was being demanded of him, that resolve has not lasted. In the years that have followed Erdő has consistently presented himself as a faithful follower of Francis. He has not joined with other cardinals in criticizing aspects of Francis’s doctrine. In 2021 he launched an “Amoris Laetitia Family Year” and celebrated a public Mass to inaugurate it. In this way he publicly manifested his support for a document which contains at least seven heresies, and which instituted the systematic desecration of the Blessed Sacrament.
Erdő also stated that Traditionis Custodes, the attempt by Francis to suppress the received rites of the Roman Church, would be applied in his diocese.
Erdő tries to serve two masters
Vatican reporter Andrea Gagliarducci has described Erdő as “having established himself as a man of liaison between the old and the new, between the Church as an institution and the novelty brought by Pope Francis.” [2]
However, there can be no reconciliation of contradictory propositions. And the novelties of Francis do directly contradict the truth of Christ.
Erdő, in attempting to be faithful to two masters, succeeded only in being faithful to one – Francis. It is impossible to serve Jesus Christ while preaching a false gospel, and between the new and old religions there can be no reconciliation.
As John Henry Newman wrote:
If St. Athanasius could agree with Arius, St. Cyril with Nestorius, St. Dominic with the Albigenses, or St. Ignatius with Luther, then may two parties coalesce, in a certain assignable time, or by certain felicitously gradual approximations, or with dexterous limitations and concessions, who mutually think light darkness and darkness light.
“Delenda est Carthago;” one or other must perish.[3]
Or as St. Paul said:
Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God; as God saith: I will dwell in them, and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Wherefore, Go out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing: And I will receive you; and I will be a Father to you; and you shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (1 Cor 6:14-18)
Erdő’s defenders may insist that in private he is still a Catholic. But Catholic faith is a matter for public profession, not private conviction.
In public, Erdő played the role of loyal son to Francis, and this means that faithful Catholics have no choice but to question his eligibility for election as the visible head of the Church founded by Jesus Christ.
We must not engage in denial, but face the truth
Public profession of the Catholic faith is a duty for us all. The history of the Church is a history of martyrs. There have been thousands of men, women, and even children, who have paid the ultimate price rather than deny the Catholic faith. Each one of these martyrs was a real person, who felt physical pain, emotional anguish, and had a desire to live. They had aspirations for the future and loved ones they were leaving behind. Yet they chose to die rather than to betray Christ.
The cardinals wear red to symbolize their willingness to die for the faith of the Roman Church. Each of these men accepted their office – and its privileges freely – and at the same time took on grave responsibilities. When seen in the light of the witness of the martyrs, it is plain that the putative cardinals have collectively failed in their responsibility to profess the Catholic faith.
There is a form of clericalism, which is very prominent in conservative circles, which holds the clergy to a much lower standard than the laity, and the higher a man rises in the putative hierarchy, the less is expected of him.
Francis was the greatest beneficiary of this clericalism. Many who would cheerfully denounce liberal laity, or priests like James Martin, as non-Catholics, suddenly went quiet – or went on the attack – when the same was suggested about Francis.
After Francis, the greatest beneficiaries of this form of clericalism have been “conservative cardinals” who continue to be lauded as potential saviors of the Church no matter how many times they publicly betray the faith and the faithful.
We must stop betraying ourselves by treating these men as heroes. Let them prove themselves are worthy of the offices they claim by committing to the full profession of the Catholic faith, whatever the cost to themselves may be.
Pledge to pray for the repose of Pope Francis’ soul
References
| ↑1 | https://voiceofthefamily.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/narrative-overview.pdf. |
|---|---|
| ↑2 | Solène Tadié, “Cardinal Erdő: ‘A Man of Unity, a Bridge Between East and West’,” National Catholic Register, https://www.ncregister.com/news/cardinal-erdo-hungary-profile-tadie. |
| ↑3 | John Henry Newman, Certain Difficulties Felt by Anglicans in Catholic Teaching: Volume 1, Lecture 4. Source: https://www.newmanreader.org/works/anglicans/volume1/lecture4.html. |