Cardinal Müller’s Intervention at the Consistory of Cardinals: Full Text
“The boundary into schism is definitively crossed when the ministry of the Bishop of Rome … is violated.”
ROME, 28 June 2026 — Cardinal Gerhard Müller used his intervention at the June 26-27 extraordinary consistory at the Vatican to call for a clear response to the Society of St. Pius X following its open letter to Pope Leo XIV and the College of Cardinals on the eve of the meeting.
In his three-minute remarks, the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also proposed establishing a commission along the lines of Ecclesia Dei to facilitate the return of those seeking “full communion with the Pope” following the SSPX episcopal consecrations scheduled for July 1 in Écône.
It has now emerged that he also pushed back on the new “synodal style” format of consistories, criticizing the prioritization of small-group exchanges over plenary debate and discussions between the Pope and members of the Sacred College.
Below is an English translation of the full text of Cardinal Müller’s intervention, followed by the original Italian text.
INTERVENTION AT EXTRAORDINARY CONSISTORY OF CARDINALS
Cardinal Gerhard Müller
Rome, 26 June 2026
1. I thank the Holy Father for reaffirming the fundamental role of the College of Cardinals for the universal Church. From Irenaeus of Lyons to the First Vatican Council, the primacy of the Pope was not spoken of as though it belonged to an isolated individual, but rather as the primacy of the Church of Rome, whose Bishop is at the same time the visible head of the entire Catholic Church. This served to avoid isolating him from the Church. As Bishop of Rome, he is always the head of the college of the suburbicarian bishops, as well as of the Roman presbyters and deacons. There exists, indeed, a broad external collegiality of the Pope with the bishops of the other Churches; but there also exists an internal collegiality, insofar as every bishop is always in communion with his own presbyterate, as Ignatius of Antioch affirms. A portion of the Roman clergy was institutionalized in the College of Cardinals, not for the pastoral care of the Diocese of Rome, but as an instrument which the Pope employs in the governance of the universal Church.
From this perspective should one likewise reflect on the manner in which a consistory is conducted. In every depiction and photograph of the councils, the plenary discussion is shown. Accordingly, the free exchange of views, preceded by carefully prepared interventions, ought to precede group work and should be accorded greater space than is presently the case. In any event, further reflection should be given to the new method, taking into account the nature of an ecclesial assembly of cardinals and bishops with the Pope, as well as that of the bishop with his presbyterate and the lay councils.
2. The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X has sent an open letter to all the cardinals. It is our duty by virtue of our office, both individually and as a college, to reject the scandalous accusation that the Roman Church has departed from the Catholic faith. In the face of the schismatic act of episcopal consecration carried out without the prior grant of communio with the Pope, there must be no ambiguity. In pastoral and liturgical matters, one may proceed with pastoral sensitivity. I propose the establishment of a commission, along the lines of the former Ecclesia Dei, to enable those who have embraced this schismatic position to return to full communion with the Pope. But the boundary into schism is definitively crossed when the ministry of the Bishop of Rome, as the visible principle and enduring foundation of the Church’s unity in revealed truth, is violated. During the Council of Trent, the distinguished Polish Cardinal Stanislaus Hosius said to the Protestants of his own day—and his words apply equally to the Lefebvrists of our own time:
Catholicus non est, qui a Romana ecclesia in fidei doctrina discordat.
He is not a Catholic who is at variance with the Roman Church in the doctrine of the faith.
“Catholicus non est, qui a Romana ecclesia in fidei doctrina discordat.
He is not a Catholic who is at variance with the Roman Church in the doctrine of the faith.”
Hmmm….lets see….Sarah Mullaly is in full communion? Pagan idolatry is part of the Doctrine of Faith? False religions are in communion with the Church? Blessing disordered unions is part of the Doctrine of Faith? Blessing blocks of ice is part of the Doctrine of Faith? Leaving the Filioque out of the Creed is part of the Doctrine of Faith?
And the list goes on….and Cardinal Mueller, what about your home country, Germany? Do they uphold the Doctrine of Faith?
In other words keeping with the Pre Councilor Magisterium places one in schism…? Seriously ….?
So this cardinal says the SSPX is not following the true Catholic faith.
Let's see....
Allowing rainbow masses and celebrating and blessing sin, and sinful art, who would do that?
Allowing pachimamma art into the walls of scared Catholic spaces, who would do that?
The church in Germany, what on earth is going on there, who would allow that?
Saying that all gods are the same as Jesus and all religions lead to Jesus, AKA God, who would do that? Shall we go on?
VS
Consecrating faithful Catholic Bishops who follow cannon law and the Catechism, even though they asked for permission did not get the charity that is their due, whose churches are packed! Opposed the the former's attendance rate.
Now would someone PLEASE tell us, who is following the true Catholic faith of old?
I think we ALL know who. What is sad is that this cardinal standing up for the faith does not seem to know it at all. How? What is possessing these people?
Do they even know that Catholics want the Catholic faith of old not what is happening? Who are they listening to?