It was Pope Francis who appointed Cardinal Robert Sarah as his “special envoy,” and Leo XIV simply ratified a decision already made. A small media short circuit that teaches us a lot.

---

 

Last May, Pope Leo XIV appointed Cardinal Robert Sarah as special envoy to preside over several liturgical celebrations in France.

The occasion is the 400th anniversary of the apparitions of Sainte‑Anne‑d’Auray, to be held on July 25 and 26.

The truth behind the appointment, however, emerged yesterday in a brief letter in Latin written by Pope Leo: the decision had already been made by Pope Francis.

 

Cardinal Sarah as the Pope’s special envoy

This appointment of Cardinal Sarah as “special envoy” sparked a great deal of discussion, but today we are likely the only ones to make a “mea culpa.”

Yes, because we too reported the news, highlighting at the same time the appointment of Cardinal Tagle as Suburbicarian Bishop of Albano, a post vacated by Leo himself.

Thus, UCCR interpreted these choices as a message of unity and reconciliation from the Pope amid tensions between traditionalists and progressives.

Other outlets, however, went a step further, aiming to strike at Francis.

In Italy, for instance, the conservative daily Il Giornale claimed that the appointment was “an outstretched hand” to traditionalists, commenting that the choice of Sarah “would have seemed unlikely” under Pope Francis, whose “established pattern was to sideline cardinals considered ‘traditionalist’ or ‘conservative.’”

Other websites spoke of Sarah’s ‘promotion’ as a snub to Bergoglio, some of a “change of direction,” and some even went so far as to claim it was fake news.

 

The appointment of Cardinal Sarah was Francis’ decision

Yesterday, perhaps with subtle irony (though, again, this is our interpretation—and likely wrong), Leo XIV emphasized that the decision to appoint Cardinal Sarah was not his: it had already been made by Pope Francis.

Pope Prevost explains that Bishop Raymond Centène of Vannes had approached Pope Bergoglio, requesting he “appoint a distinguished Cardinal” to preside over the celebrations “on behalf of the Supreme Pontiff and deliver words of spiritual encouragement.”

Francis, who had already appointed the African cardinal in 2014 as prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, evidently thought of him once again. He did so despite Cardinal Sarah having voiced criticism of some decisions made by Bergoglio himself (in particular concerning “Fiducia Supplicans” and “Traditionis Custodes”).

It was a modus operandi reminiscent of the affectionate phone call Francis made to Mario Palmaro, a journalist highly critical of him and suffering from a terminal illness.

 

What we can learn from the media short circuit

The curious media short circuit reveals just how many facets we often overlook within the Holy See—and yet we still do not refrain from commenting and attempting to interpret them. And, too often, unfortunately, from condemning.

The Church follows complex, elusive, and unpredictable dynamics that the world tries to grasp by boxing them into worldly and political categories. So many pointless debates, so many controversies, so many speculations, so many interpretations of improbable shifts in direction.

This small media “incident” should remind us—especially those of us who write—that above all, the Church is not an arena for ideological confrontation, but a spiritual reality marked more by continuity than rupture, and that its acts should be received with discernment, not just with suspicion.