Consistory of June 30: The absence of Zen, Erdo, and Eijk, a signal Rome cannot minimize

Verified Facts

Pope Leo XIV has convened an extraordinary consistory for June 30, 2026. Three cardinals have announced they will not attend: Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun (Hong Kong), Cardinal Peter Erdo (Budapest), and Cardinal Willem Eijk (Utrecht).

These three absences are not of the same nature, but their simultaneity is significant.

Cardinal Zen is a figure of resistance to the 2018 Sino-Vatican agreement. His absence from Leo XIV's consistories is recurrent and signals a breakdown of trust with the Holy See's diplomatic line on China.

Cardinal Erdo is one of the most influential princes of the Church in Central Europe. His theology and pastoral approach are clearly in continuity with traditional Magisterium. His absence from an extraordinary consistory is unusual.

Cardinal Eijk is known for his clear positions on bioethics and sexual morality. He had publicly criticized Pope Francis' handling of the apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

Furthermore, a traditionalist priest has published an appeal to Leo XIV to act to avoid "an unfortunate rupture" with the SSPX. Bishop Bernard Fellay had set an implicit horizon of July 1 for regularization. Bishop Strickland, in an op-ed, defends the legacy of Archbishop Lefebvre as an act of love, not defiance.

Analysis of Underlying Issues

By definition, a consistory is a meeting of the entire College of Cardinals convened by the Pope. Its "extraordinary" nature implies a particular gravity on the agenda.

The simultaneous absence of three prominent cardinals raises a canonical question. Canon law (CIC, can. 353) stipulates that cardinals are obliged to attend consistories unless legitimately impeded. Contemporary practice has relaxed this obligation, but a coordinated triple absence—even if each motive is distinct—constitutes a signal that Vatican observers cannot ignore.

What this signal says about Leo XIV's pontificate. The new pope inherits fractures opened by two decades of ecclesial recompositions. The liturgical question (SSPX, traditional Mass), the doctrinal question (German Synodal Way, Amoris Laetitia), the diplomatic question (Sino-Vatican agreement): these three dossiers correspond exactly to the three absent cardinals. This is no coincidence.

The July 1 horizon. The SSPX has implicitly set July 1 as a reference date for a response from Rome on its canonical regularization. The consistory of June 30 takes place the day before. The timing is tight. What Leo XIV says—or does not say—during this consistory will have immediate consequences for the Lefebvrist dossier.

Doctrinal Insight

The College of Cardinals is not a parliament. The Code of Canon Law (CIC, can. 349) defines it as a particular college whose members assist the Supreme Pontiff, either by acting collegially when convened or individually in the various offices they hold. Its meeting in consistory is an act of service to the Successor of Peter, not a control body.

That said, canonical tradition since the Middle Ages recognizes that a cardinal's absence from a consistory can express a serious reservation. Thomas Aquinas noted that fraternal correction, even toward those in authority, is sometimes an act of superior charity (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 33, a. 4).

To our knowledge, Cardinals Zen, Erdo, and Eijk have not published an explicit statement explaining their absence. It is precisely this silence that speaks volumes. A commented absence is a protest. A silent absence is a distancing.

Points for Reflection

The question posed by this consistory is not: Is Leo XIV right or wrong? It is: Can the Catholic Church maintain the unity of the episcopal college amid growing doctrinal plurality?

The unity of the Church is not uniformity. It is communion in truth. When three cardinals do not attend, the pope must hear something. And we, Catholic readers, must pray that the Successor of Peter has open eyes and ears.

June 30 is not only the date of a consistory. It is also the date of the vote on assisted dying in France, and the eve of the SSPX's July 1 deadline. This compressed timeline over three days involves dossiers that will shape the future of the Church in Western Europe.