DR. ANDREA GRILLO UNDER SCRUTINY BY HIS OWN PEERS AND IT ISN’ PRETTY OR GOOD LOOKING, DEPENDING ON YOUR ORIENTATION…

Press the title to the Silre non possum commentary below for the English version of the commentary which also has a very brief video, with English captions, of a very unhinged liturgist, what some call a terrorist, railing against now sainted, Saint Carlo Acutis, a teenager! I can’t figure out how to post the video, but it is very telling and one can see why Pope Francis would have liked his South American antics, almost like a dictator, although Grillo is Italian, with an Italian accent that sounds like it is from Livorno where my mother was born. I think he is from Boloney, I mean, Bologna, which is near Livorno! 

Women deacons and attacks on Carlo Acutis. The petition: “Assess the doctrinal suitability of Andrea Grillo”

 Rome – On the solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, 8 December 2025, a petition was launched addressed to the Dicastery for Culture and Education and to the academic authorities of the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo. It is being promoted by lay faithful, clerics, religious and students who describe themselves as “deeply attached to the ecclesial and academic mission” of the Athenaeum and who are asking for action regarding the position of Prof. Andrea Grillo, a member of the faculty at the same institution. At the heart of the initiative is a concern explicitly described as “ecclesial”: to ensure “a formation that truly conforms to the doctrine of the Church”, in accordance with what is laid down by the Statutes of the Athenaeum and by canon law.

The framework: Statutes “at the service of the Magisterium”

In the introduction to the petition, the promoters recall the General Statutes of the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo, noting that the institution was erected by the Apostolic Authority and is placed “at the service of the universal Church and of the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff”. Among its principal aims, the Athenaeum undertakes to provide students with an integral formation that is “genuinely scientific and in conformity with the doctrine of the Church”. Hence the emphasis on several key passages of the Statutes:

all faculty members must stand out for honesty of life, integrity of doctrine and dedication to duty; if any of these requirements should fail, “they must be removed from their office”, with reference to canons 810 §1 and 818 CIC;

professors of disciplines relating to faith and morals, after making the profession of faith and the oath of fidelity, receive the canonical mission from the Grand Chancellor and carry out their task “in full communion with the authentic Magisterium of the Church and in particular of the Roman Pontiff”;

it falls to the Grand Chancellor to “safeguard the doctrine and discipline of the Church” and, where necessary, to “relieve from the task of teaching for a grave reason” members of the faculty and the rector, in compliance with the procedures laid down.

According to the signatories, these principles – in the light of Donum Veritatis and Veritatis gaudium – outline a clear framework: academic freedom is real, but it is “internal to the faith of the Church” and cannot be separated from communion with the Magisterium.

The objections: ordination of women, Eucharist and attacks on the DDF

The central section of the petition lists a series of behaviours and public positions taken by Prof. Andrea Grillo, in particular:


a systematic attack on magisterial acts such as Summorum Pontificum, in “violent” tones, and support for the ordination of women to the diaconate “and beyond”, presented – the promoters stress – not as a hypothesis for study, but as a goal to be pursued “against the current discipline of the Church”;


repeated criticism of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) and of its documents (Gestis verbisque, Fiducia supplicans, Dignitas infinita), often expressed – in the signatories’ view – in “polemical and denigratory” tones towards those responsible for the offices;

polemical writings and interventions on the figure of Saint Carlo Acutis and on Eucharistic spirituality, in which – the text states – sarcastic and scornful expressions are used not only with regard to the young saint, but also towards the Eucharistic devotion of the People of God, at times portrayed as “obsessive” or “ill-mannered”, with the risk of devaluing the doctrine of the Real Presence and of Eucharistic miracles;

aggressive and denigratory language towards those who defend the current discipline on the impossibility of conferring Holy Orders on women, to the point of generalisations that would go so far as to brand as “psychiatric” groups of faithful who simply adhere to the current Magisterium;


a manner of public intervention which, according to the petition, does not foster theological dialogue, but tends to “ridicule one’s interlocutor”, striking also “a saint of the Church and millions of faithful devoted to the Eucharist and to the Vetus Ordo”.


The promoters make it clear that they acknowledge that the theologian “can and must raise questions, explore and argue, even in areas that are the subject of theological discussion”. However, in this specific case, they consider that the content of certain theses, the way in which they are put forward (as a systematic opposition to current doctrine), and the tone judged “contemptuous” towards the sensus fidei of the People of God would appear incompatible with the “integrity of doctrine” required of professors and with the obligation to exercise theological freedom “within the faith of the Church and in full communion with the Magisterium”.

The reference to Donum Veritatis: right of the faithful and limits of dissent

To support its requests, the petition cites two passages of Saint John Paul II in the instruction Donum Veritatis on the ecclesial vocation of the theologian: “The faithful have the right to receive the word of God in its integrity and purity. The task of theology is to serve this right, helping the People of God to understand the faith ever more deeply” (no. 7); “Public dissent from the teaching of the Magisterium cannot be considered a legitimate expression of theological freedom” (no. 32).

In the light of these criteria, the signatories maintain that when the teaching of a theologian in a pontifical institution takes the form of a public, systematic and polemical challenge to the Magisterium and of a contempt for the sensus fidei of the faithful, this creates “a fracture with the very mission of the ecclesiastical institute that hosts him”.

The statutory norms invoked

The petition expressly recalls several articles of the General Statutes of the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo:

Art. 3 §1 – Purpose of the Athenaeum: to ensure a formation that is “genuinely scientific and in conformity with the doctrine of the Church”;
Art. 5 §§1-3 – Duties of the Grand Chancellor: to safeguard doctrine and discipline, to receive the profession of faith and the oath of fidelity of the rector and full-time professors, and to “appoint full-time professors and relieve them of the task of teaching for a grave reason”;
Art. 18 §§1-3 – Requirements for remaining in office: all professors must stand out for honesty of life, integrity of doctrine and dedication to duty; when one of these requirements is lacking, “they must be removed” (canons 810 §1 and 818 CIC), by means of a procedure that safeguards the right of defence;
Art. 20 §§1-3 – Rights and duties of professors: freedom of research and teaching within the faith of the Church; for professors of disciplines relating to faith or morals, the obligation to carry out their task “in full communion with the authentic Magisterium of the Church”.

According to the signatories, the body of positions taken by Prof. Grillo – on the ordination of women, Eucharistic doctrine, Saint Carlo Acutis, the work of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the tones used in public debate – would raise “serious doubts” about the continued presence of the integrity of doctrine and the full communion with the Magisterium required for teaching in an ecclesiastical faculty.

What the promoters are asking for

The petition sets out three specific requests to the competent authorities: 


A formal review of the doctrinal suitability of Prof. Andrea Grillo, in the light of his writings and public interventions on: the ordination of women and ordained ministries; Eucharistic doctrine and popular devotion; his relationship with the Magisterium and with the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.


That this review take place using the instruments provided for by the Statutes and by canon law, including – if necessary – the appointment of an ad hoc Commission to examine systematically the professor’s writings and statements, guaranteeing his right to present clarifications and defences.

Should it emerge, at the end of the inquiry, that contents and behaviours are not compatible with Art. 18 §1(integrity of doctrine) and Art. 20 §3 (full communion with the Magisterium), that there be – “according to law” – a removal from the teaching post at the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo, in application of canons 810 §1 and 818 CIC.

The promoters further ask that “adequate information be given to the academic community and to the faithful” on the outcome of the procedure, with respect for persons but also for “the right of the faithful to sound doctrine” and for the assurance that “ecclesial institutions do not fund the systematic calling into question of the Magisterium”.

“Not masters of the faith, but servants of the Word”: the appeal to sign

The petition concludes with a reference to Pope Francis: “We are not masters of the faith, but servants of the Word”. From this awareness, according to the signatories, arises the duty to ask that academic and theological responsibilities be exercised “in full coherence with the ecclesial nature of the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo and with the rights of the faithful”.


The text states that when a professor “by virtue of his chair, weakens the faithful’s trust in the doctrine of the Churchand despises the sensus fidei of the People of God”, it falls to the competent authorities to intervene “in order to safeguard communion and truth together”.


The promoters invite faithful, clerics, religious and students who share these concerns to sign the petition and to circulate it in their own ecclesial and academic settings, as a concrete gesture of co-responsibility in the life of the Church and in safeguarding the theological formation offered by a pontifical institution. Those who wish to join may do so here, uniting themselves to the request that at the Pontifical Athenaeum Sant’Anselmo theological teachingshould always and clearly be “at the service of the Church and in full communion with her Magisterium”.

fr.B.V. and M.P.
Silere non possum



GIVEN THE FRANCISCAN RIGIDITY , MICROMANAGEMENT AND AUTHORITARIANISM IN CHARLOTTE, DOES THIS SEND A MESSAGE?

 Copied from Rorate Caeli. Press title for full article there:

Pope Leo XIV Extends Apostolic Blessing to SSPX Chapel in North Carolina for Its 25th Anniversary

In a remarkable gesture of pastoral solicitude, Pope Leo XIV has extended an Apostolic Blessing to the Society of St. Pius X's chapel in the Charlotte Diocese of North Carolina:

(click to enlarge)

The document reads:

The Holy Father Leo XIV cordially imparts the requested Apostolic Blessing to Reverend Father John Bourbeau, FSSPX and Faithful of the Fraternitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Pii X of Saint Anthony of Padua Chapel on the occasion of the 25th Anniversary of the Foundation of the Chapel invoking through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary an abundance of divine graces. Mount Holly, North Carolina, 22nd August 2025, Jubilaeum A.D. MMXXV. (Dated at the Vatican, November 18, 2025, and signed by Card. Konrad Krajewski, Papal Almoner)

Apart from this bombshell, Damian Thompson has some wise, sober words:

 … Leo doesn’t seem to want to repudiate anyone and certainly not Francis. He clearly endorses some of Francis’s ideas, especially certain political themes. He’s also clearly opposed to the idea that any pope should rubbish the initiatives of his predecessor – and this conviction of his leads me to suspect that, if he had succeeded Benedict, there would have been no Traditionis Custodes. What remains to be seen is how far Leo will go in ‘softening the impact’ of this and other badly conceived Bergoglian ‘reforms’. We’ve already seen some changes to Vatican financial arrangements and to the structure of the Diocese of Rome that look more like a change of direction than mere softening. These are confusing times, but I think we need to stop using Francis’s pontificate (or Benedict’s) as the measure of Leo’s. His spirituality is subtle, attractive and may yet surprise us by its distinctiveness.

BOMBSHELL! POPE LEO MEETS SAINT NICHOLAS WHO IS WEARING PRE-VATICAN II EPISCOPAL GLOVES!!!

 Saturday, December 6, is the Feast of Saint Nicholas and Jolly ole St. Nick visited the Vatican, the Swiss Guard and Pope Leo. Pope Leo received goodies from St. Nick. Some Swiss Guard might have received a lump of coal, though….

VATICAN II AT 60 YEARS OLD—A TIME FOR A CRITIQUE OF THE GOOD, BAD AND UGLEY IN THE LAST 60 YEARS?

Recently, Cardinal Fernandez, with Pope Leo’s imprimatur, critiqued two Marian titles used for centuries by popes, bishops, priests and laity in popular piety. These are “Mary, as Co-Remptrix” and “Mary, as Co-Mediatrix.” In both cases, for various reasons, primarily that neither title has a defined doctrinal or dogmatic formulation or decree, that these two titles, used for centuries, by popes, St. John Paul II, the latest, cannot be used in any formal teachings of the Church. However, if someone, like a pope, understands these formulations in a proper way, they can continue to use these in private piety and beliefs. 

Yet, yet, yet, so many in the Church to include popes, bishops and priests, proclaim certain aspects of Vatican II, contained in its documents, as doctrine and dogma, when in fact these are only statements of a “pastoral” nature, or theological configurations not defined as doctrines or dogmas. 

To be sure, the documents of Vatican II reiterate pre-Vatican II defined doctrines and dogmas. In this critique, I am not writing about these immutable truths.

But when it comes to the Liturgy and its reforms—these are discipline-oriented recommendations and there is nothing to say that what is recommended are doctrines, dogmas or set in concrete. There is nothing preventing arguments of a theological and doctrinal or even disciplinary nature, to say that the Fathers of Vatican II got this, that and the other wrong. The Second Vatican Council is not a dogmatic Council, but rather pastoral. And pastoral initiatives, no matter how wise or stupid, are not doctrines or dogmas. Yet so many state that everything about Vatican II must be obeyed and believed on the same level as though doctrines and dogmas. That is a false narrative in my most humble opinion.

I won’t go any further in my critique, except to say that all the documents concerning ecumenism, inter-faith relationships and relationships with the world in general, are pastoral initiatives that can and must be critiqued in terms of results in the last 60 years. Nothing in this vain is doctrine or dogmas. One can raise questions and no one should say that a Catholic is being disobedient toward Vatican II or its authority in raising questions!

The same is true of Religious Freedom.

The same is true of the reforms of religious life and the priesthood.

With that said, though, the hierarchical nature of the Church, which is dogma, must be respected for the sake of sacred order in the Church. Canon laws that are for order, not necessarily divine or unchangable, must be respected. But with these, dispensations from canon law are always possible.

So, my recommendation on the 60th anniversary of Vatican II is to go back to Pope Benedict XVI’s elocution to the Cardinals of the Curia at their Christmas gathering where His Holiness called for the proper interpretation of Vatican II in continuity with all that preceded the Council, especially Trent which was a dogmatic Council and anathematized so many heresies of the Protestant Reformation. 

And certainly Summorum Pontificum should be reinstated as an authoritative product of Pope Benedict’s Magisterium in His Holiness’ efforts to interpret Vatican II properly, that is in continuity with all that preceded it, all the Councils of the Church to include the Council of Trent, which was a dogmatic Council!

Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix have a longer history in the Church than most of the pastoral solutions proposed by the Second Vatican Council—points of discipline and attitudes, not doctrines and dogmas!

Judge the pastoral initiatives by the fruits, good, bad or rotten, that has occurred, especially as the “new springtime for the Church” never happened, although much touted as a future result of Vatican II! Judge the fruits and their quality compared to the results of the Council of Trent!