IF I WERE INCLINED TO PICK A SCHISMATIC SECT, I WOULD NOT PICK CARDINAL HOLLERICH AND THE GERMAN SCHISMATIC WAY BUT THE SSPX!

 The SSPX and sedevacantists look tame compared to this schism fomenting heretical, sentimental babel, no?

And in Belgium, a schism fomenting bishop is planning on ordaining married men as priests and laments, like Cardinal Hollerich, that women can’t be ordained. Will this bishop incur possible excommunication like the SSPX bishops will if the current bishops there ordained new ones?  Poor Pope Leo inherited a mess from the mess desiring Pope Francis, God bless His Holiness messy soul! 

Pray for Pope Leo! What a mess! Haigan lio!

Press title for full report:

Belgian bishop announces plan to ordain married men as priests

The bishop said he will “make every effort to ordain married men as priests for our diocese by 2028.”

CAN THE CHURCH’S MAGISTERIUM CHRISTIANIZE PAGAN PRACTICES LIKE HALOS, FEAST DATES, CHRISTMAS TREES AND EASTER EGGS NOT TO MENTION PACAMAMMA?

Lifesite News seems to be spiraling into the fomenting of schism by calling into question the papacies of Francis and now Leo. I think they are run by neo-Protestants, meaning they are converts, but still import heretical Protestant content into the faith that can never be canonized. 

But what about the Church’s authority to baptize pagan practices and make them Christian? Yes, the Church has the authority to do so—it takes time, might be messy in the process of doing so, but it has happened over the centuries.

Of course, some things that Catholics wanted canonized from paganism never were and by the authority of the Magisterium. But it is the Magisterium that makes these kinds of decisions and not quickly.

Here are some pagan practices that became Catholic as AI describes it:

While Catholicism is a distinct monotheistic faith, it historically adopted and "baptized" various pre-Christian customs to ease the conversion of pagan populations. These practices are often viewed by historians as 

syncretism—the blending of different beliefs—though the Church typically maintains they have been re-imbued with Christian meaning. 

Common Catholic practices with cited pagan parallels include:

Holidays and the Calendar

• Christmas (December 25): Widely believed to have been placed on the date of the Winter Solstice and the Roman festival of Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (Birthday of the Unconquered Sun) to co-opt existing midwinter celebrations.
• Easter: Often linked to spring fertility festivals. The name itself is thought by some to derive from Eostre, a Germanic goddess of spring, whose symbols (eggs and rabbits) represented new life.
• All Saints’ Day (November 1): Closely aligned with the Celtic festival of Samhain, a time when the veil between the living and the dead was believed to be thinnest.
• Saint Brigid’s Feast (February 1): Saint Brigid of Ireland is frequently considered a Christianization of the Celtic goddess Brigid. Her feast day coincides with Imbolc, a pagan festival celebrating the beginning of spring. 

Rituals and Symbols

• Veneration of Saints: Critics often compare the Catholic practice of praying to specific saints for protection (e.g., travelers, the sick) to the pagan tradition of honoring local deities or heroes.
• The Halo: Used in Christian art to denote holiness, the halo was originally used in Roman and Greek art to depict sun deities like Helios or Apollo.
• Incense and Candles: The ritual use of fire, smoke, and light was common in ancient Roman, Egyptian, and Babylonian ceremonies for purification and as an offering to the divine.
• Holy Water: The use of water for ritual purification has deep roots in nearly every ancient pagan religion, from Roman lustration to Egyptian temple rites. 

Titles and Architecture

• Pontifex Maximus: This title, now used by the Pope, was originally the title of the High Priest in Roman paganism.
• Sacred Sites: Many early churches were intentionally built on the ruins of pagan temples or sites considered sacred in local traditions to help local populations transition their worship to the new faith. 

POPE LEO XIV HAS MOVED BACK INTO THE WHITE HOUSE, I MEAN, THE APOSTOLIC PALACE PROVIDED BY HOLY MOTHER CHURCH FOR POPES TO LIVE AS THE USA PROVIDES THE WHITE HOUSE FOR PRESIDENTS TO LIVE, BUT WHEN WILL SAINT POPE PETER I MOVE BACK INTO THE APOSTOLIC PALACE?

 I was a concelebrant with Pope Francis at the Closing Mass for the Year of Faith on November 24, 2013 and I also distributed Holy Communion!

The first five photos I took before the Closing Mass of the Year of Faith on November 24, 2013:

I pray that Pope Leo will return to this contraption for the Introductory and Concluding Rites of papal Masses in St. Peter’s Square. This particular set-up was Pope Benedict’s which Pope Francis had maintained his first year but slightly modified later:

I was blessed to be on a nearly four month sabbatical at the North American College in Rome from August 2013 through November 2013. Pope Francis had been pope for only five months when I arrived and because it was the Year of Faith, His Holiness celebrated many Solemn Masses in a packed St.Peter’s Square. I was able to concelebrate and distribute Holy Communion at many of those Masses and I felt like I had died and gone to heaven. What wonderful memories!

I concelebrated Mass with Pope Francis for the Closing Mass of the Year of Faith on November 24, 2013. I also distributed Holy Communion. 

At this Mass, the relics of Saint Peter, which were kept in the Apostolic Palace where popes had lived but Pope Francis chose not to live, but rather he lived at the Vatican Motel 6, were on public display. In addition to that, Pope Francis held the reliquary containing St. Pope Peter’s bones for the chanting of the Credo. It was powerful to be there and witness such a historical spectacle and to be concelebrating that Mass with the pope and St. Peter!

I would be located to the left of the altar to concelebrate this Mass, directly behind the bishops maybe one or two rows behind them. I think I am at the end closest to the square:

Father Raymond de Souza writing for the National Catholic Register, asks when these same relics of Saint Peter will move back into the papal apartment’s chapel. I did not know that Pope Francis had given these relics, the bones of St. Peter, to the Patriarch of Constantinople of the schismatic Eastern Orthodox Church.

This is what Father de Souza writes:

There is the issue of the private chapel, in which were kept small pieces of the bones of the Apostle Peter. Among the most precious relics in the possession of the Holy See, some bone fragments were kept in the Pope’s private chapel for his veneration. 

In 1968, the relics of St. Peter were archaeologically determined to be under the high altar in St. Peter’s Basilica. The majority of the bones found were left on-site. But Paul VI took nine small fragments and placed them in a special reliquary, which he kept in the chapel in the papal apartment. He desired that the Successor of Peter’s daily prayer be nourished by the corporeal presence of the Prince of the Apostles and that Peter’s relics would protect the pope and his ministry.

His successors maintained the custom, never removing the reliquary for public veneration. Pope Francis exposed the relics for public veneration at the conclusion of the Year of Faith in November 2013, after which they remained in the private chapel of the papal apartment. 

In 2019, having given the idea less than 24 hours’ consideration by his own account, he gave the relics to the delegation representing Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I, at the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul in “I no longer live in the Apostolic Palace, I never use this chapel, I never serve the Holy Mass here, and we have St. Peter’s relics in the basilica itself, so it will be better if [these relics] will be kept in Constantinople,” Pope Francis said when presenting his gift to the astonished delegation. “This is my gift to the Church of Constantinople. Please take this reliquary and give it to my brother Patriarch Bartholomew. This gift is not from me; it is a gift from God.”

Now that Pope Leo XIV is back in the papal apartment, it remains for him to quietly indicate that the relics of Peter belong back in the pope’s chapel. It is likely that Bartholomew would agree, and the transfer could be arranged in June, when his delegation makes its annual Roman visit for Peter and Paul. 

That the Pope didn’t live in the papal apartment for 12 years was an anomaly that the Holy Father has now corrected. That Peter himself has been absent remains to be corrected.

Father Raymond J. de Souza Father Raymond J. de Souza is the founding editor of Convivium magazine.

WILL POPE LEO’S WORLDWIDE MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENTS OF BISHOPS’ CONFERENCES ON THE TOPIC OF AMORIS LAETITIA ADDRESS IN PART ITS CONTROVERSIES AND THE CARDINALS DUBIA TO POPE FRANCIS, NEVER ANSWERED BY POPE FRANCIS? TIME WILL TELL!

Pope Leo is calling the heads of bishops conferences from around the world for a meeting in Ocotber on Amoris laetitia. Overall this Apostolic Exhortation issued by Pope Francis on the Solemnity of Saint Joseph, Husband of the Blessed Virgin Mary, March 19, 2016, is quite a beautiful exhortation except for Chapter 8 and an innocuous footnote that opened the path for those Catholics living in sin to receive Holy Communion on a case by case basis. 

This controversy created moral chaos and disunity in the Church as some cardinals, called the “Dubia Cardinals” asked Pope Francis for a moral clarification to which they received no clarification from the Pope. 

I believe it is a great thing that Pope Leo is calling the heads of bishops’ conferences to a meeting to discuss Amoris Laetitia in order, in the first place, to promote all the good that is in it but secondly to address, I would presume, the major controversy this document created and perhaps clarify it. 

I would think that clarifications would also have to deal with what is called the “internal forum” when couples who are living in an irregular union due to previous marriages, presumed valid, apply for an annulment and for reasons due to a lack of evidence or witnesses that are not available cannot receive an annulment. The annulment procedure is the “External Forum.” When it fails due to the reasons I mention, the internal forum helps couples to make a moral decision about their union using their conscience. In some cases these couples return to Holy Communion, but the decision is theirs and they are responsible for it. However, their receiving Holy Communion should not cause scandal in their fellow parishioners who don’t have the full story. Sometimes they are encouraged to receive in a parish they don’t belong. 

 MESSAGE OF HIS HOLINESS POPE LEO XIV

ON THE OCCASION OF THE TENTH ANNIVERSARY
OF THE POST-SYNODAL APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION AMORIS LAETITIA

[Multimedia]

_____________________________________

Dear brothers and sisters,

On 19 March 2016, Pope Francis offered the universal Church a luminous message of hope regarding conjugal love and family life, which was the fruit of three years of synodal discernment enriched by the Jubilee Year of Mercy: the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia. On this tenth anniversary, we give thanks to the Lord for the stimulus that has encouraged reflection and pastoral conversion in the Church, and ask God for the courage to persevere on this path, always welcoming the Gospel anew in the joy of being able to proclaim it to all.

The Second Vatican Council taught that the family is “the basis of society,”[1] a gift from God and “a school for human enrichment.”[2] Through the sacrament of marriage, Christian spouses form a kind of “domestic church,”[3] whose role is essential for teaching and transmitting the faith. Since the Council, the two Apostolic Exhortations, Familiaris Consortio — issued by Saint John Paul II in 1981 — and Amoris Laetitia (AL), have both strengthened the Church’s doctrinal and pastoral commitment to the service of young people, married couples and families.

Recognizing that “anthropological and cultural changes” (AL 32) have become increasingly pronounced over the past thirty-five years, Pope Francis wanted to further engage the Church in the path of synodal discernment. His address on 17 October 2015, delivered during the XIV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the family, called for “mutual listening” within the people of God: “all listening to the Holy Spirit, ‘the Spirit of truth’ (Jn 14:17), in order to know what he ‘says to the Churches’ (Rev 2:7).” He explained that it is not possible to “speak about the family without engaging families themselves, listening to their joys and their hopes, their sorrows and their anguish.”[4]

In gathering the fruits of synodal discernment, Amoris Laetitia offers valuable teachings that we must continue to examine today: the biblical hope of God’s loving and merciful presence, which allows us to live “love stories” even when navigating “family crises” (AL 8); the invitation to adopt “the gaze of Jesus” (AL 60) and tirelessly to encourage “the growth, strengthening and deepening of conjugal and family love” (AL 89); the call to appreciate that love in marriage “always gives life” (AL 165) and that it is ‘real’ precisely in its “limited and earthly” way (AL 113), as the mystery of the Incarnation teaches us. Pope Francis affirmed the need “for new pastoral methods” (AL 199) and for a better education of children (cf. AL chap. VII), while inviting the Church to accompany, discern and integrate fragility (cf. AL chap. VIII), overcoming a reductive conception of the norm, and to promote “the spirituality that unfolds in family life” (AL 313).

As I had the opportunity to say to the young people gathered at Tor Vergata during the Jubilee of Hope, fragility is “part of the marvel of creation… We are not made for a life where everything is taken for granted and static, but for an existence that is constantly renewed through gift of self in love.”[5]To serve the mission of proclaiming the Gospel of the family to younger generations, we must learn to evoke the beauty of the vocation to marriage precisely in the recognition of fragility, so as to reawaken “trust in God’s grace” (AL 36) and the Christian desire for holiness. We must also support families, especially those suffering from the many forms of poverty and violence present in contemporary society.

We thank the Lord for families who, despite difficulties and challenges, live “the spirituality of family love […] made up of thousands of small but real gestures” (AL 315). I also express my gratitude to the pastors, pastoral workers, Associations of the faithful and ecclesial Movements that are engaged in family ministry.

Our era is marked by rapid changes which make it necessary, even more than ten years ago, to give particular pastoral attention to families, to whom the Lord entrusts the task of participating in the Church’s mission of proclaiming and witnessing to the Gospel.[6] There are, in fact, places and circumstances in which the Church “can become the salt of the earth”[7] only through the lay faithful and, in particular, through families. For this reason, the Church’s commitment in this area must be renewed and deepened, so that those whom the Lord calls to marriage and family life can, in Christ, fully live out their conjugal love, and that young people may feel attracted, within the Church, to the beauty of the vocation to marriage.

In light of the changes that continue to impact families, I have decided to convene the presidents of the Episcopal Conferences from around the world in October 2026, in an effort to proceed, in mutual listening, to a synodal discernment on the steps to be taken in order to proclaim the Gospel to families today, in light of Amoris Laetitia and taking into account what is currently being done in the local Churches.

I entrust this journey to the intercession of Saint Joseph, guardian of the Holy Family of Nazareth.

From the Vatican, 19 March 2026, Solemnity of Saint Joseph

LEO PP. XIV

The following is an AI summary of the ensuing controversy over Amoris laetitia:

The controversy over 

*Amoris Laetitia* (2016) centers on Chapter 8, which addresses pastoral care for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics. Critics argue that allowing those in "irregular" unions potential access to Holy Communion contradicts traditional church teaching on marriage, adultery, and the sacraments, while supporters praise it as a merciful approach. 

Key aspects of the controversy include:

• Access to Communion: Footnote 351 in Chapter 8 suggests that for some, "the help of the sacraments" could include Eucharist, which opponents view as a break from established practice.
• Role of Conscience/Discernment: The document emphasizes case-by-case discernment for couples, leading to debate over whether individual conscience can override objective moral laws against divorce and remarriage.
• "Dubia" and Accusations: Four cardinals famously issued dubia (doubts) asking for clarification, while some theologians accused Pope Francis of promoting heresy, notes catholicvote.org.
• Reaction to "Weakness": Chapter 8 argues the church must accompany those who cannot immediately meet the "objective" ideal of marriage, which critics say weakens moral absolutes.
• Impact on Unity: The debate created a significant rift within the church, with some viewing it as a necessary shift towards mercy and others seeing it as causing confusion, notes catholicvote.org. 

The controversy highlights a deep divide within the Catholic Church over how to balance traditional doctrine with pastoral practice and compassion for complex life situations.

SHOULD THE CHURCH RETURN TO STRICTER FASTING AND ABSTINENCE LAWS? YES, BUT WITH MODERATION AND INTENTIONALLY BREAKING THE FAST A VENIAL SIN RATHER THAN A MORTAL SIN…

The Pre-Vatican II Fast and abstinence may have been too severe leading the Church to grant dispensations to those who requested one—this was delegated to pastors to do so.

I think we need to recover the pre-Vatican II rules on fasting and abstinence, not just during Lent, but for the entire year.

However, there needs to be moderation and it should not be considered a mortal sin or a moral failure to break the fasting and abstinence rules. It should be viewed as a venial sin not needing the Sacrament of Confession for forgiveness. Wonton disobedience of what the Church asks, a kind of rebellion, though, should be classified as a mortal sin. 

I’ve embedded in red within the following AI text what modifications I would recommend:

Pre-Vatican II (pre-1962) Lenten fasting rules were much stricter than modern practices, 

requiring daily fasting and abstinence from meat for almost all of Lent. Fasting involved one full meal, allowed after noon, with two smaller, meatless meals (collations). Meat was forbidden Monday-Saturday, but Sunday was never a day of fast. 

Key Pre-Vatican II Rules:

• Daily Fasting: Fasting (1 meal, 2 smaller snacks) was required on all weekdays and Saturdays of Lent. (Let’s modify this rule to three full meals, but no eating between meals.)
• Meatless Days: Abstinence from meat was required every Friday and Saturday, plus Ash Wednesday and Holy Saturday. (Meat is allowed at all other days/meals.)
• Partial Abstinence:
   On other days (Monday-Thursday), meat was typically permitted only once a day at the main meal. (Just allow meat at any meal.)
No Fasting on Sundays: Sundays in Lent were exempt from the fasting rules, though abstinence was often observed.
Workingman's Privilege: A common dispensation often allowed laboring families to eat meat more than once on non-Friday days. (Just extend this to everyone, period.)
Strictness: Violating these rules was traditionally considered a mortal sin. (Just make it a venial sin, unless the motive is rebellion.)
Before the Second Vatican Council, Lenten fasting and abstinence rules were significantly more rigorous than current practices, as defined primarily by the 
1917 Code of Canon Law. While modern rules only mandate fasting on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, the pre-Vatican II discipline required daily fasting throughout the entire season. 
Core Fasting Rules
The obligation of fasting typically bound those aged 21 to 59. 
• Duration: Fasting was required every day of Lent except for Sundays. (Three full meals a day, but no eating between meals.)
• Quantity: Only one full meal was allowed per day. (Three full meals—no eating between meals)
• Collations: Two smaller meatless meals (snacks) were permitted, but combined they could not equal the size of the main full meal. (This should be just on Fridays and Wednesdays.)
• No Snacking: Eating between meals was strictly forbidden, though liquids like water, tea, coffee, and fruit juices were allowed. 
Core Abstinence Rules
Abstinence from meat bound all Catholics starting from age 7. 
• Complete Abstinence: Meat and meat-based soups/gravies were entirely forbidden on Ash Wednesday, all Fridays and Saturdays of Lent, and the Vigil of Christmas. (This should be maintained or recovered!)
• Partial Abstinence: On other weekdays (Monday through Thursday), meat was permitted only once per day at the principal meal. (Meat allowed at all meals on these days.)
• Dairy and Eggs: While ancient traditions excluded all animal products (milk, butter, cheese, eggs), the 1917 Code generally permitted these items even on fast days, though regional variations existed. 
Traditional Observances vs. Regional Variations
• The "Black Fast": Traditionally, Ash Wednesday and Good Friday were observed as "black fasts," which originally meant no food until after sunset and strictly no animal products. (Recommend but do not mandate this.)
• Sundays: Sundays were never fast days in honor of the Resurrection; however, some traditionalists still maintained abstinence from meat on these days during Lent.
• Eucharistic Fast: Prior to changes in the 1950s and 60s, Catholics were required to fast from all food and water from midnight before receiving Holy Communion. (Return to the late 1950’s custom of 3 hours before Mass begins, or, make the one hour fast, one hour before Mass not before receiving Holy Communion.)