SILEREI NON POSSUM HAS AN EXCELLENT COMMENTARY ON THE HUBRIS OF THE FSSPX BUT ALSO ON THE HUBRIS OF THOSE IN HIGH PLACES IN THE CHURCH WHO HAVE NOT PRESENTED VATICAN II TO THE CHURCH BUT SOMETHING ELSE NOT IN CONTINUITY WITH VATICAN II OR ANY COUNCIL THAT HAS PRECEDED VATICAN II--WHAT POPE BENEDICT CALLED THE HERMENEUTIC OF RUPTURE!

Press title:

Tradition without Peter: the Society of Saint Pius X at a dead end

LET ME RANT ON THIS 40TH DAY AFTER EASTER, ASCENSION THURSDAY, EXCEPT WHERE I LIVE WE CELEBRATE IT 43 DAYS AFTER EASTER! ASCENSION THURSDAY IS ON SUNDAY THUS MAKING SUNDAY ASCENSION THURSDAY, NOT BY A MIRACLE OF GOD BUT THE IDIOCY OF OUR BISHOPS!

In the USA, Ascension Thursday is celebrated on its proper 40th day (Thursday, May 14, 2026) in the ecclesiastical provinces of Boston, Hartford, New York, Omaha, Philadelphia, and the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter. Catholics in these areas are obligated to attend Mass on that day, unlike most of the U.S. where it is moved to the following Sunday

My most humble editorial:

Today on Hilton Head Island, I am celebrating Holy Family Church’s 8 am Mass, not for Ascension Thursday but for the Feast of Saint Matthias!

Hilton Head is a tourist Mecca!

Thus we will have Catholics from the northeast who will come to Mass to fulfill their Holy Day of Obligation for Ascension Thursday except here it is not Ascension Thursday, this Sunday is Ascension Thursday!

Then these northeast tourists will leave to go home on Saturday where Sunday is Sunday, the 7th Sunday after Easter and thus NOT Ascension Thursday. Thus they will have missed celebrating Ascension Thursday altogether even though they were at Mass on Thursday and Sunday!

And they say the FSSPX is the biggest problem for the Church—yes, in an alternate universe!

WHAT IS POPE LEO'S PLAN OF ACTION WHEN NOT ONLY THE FSSPX BISHOPS ORDAINING NEW BISHOPS BUT THE NEW BISHOPS ARE ALL EXCOMMUNICATED AND IN ADDITION TO THAT ALL THE RELIGIOUS AND LAITY WHO BELONG TO THE FSPPX ARE EXCOMMUNICTED????

MY MOST HUMBLE SOLUTIONS!

1. Reinstate Summorum Pontifcum immediately as it was! Pope Benedict XVI was brilliant and no greater respect could be shown to him for his liturgical genius by re-instituting what was so cruelly canceled in the most woke way and without pastorality for those who are attached to the TLM, mostly young Catholics.  

OR

2. Create a Vetus Ordo Ordinariate with their own bishops and make the FSSP the foundation of it, name new bishops and allow these bishops to found parishes wherever they wish as the Anglican Ordinariate is and functions! Make sure that local Latin Rite Bishops have no say in allowing this Ordinariate into their own dioceses--like the Anglican Ordinariate and all Eastern Rite Churches!

Release Summorum Pontificum from death row--We are opposed to the culture of death, including the death penalty!

 This is what Traditionis Custodes hath wrought and it, in all seriousness, should be canceled:

 Following the 2021 publication of Traditionis Custodes, which restricted the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) in diocesan parishes, the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has reported continued growth, with many observers noting new faces in their chapels and a rise in attendance. The restrictions prompted Catholics seeking the traditional liturgy to turn to the SSPX. [1, 2, 3]

Key Details Regarding the Shift:

• Increased Attendance: Reports immediately following the 2021 restrictions indicated an influx of attendees at SSPX chapels.
• Continued Growth: The SSPX has maintained a steady upward trajectory in adherents and locations, continuing a long-term trend, according to their 2025 news reports.
• "Refuge" Status: The SSPX is increasingly viewed as a "refuge" for traditional Catholics, particularly in dioceses where the Traditional Latin Mass has been heavily restricted or abolished.

AND NOW IN OTHER NEWS…

 Here we go again. I live in the Low Country of South Carolina where all of this began with Murdaugh’s drunken son in a boating accident in Beaufort that killed a beautiful young girl which then cascaded into a double murder. 

AI Overview NEWSFLASH

The South Carolina Supreme Court overturned Alex Murdaugh's 2023 double murder convictions on May 13, 2026, granting a new trial due to jury tampering by former Colleton County Court Clerk Becky Hill. The court ruled that Hill's actions denied Murdaugh a fair trial. The case is remanded to circuit court; Murdaugh remains imprisoned on financial crimes.

POPE LEO’S HIGH ALTITUDE, OFF-THE-CUFF ANSWER ABOUT LITURGIES BLESSING IMMORAL SEXUAL UNIONS—WHEREIN I THINK I HAVE THE BEST INTERPRETATION ABOUT WHAT POPE LEO ACTUALLY MEANT…

This is a very good AI summary about “What Does the Pope Really Say” which would be a great title for a blog, no? WDTPRS!

But here, if you can access it, is a facebook video of the actual question and answer.

THE AI SUMMARY:

On April 23, 2026, on a flight back from Africa, Pope Leo XIV stated that the Catholic Church's unity should not revolve around sexual matters, arguing that issues like justice, equality, and peace are "much greater, more important issues". He stated that "we tend to think that when the church is talking about morality, that the only issue of morality is sexual". [1, 2, 3]

Key points regarding his statement:

• Context: The remarks were made to journalists after a trip to Africa, responding to questions about church unity and LGBTQ+ issues.
• Core Message: Leo emphasized that while sexual morality is not unimportant, it should not be the primary focus over broader social concerns.
• Priorities: He listed "justice, equality, freedom of men and women, freedom of religion" as taking priority over sexual matters.
• Reaction: The comments were seen as a deliberate shift away from a solely preoccupation-based approach to sexual ethics, with advocacy groups calling it an "overdue reorientation".
• Not Dismissing Sexual Morality: The Pope did not state that sexual morality is entirely unimportant, but rather aimed to reorder the emphasis placed on it compared to other moral issues. [1, 2, 3, 4]

MY MOST HUMBLE, MOST ASTUTE AND MOST CORRECT OPINION ON WHAT THE POPE ACTUALLY SAID:

As I listened to the pope and reread what the pope actually said, I understand it within the context of the question posed to him, which isn’t about general sexual morality or the specifics of Humanae Vitae or even about the 6th Commandment in general. His answer concerns the question about German schismatics creating a liturgical blessing for immoral sexual acts between LGBTQ+++ people and not also heterosexuals in immoral sexual unions—it really wasn’t a question about heterosexual sexual immorality being blessed; it was specifically about same sex sexual immorality and blessing that. 

The Holy Father didn’t address the immorality of immoral sexual acts by anyone. What he basically was responding to is the focus on a small minority of Catholics who are being provided a liturgical blessing by Cardinal Marx and the German Heretical/Schismatic way. 

Within that context, the pope is putting immoral sexual acts by same sex attracted people in its place—they and it aren’t the most important issues of morality in the World. The Church’s moral teachings don’t revolve around the LGBTQ+++ lobby who think they are the center of the world and everything and everyone should revolve around them. What the pope really said, in my most humble opinion, is like that song by Carly Simon, “You’re So Vain, I Bet You Think This Song Is about You!” 

Narcissistic and vain people, which could well describe Fr. James Martin, his ministry and the LGBTQ+++ lobby in general always think the song is about them! Pope Leo begs to disagree, there are way more important moral teachings! But His Holiness certainly doesn’t negate the Church’s sexual moral teachings, for to do so would have a cascade effect on all the moral issues of great importance that the pope highlights, no? 

But what the Pope really said and meant is at the end of his answer. The Holy See has said no to the German heretical/schismatic way as it concerns liturgical blessings for immoral sexual unions. And Pope Leo also says that Pope Francis’ infamous/famous “todas, todas, todas” must also included conversion, conversion, conversion to Jesus Christ and His teachings. That is very clear. We can’t go beyond this with heretical blessings that are schismatic because these are not faithful to the Faith and Morals of the Catholic Church!

FAIR WARNING TO THE SOON-TO-BE FULLY SCHISMATIC FSSPX AND THEIR ADHERENTS…BUT WHEN WILL THERE BE A REAL WARNING TO THE HERETICALITY SYNODALITY, PASTORALITY OF VAPIDITY SEXUAL MORALS BEING REIMAGINED INTO AMORALITY? SHOULDN’T THAT DEPARTMENT AT THE VATICAN BE SHUT DOWN?

 Statement of His Eminence Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 13.05.2026

With regard to the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X, we reiterate what has already been communicated. The episcopal ordinations announced by the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X do not have the requisite papal mandate. This act will constitute “a schismatic act” (John Paul II, Ecclesia Dei, no. 3) and “formal adherence to the schism constitutes a grave offence against God and entails the excommunication established under Church law” (ibid., 5c; cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Explanatory Note, 24 August 1996).

The Holy Father continues in his prayers to ask the Holy Spirit to enlighten those responsible for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X so that they may reconsider the extremely grave decision they have taken.

From the Vatican, 13 May 2026–The memorial of the attempted assassination of St.Pope John Paul II

COURAGE RESPONDS TO THE ORWELLIAN AND ANTI-CHRIST SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE VAPIDITY PASTORALITY OF SYNODALITY UNDER POPE FRANCIS…AND NOW, IF LEFT UNCHECKED, UNDER POPE LEO XIV…

 This is a great apologetic for Courage, which Pope Leo praised, especially for including so many in their ministry with the call to conversion to Jesus Christ and His teachings.

Press the title for the interview by Edward Pentin of the National Catholic Register:

Courage Director: Synod Report ‘Wounds the Church’

Father Brian Gannon argues how ‘intellectually dishonest’ document departs from Scripture and 2,000 years of Church teaching on human sexuality.

WHY IS THERE SO MUCH FEAR OF THE TLM, OR AS PROGRESSIVES LIKE TO CALL OTHER THINGS, TLMPHOBIA?

Bottom line, those who are TLMphobic want to control anything that smacks of the pre-Vatican II Church and especially anything they don’t understand, can’t comprehend and mystifies them. They fear it so much, they can’t stand those who aren’t TLMphobic, who do understand it, comprehend it and love the mysticism of the TLM.

But, and this is a big but, they hate and fear anything that calls into question pastoral reforms of the Second Vatican Council. Their entire faith is in Vatican II, not God. Their faith is in reform and the Church constantly reforming. It really is all about manipulation of social structures and making sure everyone is walking lockstep in unity in those reforms, not Jesus Christ. 

In addition to their faith being sidelined to Vatican II, they also have faith in Vatican II’s ecclesiology, Vatican II’s call to active participation and Vatican II’s call to destroy the clergy and religious life and substitute lay leadership. Their real faith, actually, is not only not in God, it isn’t really in Vatican II either! It’s in the spirit of Vatican II that morphs into whatever manipulation of Vatican II and its spirit that these people want. 

They also have a death wish

By this I mean they refuse to look at and are in complete denial about what has happened to the Church since Vatican II and how progressive religious orders, as a result of implementing the spirit of Vatican II, are now on life support with many others completely gone including their once vibrant institutions, like their schools, universities, hospitals and social outreach ministries to the poor. 

They think that the drop in Mass participation from about 90% in 1965 to about 5% to 20% today is a result of other things not connected to the spirit of Vatican II’s implementation of Vatican II but to other social changes in society.

They loved when Pope Francis nipped the TLM movement in the bud with Traditionis Custodis, because it was blossoming when given free rein to bishops, priests and laity. What this did to the psyche  of 1960’s Vatican II’s spirit warriors cannot be underestimated, with Pope Francis being the front for it. 

They want the clock turned back to the papacy of St. Pope Paul VI, a completely backwardist approach and they, for the time being, have succeeded. But that success is a mirage. 

WHEREIN, VATICAN II MADE THIS ONCE UNCLUTTERED, COHERENT CHURCH INTO A MISH MASH HOT MESS…

 Saint Veronica, Detroit…

The only good thing about this renovation, in keeping with what Vatican II demanded, (not!) is that it could easily, or somewhat easily, be erased as the old wasn’t destroyed. 

Please note that now there are two separate sanctuaries, not just double altars.

Please note that the new sanctuary has the ambo and altar on equal footing, diminishing both. That configuration is very 1970’s! 

Please note how the flowers, thanks be to God, overwhelm the new sanctuary.

The whole post-Vatican II thingy is a hot, cluttered mess—no noble simplicity of the pre-Vatican II set-up! 

Sad, very sad!

IN THE HIERARCHYITY OF VAPITY COMING FROM THE VATICANITY SYNODALITY DOCUMENTITIES HAVE TO BE AT THE TOP OF THAT HIERARCHYITY

Fortunately, since Pope Leo became pope, we haven’t seen too many documents coming from the synodal gang, although a doozy came out last week, a summary of discussions which holds, thanks be to God, no moral, doctrinal or canonical significance. 

Sadly, though, the Vatican released it, as vapid and word salady, as it was.

But in the past, under Pope Francis, documents issued by gang leaders in the synodal way office often did not include anything about God, our Blessed Mother, the saints, eternal life, salvation, sin or grace. Dialogueity, pastorality and vapidity characterized these documents. They were cotton candy documents or better yet, nothing burgers and they were an embarrassment for those who wrote them and for Catholics who expect more from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

And then, under Pope Leo, that summary, word salady as it was, came out from the gang of leaders of the pastorality synodality churchity. Part of it was to subvert Humanae Vitae, Scripture and Tradition when it comes to sexual morality and the nature of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony and Holy Orders. What it glorified, in terms of immoral sexual relationships, could be condemned as heretical, a hereticality pastorality, if you will!

And again, there was nothing in the summary about sexual issues that smacked of being sin, conversion and living a new and different life from the sinful lifeity that a personity liveities.

What an embarrassmentity!

Holy Father, can you restore to the Church the majesty of a a magisterial Church and her documents? 

Please Holy Father, can’t you do that?

THE WAY THE LITURGY WARS WERE

Believe it or not, when Pope John Paul II allowed the Tridentine Mass to be celebrated but with diocesan bishops making the decision to allow it or not in their diocese and this around 1986, I believe, my then bishop had a staff meeting at the pastoral center of those of us in various diocesan positions. I was the Bishop’s MC, Diocesan Director of Liturgy (I did such a good job, no other priest has held that position since me) and vocation director. Plus I was the Associate Rector of the Cathedral. When the bishop asked if we should allow the Tridentine Mass in our diocese, the staff was very reluctant. And I pushed back too. I said, and I quote, “Why not just celebrate the Vatican II Mass in Latin and Ad orientem?” I was opposed to going back to the Tridentine Mass because I was imbued, as a child, that you don’t eliminate “new and improved” with anything, including the Mass. Could you imagine going back to old Tide after having the new and improved version?But, when priests tried to celebrate the Vatican II Mass, with some Latin and more sobriety, by the book, how novel, they and I got push back from post-Vatican II laity, especially the 1960’s warriors of Vatican II. They called us pre-Vatican II and not because we celebrated the pre-Vatican II Mass but because we celebrated the new Mass in a traditional way. 

But that still included lay lectors and Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and male and female altar servers. We still had an eclectic mix of music from Latin chant to contemporary. But we were still accused of being pre-Vatican II, the worst insult another Catholic could hurl at a Catholic, clergy of laity! 

I no longer see the TLM as problematic given all the problematic ways the Bugnini Mass is celebrated and without any correction by local bishops. 

But I prefer that we celebrate the Bugnini Mass in a traditional way, even if all in the vernacular. 

But you’ll always have the Vatican II warriors who long for the glory days of the 1960’s. They are my age and older and still hold considerable sway and have indeed influenced some younger clergy and laity.

A YEAR IN AND THE PAPACY HAS IT’S GROOVE BACK! THESE ARE MY TAKES AND ALSO HOW YOU SPELL R-E-L-I-E-F!

The Mozzetta and papal stole said it all—in an act of true humility, Pope Leo accepted the trappings of the papacy and embraced them, even if not to his personal taste. There is no virtue signaling about personal humility by forgoing papal dress, papal residence and papal automobiles. He submits to the office  not the office to him. That’s a great relief to say the least.

Here are my rolaids:

1. He speaks with clarity and upholds orthodoxy on priestly celibacy, Humanae Vitae, marriage, male only Holy Orders and much more.

2. He tries to show himself in continuity with all previous popes, not only his immediate predecessor, but all of them, pre-Vatican II and Post Vatican II

3. He doesn’t employ name-calling to humiliate those he wants to change—no words of faggotry, pickled peppered nuns’ faces, rigidity, backwardists, mentally ill, grandmother’s lace wearing prelates and priests, the Bugnini Mass the only expression of the Latin Rite’s Mass, eating feces,  and so on and so forth!

4. He hasn’t given canonical status to synodality and is meeting more regularly with the College of Cardinals and also the heads of bishops’ conferences

5. No grandstanding, more regal, introspective and papal.

LOOK WHO GOT CALLED TO THE PRINCIPAL’S OFFICE—I WOULD LOVE TO BE A FLY ON THE WALL!

 Will there be a summary of what was discussed????

MAY 9 IS THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF THE ELECTION OF POPE LEO XIV AND SOUTHERN ORDERS WAS AND IS YOUR CLAIRVOYANT GO-TO BLOG AS WELL AS YOUR MOST HUMBLE BLOGGER, YOUR GO-TO BLOGGER!

 On May 1, 2025, your most humble bloggeer, blogged on his most humble blog that Cardinal Prevost would be the next pope!

Then, and this is truly astounding, on the morning of the election of Cardinal Prevost that afternoon, your most humble blogger on his most humble blog announced that there would be white smoke today.

I was 100% correct! Correct, I tell you!

But even more astounding, astounding I say, is that on that very same post, even before the white smoke scared a seagull and her two chicks away, nearly killing them as they inhaled the chemical infused smoke to make it white, Marc predicted that the new pope would take the name Pope Leo XIV! Yes, you read that correctly, before the pope was elected, Marc predicted that the new pope’s name would be Pope Leo XIV!

You can’t make this stuff up but indeed your most humble blogger and his most humble blog predicted the truth!

This is my headline on my most humble blog on May 1, 2025, well before the Conclave began and a week before Cardinal Prevost was elected!

Thursday, May 1, 2025

AMERICAN CARDINAL ROBERT PROVOST THE NEXT POPE? 

CARDINAL FERNANDEZ MAKES CLEAR THAT POPE LEO XIV AUTHORIZED MAKING PUBLIC THE 2024 LETTER THAT THE POPE AND THE VATICAN DO NOT APPROVE OF GERMANY’S SCHISMATIC WAY OF LITURGICAL BLESSINGS FOR THOSE IN IMMORAL SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS

 FROM VATICAN NEWS On May 6, the day after the Vatican’s Synodal summary that includes a glowing review and testimony of the glories of homosexual sex in a committed relationship of a secular marriage  between two husbands, Cardinal Fernandez makes clear that it was Pope Leo who approved of making public a 2024 letter from Cardinal Fernandez condemning German plans for public liturgical blessings of fornicating couples. Today’s news makes clear that this condemnation also applies to Cardinal Marx’s plans for public liturgical blessings of couples in immoral sexual unions. 

Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith 

VATICAN

• DICASTERY
• BLESSING
• HOMOSEXUALITY
• FIDUCIA SUPPLICANS

DDF responds to vademecum on blessings in Germany

The Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, explains that the November 2024 letter also applies to the text of the current vademecum, which does not have the Dicastery’s approval.

Vatican News

The letter from Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, dated 18 November 2024, concerning the draft vademecum of the German Bishops on blessings for extramarital unions, is a valid response also to the text entitled “Blessing Strengthens Love,” which was definitively approved by the representatives of the German Bishops’ Conference (DBK) and the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK) in April 2025.

The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith made this clear to Bishop Stephan Ackermann, Bishop of Trier and President of the Liturgical Commission of the German Bishops’ Conference, during the last meeting held in the Vatican with the German Bishops on 12 November 2025.

The Cardinal clarified that the 2024 letter, published recently on the Dicastery’s website with the agreement of Pope Leo, was “the one and only final response”, including to the text definitively approved in April 2025.

“What was said in that letter,” the Cardinal Prefect told Vatican News, “also applies to the text of the current Vademecum, which does not have the approval of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.”

Indeed, although the final text differs from the original draft, it does not actually incorporate what was written in the 2024 letter because, although it speaks of spontaneity and freedom regarding blessings for extramarital couples, it proposes a kind of liturgy or para-liturgical ritual that is not permitted by the Declaration Fiducia Supplicans which was issued in December 2023. That Declaration states that with regard to blessings that "the Church has the right and the duty to avoid any rite that might contradict this conviction or lead to confusion" regarding marriage.

On the return flight from Equatorial Guinea on 23 April, responding to a question about the proposal to formalize blessings for homosexual couples in Germany, Pope Leo said that "The Holy See has already spoken to the German bishops."

"The Holy See has made it clear", the Pope said, "that we do not agree with the formalized blessing of couples, in this case, homosexual couples, as you asked, or couples in irregular situations, beyond what was specifically, if you will, allowed for by Pope Francis."

I SMELL SOME SKULLDUGGERY HERE, AKA, SMOKE OF SATAN

 Diane Montagna has excellent reporting on the synodal summary just released by the Vatican on Tuesday.

She contends or suggests that Fr. James Martin SJ may have had a hand in the part of the summary which glorifies not just same sex attraction but also homosexual relations in a secular marriage between two husbands. 

And the one writing of his glorious experiences with his husband is the very couple that Fr. Martin publicly blessed as a secularly married couple the day after Fiducia Supplicans was issued, which explicitly says, no hoopla should surround blessing individuals in an immoral sexual relationship. 

Included in this summary by the same man blessed by Fr. Martin is the disparaging of the Catholic Ministry to same sex attracted men and women, Courage. 

Timing is everything.

I think this section of the summary, about the glories of immoral sexual relationships of the same sex kind—I don’t think there were any testimonies of those glorifying their cheating on their spouses or those living as as a polygamist, only same sex, is a direct rebuke and slaming of Pope Leo XIV as His Holiness, this week, celebrates his first anniversary as the Vicar of Christ, the Supreme Pontiff and the Successor of Saint Peter. 

Let me repeat that—the sectional summary on the glories of homosexual fornication and the slamming of Courage, is a public rebuke of Pope Leo XIV by the homosexual lobby of the synodal way and Fr. James Martin, SJ seems to be involved in it. 

Why do I jump to this conclusion?

1. Pope Leo XIV met with leaders of Courage, had several photos with them and praised them for their ministry, especially calling people to conversion to Christ which touches every aspect of whom we are to include our sexuality. I wrote at the time, that Fr. James Martin, who usually gushes when the pope meets with people with same sex attractions and ministries to them, said absolutely nothing about the praises Pope Leo heaped upon Courage!

2. Pope Leo last week chided the German bishops, in particular Cardinal Marx, for publishing a document that includes a public liturgy of blessing of those in immoral sexual relationships. 

3. And on Monday, Cardinal Fernandez made public a letter to the Germans about no public liturgies for the blessing of immoral unions which was written during Pope Francis’ reign back in 2024.

How can I not help but two and two together and say that the homosexual lobby in the synodal way is getting even with Pope Leo?

You Can read Diana Montagna’s excellent reporting on this HERE. 

I FEEL BAD FOR YOU TYPE OF CATHOLICISM, VAPID AND LIKE COTTON CANDY…

Cardinal Hollerich feels bad that women can’t be ordained priests. Thus feeling bad is the hallmark for changing doctrines and dogmas.

I feel bad that the LGBTQ+++ can’t love and fornicate with whomever they wish and wherever, thus we need to change the Church’s teaching on disordered affections and relationships.

I feel bad that those who can’t live monogamy can’t have multiple spouses or at least have multple partners apart from their spouses. Thus the Church needs to change her teachings to make these people feel innocent and welcomed in the Church as they are. 

I feel bad that kleptomaniacs feel unwelcome at Church and counting the collection. We must include them in all the security needs of the Church and not make them feel guilty for stealing as they were born that way.  

I feel bad for sexual predators. They’re human too and must be welcomed in our homes, schools and religious education programs as well as our other ministries to shut-ins and vulnerables at home. The Church must allow these people, born this way, to live a guilt free life with acceptance of all they are and do. 

Fr. James Martin, SJ is thrilled that the Vatican published a summary of discussions from the last synod. This summary quoted someone with a same-sex attraction as feeling exluded by the Church and that he and his husband have a great marriage and are fulfilled and active members of the Church. Fr.Martin, gushing, that a Vatican summary included their testimony is a sign that the synodal Church will accept persons, once considered to be living in sin, as saints and praise what was once considered a mortal sin no longer is. Fr. Martin no longer feels bad but good about this. The Church is correcting their course.

I am happy for those persons and I am glad the synodal Church can change Divine teachings to make people feel less excluded and more included.

The above is a script for a Twilight Zone episode. 

WHAT IS THE PROPER WAY FOR A BISHOP, EVEN A POPE, TO GIVE THE FINAL BLESSING AT MASS?

I have seen it done two ways.

The wrong way, I think, but maybe an option, is for the bishop to offer the final blessing at Mass with three “Signs of the Cross” beginning from his left, to the middle and then to the right. I just saw Pope Paul VI on an old video do it that way.

But, Pope Leo offers his Final “tripple” Blessing at Mass, beginning in the middle, then to the left and then to the right. 

I think that’s the kosher way, but maybe both are kosher and if so, why the difference? Does anyone know?

BEFORE AND AFTER…

BEFORE:

AFTER:

I read a post on Facebook that complained about the modern rite of Episcopal Ordinations as exemplified in the two photos above at the Basilica of Saint John Lateran. The second photo was this past Saturday Ordination of new auxiliary bishops of Rome. 

As you can see, both are papal Episcopal Ordinations. The top one is the pre-Vatican II Form at the Bishop of Rome’s Cathedral, the Lateran. The second is the most recent one, thus the post-Vatican II form at the same Cathedral but with Pope Leo. Not sure who the pope is in the pre-Vatican II set-up.

The complaint is that the Litany of the Saints, where the candidates are prostrate on the floor, in the post-Vatican II Ordination Rite has them prostrating before the pope and his papal throne, whereas in the pre-Vatican II Ordination Rite, the candidates along with the pope go the the altar for this and the candidates are prostrate before the Altar, along with the pope, who kneels, signifying that the altar represents the true Head of the Church, Jesus Christ. 

The flimsy rubrics of the Reformed Rite doesn’t make clear, evidently, that the prostration at any ordination, a deacon, priest or bishop, should take place before the altar.

Granted, the set-up in the Lateran is ancient, with the Bishop’s throne at the back of the apse and the altar in the transept of the Cathedral. 

I’d love to see the full Ordination Rite in the pre-Vatican II set-up at this particular cathedral. I think a a chair would have be brought to the altar for the pope to do all of the rite of ordination there and not at the throne.

I do think, though, that at least for the Litany of the Saints with its prostration of the candidates should have been at the altar with a procession from the chair to the altar by the pope and then back to the chair for the rest of the ordination rite. 

Preferably, all of the ordination rite should have been at the altar.

But the problem, again, are the flimsy rubrics of the modern Mass that allows for all kinds of adaptations.

But the prostration before the pope was not a good visual for an ordination rite. I am sure you will agree. 

BUT! BUT! BUT! THIS IS HOW THE POST-VATICAN II CHURCH WORKS—DISOBEDIENCE BECOMES ENSHRINED IN LAW!

 How did we get altar girls? Through disobedience!

How did we get Communion in the hand? Through disobedience!

How did we get the common chalice and a multiplicity of Communion Ministers for it? Disobedience!

How did we get lay preaching? Disobedience!

The Post Vatican II Church is built on disobedience. You want something to become enshrined in Law, disobey first and then it will finally get approved.

Formal Blessings for anyone in immoral and mortal sin unions will come about and be enshrined in Church Law only through disobedience—it worked in the past and will in the future, despite the Vatican’s protests!

From Sileri non possum:

Vatican City – On November 18, 2024, Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (formerly the Holy Office), wrote to Msgr. Stephen Ackermann, Bishop of Trier, in response to a document that the German Bishops' Conference had sent to Rome on the preceding October 24.

This document was a *Vademecum*—a sort of practical guide in German and Italian—conceived as an aid for "Blessings for couples who love one another," intended for presentation to the German diocesan bishops. The stated objective was to apply the declaration *Fiducia supplicans* (December 2023)—the Vatican document that had cautiously opened the door to the possibility of blessing irregular couples, including those of the same sex—to the pastoral reality in Germany.

The Core of the Objection

Fernández raises two substantial objections regarding the German initiative, articulated in points (a) and (b) of his letter.

First problem: there is a risk of "legitimizing" that which ought not to be legitimized. *Fiducia supplicans* had been crystal clear in stating that blessing an irregular couple does *not* signify approval of their status, nor does it confer any moral legitimacy. It is merely a matter of asking God for help to live a better life. The German *Vademecum*, however—according to the Cardinal—speaks of "official regulation" on the part of pastors, and even of "acclamation" (a gesture typically prescribed within the rite of marriage). In other words: in practice, there was a risk of legitimizing the couple's *status*—precisely the opposite of what Rome had established.

Second problem: a rite is being created where none was intended to exist. *Fiducia Supplicans* explicitly forbade any fixed ritual form: no liturgies, no para-liturgies, nothing resembling a sacrament. The *Vademecum*—while initially declaring that blessings for same-sex couples must remain within the realm of "spontaneity and freedom"—then proceeds (contradicting itself) to provide a pre-established formula. In the final section ("Form"), it goes so far as to prescribe how the blessing is to be conducted—including its aesthetics, music, and chanting—amounting, in short, to a full-blown liturgy in disguise.

**Francis, Too, Said No**

The letter is formally courteous—"I take the liberty of kindly offering the following observations"—but in substance, it constitutes a sharp rebuke. Fernández concludes with the formula, "All this is communicated for all due purposes"—a curial expression that, in practice, means: *take note and act accordingly.*

The subtext here is the tug-of-war that has pitted the Vatican against the German Church for years—a Church that has become particularly ideological and entrenched in its "Synodal Path" regarding issues such as blessings for homosexual couples, the role of women, and the promotion of the laity. Rome is telling the Germans: *Fiducia Supplicans* is not a license to construct your own parallel practice; that manual—as it currently stands—exceeds the boundaries established by the Holy See.

s.C.B.

*Silere non possum*

THE SIGN OF PEACE AT WEDDINGS—OMIT IT OR NOT TO OMIT IT? THAT IS THE QUESTION I HAVE ANSWERED: OMIT IT!

The various Nuptial Masses I have celebrated over the years can get out of hand if the couple isn’t truly practicing their faith nor their family and friends who attend the Nuptial Mass.

The Sign of Peace can become very problematic.

Here are a couple of things that went very wrong at some of my Nuptial Masses:

I say, “Let us offer each other the Sign of Peace” and then the couple proceeds to French kiss in a prolonged fashion in front of the assembly to their hoops and hollering! 

Or:

The couple kisses passionately but not in the French way and then everyone comes up to them to exchange the Sign of Peace—without any coaching!

Or:

The couple goes to everyone in the congregation to greet and offer the Sign of Peace.

Or: 

Everyone in the Church goes and greets everyone else!

All of this is very boisterous! 

So, I have come to omit the Sign of Peace at Nuptial Masses and it makes all the difference in the world!

Of course, the couple with or without the Sign of Peace at the end as they depart will passionately kiss to the applause, hooping and hollering of all in the Assembly. What to do? What to do? Oh! What to do?

As a codicil, no such problems ever, ever, ever happen at any Tridentine Nuptial Mass I have celebrated, ever!

WHERE-IN THE EPISCOPALIANS GET HOLY COMMUNION IN THE HAND RIGHT—THEY PRACTICE THE ANCIENT WAY!

 Receiving Holy Communion in the hand was a common practice in both the Church of the East and the West for about the first seven centuries of the Church. 

The way it was done is that the communicant placed their right hand over their left in the form of a cross. The priest placed the Host onto the palm of the communicants right hand. Then, the communicant bowed down as both hands in the form of a cross come up and with the mouth and tongue take the Host from the palm of the right hand. 

Episcopalians to this day receive in the hand in the ancient way and most Episcopal Churches have communion rails and receive in this manner while kneeling although standing is a more ancient way.

Catholics do not receive in the ancient way with the novel manner in which the laity were taught to receive Holy Communion by hand beginning in the late 1970’s.

The way the Church teaches the laity to receive Holy Communion in the hand is to place their dominant hand under the other hand (left or right), allow the minister of Holy Communion to place the Host in their palm and then take the dominant hand and pick the Host up form the palm and place the Host in one’s mouth. 

This is completely foreign to the Episcopalian way which is, in fact, the ancient way. 

Today, though, Communion in the hand in every Catholic Church has devolved into snatching the Host from the minister, placing both hands out without signifying which hand the Host should be placed and one handed reception where the communicant drops the hand so the Host moves towards the fingers and then one handedly and with the same hand in which the Host is received the person places the Host in their mouth and usually while moving away from the minister. 

Never mind how sloppily children receive the Host in the hand and this in the most important years of their life where proper piety and reverence for Christ in the Holy Eucharist is formed or deformed!

Dr. Peter Kwasniewski gives the proper historical way that Holy Communion was received in the hand for the first seven centuries and points out how the modern Catholic practice is not the ancient practice: