THE DEBATE ABOUT CONVERTING PEOPLE TO THE CATHOLIC FAITH, GOOD WORKS AND THE CHURCH JESUS FOUNDED—IS IT A MATTER OF SEMANTICS?

If Bishop Vesco is opposed to the OCIA and making converts because he is opposed to evangelization, then he should be condemned not only by Bishop Barron, but all bishops and the Bishop of Rome, Pope Leo.

But I will give Cardinal Vesco the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he is opposed to proselytizing rather than to evangelization which all Catholic Bishops should be to include Bishop Barron. 

This is AI’s description of the difference between the two:

Evangelization is the respectful sharing of the Christian Gospel that invites a free, personal response to faith, whereas proselytizing uses pressure, manipulation, or coercion to recruit members.

Evangelization

• Core Focus: Proclaiming the "good news" of Jesus Christ, salvation, and God's love.

• Method: Relies on witness, testimony, charity, dialogue, and respect for human freedom and conscience.

• Goal: To introduce people to a genuine relationship with God, allowing faith to grow by attraction rather than force.

• View of Conversion: True faith must be chosen freely; conversion is seen as the work of God/the Holy Spirit, not human salesmanship.

Proselytizing

• Core Focus: Increasing numbers, filling church pews, or meeting organizational quotas.

• Method: Often uses fear, guilt, unfair attacks on other faiths, or attaching strings (like financial aid or material benefits) to conversion.

• Goal: To pressure or convince someone to switch their religious label or join a specific group.

• View of Conversion: Treated like a transaction or a forced argument where compliance matters more than free will.

Pope Leo is not opposed to Evangelization but is opposed to proselytizing. If he were opposed to evangelization, he would not have authorized the beatification of the five Georgia Martyrs and he would have condemned every missionary the Church has sent to the new worldin North, Central and South America!

He would not have been a Bishop in Peru! He would not be pope!

If Cardinal Vesco is opposed to evangelization, he should be removed as the bishop of his diocese, no? And if Bishop Barron is in favor of proselytizing, he should be too, no?

At Sunday’s Angelus at St. Peter’s Square, Pope Leo said this:

After the Angelus

Dear brothers and sisters,

Yesterday, in Savannah, Georgia, in the United States of America, Pedro de Corpa and four companions, religious of the Order of Friars Minor, who were killed in odium fidei in 1597, were beatified. Originally from Spain, they responded generously to the Lord's call to evangelize the peoples of the Americas, even to the point of giving their lives. Let us invoke the intercession of these martyrs for all missionaries of the Gospel.

MY FORMER PARISH OF SAINT ANNE CHURCH IN RICHMOND HILL (SAVANNAH IS ITS SUBURB) HAD ITS CANDLESTICKS BEATIFIED BY FRANK CARDINAL LEO OF TORONTO!

 A glorious and historic day for the Diocese of Savannah! Five Franciscan Georgia Martyrs were beatified at Savannah’s gargantuan Convention Center. 10,000 or so of the faithful came to celebrate. Yours truly led the priests and bishops down the aisle! 

I was able to distribute Holy Communion too! God is Good!

They had an altar railing installed to the delight of the Bishop of Charlotte who joined many other bishops and archbishops for the Beatification.

Cardinal Leo of Toronto has a very nice ars celebrandi and read the black and did the red and seem to me, this most humble reform of the reform in continuity priest that he incorporated certain aspects of the TLM in to how His Eminence consecrated the Bread and Wine. 

His homily was very good too. He spoke of not becoming worldly when it comes to Marriage (which got the five martyrs martyred in the first place). We are to conform to Christ, not the world. Hopefully I can post his homily on line when I find it.

The last two photos are of St. Anne’s candlesticks at St. Anne and then at the Beatification—are these now relics? 

Saint Catherine Island where the Franciscans were martyred is a barrier island off of Richmond Hill. 

NON PAPAL MASS AT THE PAPAL ALTAR FOR VILLANOVA AND NOTRE UNIVERSITIES ON HALLOWEEN…

 From St. Peter’s Basilica, Archbishop Nelson J. Pérez presides at Holy Mass with delegations from Villanova University and the University of Notre Dame

WARNING CATHOLICS NOT TO ATTEND FSSPX MASSES AS THEY ARE NOW IN A FORMAL SCHISM WITH THE CHURCH

I’m not complaining that bishops are making clear to Catholics tempted to attend the schismatic FSSPX Masses that it is wrong, sinful and at least imprudent to do so! But I can remember when I was a child, prior to the ecumenical movement that Vatican II put on steroids, that we were warned about even setting foot in a Protestant Church let alone attend one.

There were some exceptions for attending funerals and weddings, but we were always warned not to receive Communion in those denominations and not to join them in prayers. 

Bishops and priests did a great job about warning us about that.

My father even got mad at me when I told him I looked through the glass doors of the Episcopal Church down the road from us to see what it looked like. He said I shouldn't even look into a Protestant Chruch! Good for dad!

But after Vatican II, we didn’t hear so much about that even while thousands of Catholics were leaving the Church for Protestant sects. Today the number one sect that Catholics join are the non-denominationals sects that have great music and fellowship, worship and praise music.

A Catholic musician, who was not what I would call a traditionalists, lamented that the Catholic Church was using Protestant worship and praise music which he felt was preparing them to leave the Catholic Church to join those sects where their worship and praise music is done a lot better than how Catholics attempt to mimic them! 

But that’s my point! We have far, far, far more Catholics joining Protestant sects, especially the non-denominational ones than we have Catholics joining the FSSPX! Catholics going to SSPX chapels are minuscule in numbers compared to those going to Protestant sects.

Yet almost every bishop is mum, I mean, mum on that, but are writing letters galore about not going the SSPX Masses. What’s up with that??????

VERY INTERESTING!

 

Press title for story!

Robert Prevost requests to vote in Illinois in an unprecedented gesture in the history of the papacy

Pope Leo XIV has requested to vote by mail in the midterm elections taking place in the United States next Tuesday, November 3. The request was registered on October

WHEN IT COMES TO THE CHURCH AFTER VATICAN II, THE PROBLEM IS PUTTING THE HORIZONTAL OVER THE VERTICAL—OF COURSE IT ISN’T EITHER/OR BUT BOTH/AND BUT IN A HIERARCHY WHERE THE VERTICAL COMES FIRST!

 There are two commentaries very much related, one from Cardinal Fernandez and the other from Bishop Robert Mutsaerts although Mutsaerts’ commentary is very coherent and specific!

Cardinal Fernandez says this according to Infovaticano:

Fernández criticizes the priorities of progressives and conservatives 

"No one is passionate about it": Fernández admits the scant impact of Venite ad me

The prefect attributes the scant interest in the document to the priorities that, in his view, predominate in different ecclesial sectors.

According to Fernández, more progressive bishops pay greater attention to structural changes and dialogue with society, while conservative sectors concentrate especially on the transmission of sexual morality. (My comment: While “conservatives” might seem to focus on sexuality, my experience of “conservatives” is that they focus on the 10 Commandments in general—but indeed, sexuality is vey personal and intimate to their own lives, be it  a grace-filled moment or one of sin and guilt. But it is personal to them, from them, whereas social issues like war and peace, ways to care for the poor and the displaced are other than them and many feel helpless to solve these social problems apart from political affiliations or activism. It’s like the progressives who focus only on things external to them, rather than on Christ who is intimate with them and should be the center.)

The cardinal believes that both orientations relegate the proclamation of Jesus Christ and the personal experience of faith to a secondary place.

In this context, he maintained that Pope Francis’s call to renew the missionary proclamation of the kerygma has not produced significant changes in the pastoral projects of dioceses and movements.

In his opinion, this lack of response explains why the new document has not aroused particular enthusiasm either.

READ THE ENTIRE INFOVATICANO ARTICLE HERE.

Copied from Rorate Caeli, press title or read more for full great, common sense article, common sense so lacking in certain places in the Vatican and in chanceries:

Cardinal Roche's Threatening Language: Do Not Attend the TLM! But Why? The Church Need Not Forbid Its Past to Secure Its Future.

By Bishop Robert Mutsaerts

Auxiliary of ‘s-HertogenboschOctober 24, 2026

The Catholic Church prides (herself) on its universality, cherishes an impressive diversity of liturgical traditions, and regards that diversity as an expression of its riches. A Catholic may attend the divine liturgy according to the Byzantine tradition, the Maronite tradition, the Armenian tradition, or the Chaldean tradition. No one finds this in itself a threat to ecclesial unity. But the moment a Catholic wishes to attend Mass as it was celebrated for centuries in Rome, Paris, Amsterdam, and virtually the entire Latin Church, certain ecclesial authorities in Rome begin to grow uneasy.

Read more »

My final comments:

While Bishop Mutsaerts is more specific and coherent about it, Cardinal Fernandez also indicates that focusing in on the horizontal rather than the vertical is the problem in today’s Church. 

When you understand the TLM, you realize that the focus is completely vertical, contemplative and other-worldly where the focus is on Christ—which then leads to the horizontal in the world—love of God and neighbor as the Church teaches the laity should carry out in the world, but the liturgy is other-worldly.

Not so, in many celebrations of the post-Vatican II Bugnini Mass. Often it is celebrated as though it’s a 1960’s Kumbaya Mass. There’s nothing transcendent about it. The problem is the Missal’s ambiguous General Instruction and the manipulation of the scant rubrics and rituals of the Mass by the priest and the laity during its celebration, such as casualness, clowning around and making Mass into a convivial “Sacred Meal” rather than the Holy Sacrifice it is. Revising the Bugnini Mass by giving it the TLM’s Order and rubrics would completely solve that problem without changing the vernacular or any of the prayers of the Mass (except the Introductory Rites). 

Fernandez also indicates that progressive leaning bishops and dioceses think that more meetings, more structure, more talking (all horizontal by the way) are more important than a transcendent encounter with Christ who is the center of one’s life, not meetings! The disconnect for Cardinal Fernandez is that the synodal thingy, that no one likes and few care about, except that it is instrumentalized to make the Catholic Church like the Anglican Communion, is what the Vatican has been promoting for the last 14 years!

But Bishop Mutsaerts hits the nail on the head—Thank you good Bishop!

APART FROM BEING EXTREMELY UGLY, WHAT IS THE CORRUPT THEOLOGY BEHIND THE 1980 WRECKOVATION?

 And let us thank God for the return to sanity for this poor parish after having suffered such insanity at the hands of design experts!

INSTRUMENTALIZING THE SYNODAL MEETINGS AS A POLITICAL, PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS, AN ARTICLE AT WHERE PETER IS, AKA, WHERE POPE FRANCIS WAS, LOBBIES YET AGAIN FOR FEMALE ORDINATION, BEGINNING WITH DEACONS BUT ENDING WITH PRIESTS, BISHOPS AND ULTIMATELY THE POPE—LIKE THE ARCHBISHOPESS OF CANTERBURY

 The anthropology of Catholic ordination hinges on the difference between male and female, husbands and wives, the masculine and feminine especially as it relates to marriage as well as ordination.

Those political lobbies in the Church, instrumentalizing synodality as a parliament, want to do away with this anthropology or act as though it doesn’t exist and in the modern world is irrelevant.

You can see how this is related too, with political lobbies of synodlaity wanting to do away with sexual sins or ignore them for other sins more devious, in order to eventually get to same sex or whatever sex is claimed, marriage and ordination. It effectively, too, does away with Humanae Vitae and the Catholic Church’s reliance on natural law. 

You can read a bleeding heart’s take on why women should be ordained deacons from Where Peter is, aka, Where Pope Francis Was, HERE. 

However, this is what Artificial Intelligence says about Pope Francis’ position on the subject of ordination, all three elements that form a whole, deacons, priests and bishops:

Pope Francis and the Roman Catholic Church teach that women cannot be ordained priests because of theological anthropology, apostolic tradition, and the symbolic nature of the priesthood. [1, 2, 3]

Key Teachings and Rationale

Apostolic Tradition: The Church holds that Jesus Christ deliberately chose only men as his 12 Apostles, a pattern maintained throughout Church history as an unchangeable norm. Pope Francis reaffirmed the permanence of this rule, referencing Pope John Paul II’s 1994 apostolic letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Theological Anthropology and the Petrine vs. Marian Principles: Catholic theology frames the Church through two complementary dimensions: the Petrine principle (governing and ministerial priesthood) and the Marian principle (femininity, maternity, and the spousal nature of the Church). Pope Francis explains that excluding women from the ministerial priesthood is not a deprivation of dignity, as Mary holds a higher theological and mystical place in the Church than the apostles. [1, 2, 3]
In Persona Christi: During the Eucharist, the priest acts in persona Christi (in the person of Christ the bridegroom), and the Church views the male body as an integral sacramental sign of that representation. [1, 2] This principle applies to deacons at Mass, when a deacon reads the very Words of Jesus in the Gospels—when a deacon reads those worsds, he is acting sacramentally in Persona Christi. 
Distinction in Roles: While barring women from holy orders (diaconate, priesthood, and episcopate), Pope Francis has emphasized increasing women's decision-making and administrative roles in Vatican governance and financial bodies. [1, 2, 3]

HOLY FATHER, IT IS TIME TO BRING BACK ECCLESIA DEI! THAT WOULD HAVE SOLVED THE SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM DEBACLE, A DEBACLE OF ROME AND THOSE WHO ORGANIZED THE PILGRIMAGE!

Michael Haynes

If only, if only, if only, Pope Leo had reestablished Ecclesia Dei as it was before Summorum Pontificum, it would have solved all the problems of this year’s Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage.

If that pilgrimage had been coordinated by Ecclesia Dei and renamed the Ecclesia Dei Pilgrimage, the scandal of the “visuals” of the Vatican slamming the door in the face of Traditionalists would not have happened!

The Curial bishop or cardinal, the prefect for the reestablished Ecclesia Dei would have coordinated all events, made sure that there wasn’t any instrumentalization by those in the Traditionalist movement and the Prefect would have selected the celebrant for the Mass at St. Peter’s and all other events in the basilica. 

For the love of God and all that is holy, reestablish and reconstitute Ecclesia Dei!

Here’s an AI description of the Ecclesia Dei established by St. John Paul II:

Primary Actions

Pontifical Commission: Established the Pontifical Commission "Ecclesia Dei" to help reintegrate traditionalist priests, seminarians, and religious communities wishing to remain in unity with Rome while keeping their traditional spiritual and liturgical forms. [1, 2]
Liturgical Provision: Urged a "wide and generous application" of the pre-conciliar Roman liturgy (the 1962 Roman Missal) for Catholics attached to the traditional Latin Mass. [1, 2]
Later Dissolution: Pope Francis dissolved the commission on January 17, 2019, transferring its duties directly to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. [1, 2]

SHOULD THE CHURCH STOP BLESSING AND PRAYING FOR SINNERS OR IF DONE HELD IN THE CONFESSIONAL UNDER ITS SEAL?

Did President Trump used this photo op to instrumentalize those poor Catholic bishops who may or may not have wanted to be the President's political pawns? You betcha!

Did the LGBTQ+++ ideologues instrumentalize that poor priest when this photo of him praying over and blessing a same sex sexual partners was immediately sent out to the world, by the priest, btw? You betcha! 

Did the couple apologize that this photo was instrumentalized for LGBTQ+++ideologies promoted in the Church and world today? Not to my knowledge nor did the priest apologize to my knowledge. 

The first photo photo op is probably one of those events where nothing more should have been said. But two bishops who are there and praying over and blessing President Trump have apologized for doing so. Yes, you read that correctly. They accepted an invitation to the Oval Office and to meet the president. Most people would jump at the chance for that kind of experience and they did.

Of course, evangelical minister Paula White initiated the prayer and being Post Vatican II Catholics embracing unbridled ecumenism, the Catholic bishops were happy to display their ecumenical mindset and joined in very quickly. Could you imagine if they hadn’t? The ecumenists would have crucified them!

Anyone who knows President Trump knows that he, a politician like all politicians, but unique in his own way, would instrumentalize for political purposes anyone praying over him, especially Catholic bishops. 

Why did they go if they didn’t want to be instrumentalized.

After the fact, maybe less said is more and only two apologizing while the others did not put on sackcloth and ashes really draws even more attention to what bishops should be doing, praying for and over people and offering blessings. 

The attention given to this really plays into President Trump’s favor, no? 

YIKES! WILL THERE BE ENOUGH ROOM IN THE INN? THE BEATIFICATION OF THE GEORGIA MARTYRS ON ALL HALLOW’S EVE!

The Beatification of the Georgia Martyrs will take place on Saturday, October 31 at the Savannah Convention Center. Frank Cardinal Leo, Archbishop of Toronto, will be the Celebrant.

I will be one of many con-celebrants. Knowing that parking will be difficult on Hutchinson Island, across the Savannah River from downtown Savannah, I booked a room at the Westin Hotel next door to the Convention center.

But this is an email that we just received overnight!:

IMPORTANT BEATIFICATION UPDATE!

Dear Monsignors and Fathers,

 

Bishop Parkes has asked me to share with you that the registrations for the beatification of the Georgia Martyrs has been exceptional – in fact, registrations have exceeded the capacity of the Savannah Convention Center!

While this is wonderful news, we ask that you please share the following with your parishioners at the Masses this weekend:

 

The Diocese of Savannah has been blessed with an overwhelming number of registrations for the Beatification of the Georgia Martyrs, and the Savannah Convention Center will be at capacity during the event. 

For those of you who registered, please note that the event is expected to be standing room only. If you did not register, please do not plan to attend as you will likely be turned away. We encourage you to instead watch the livestream on EWTN or at diosav.org.

You can read about the Georgia Martyrs HERE. 

THERE’S MORE TO THIS STORY: AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY…

 Press title for full Sileri non possum commentary:

Traditionalists at St Peter’s: The Latin Mass, the Lies and the War on the Pope

The Mass had been refused for organisational reasons, but some chose to portray the decision as persecution. The role played by Pentin, Montagna and Giansoldati, and the contradictions of those who claim to defend the faith while attacking the Church’s hierarchy.

TRADITIONALISM AND ORTHODOXY—THE TWO DON’T NECESSARILY GO TOGETHER

Eric Sammons writes this (copied from a longer commentary HERE):

 How has (traditional Catholicism) changed for the better? In many ways, traditional Catholicism has become more accepted, more normalized. Whereas for a long time traditionalism was a fringe movement within the Church, now traditionalists are part of the wider Church in ways unimaginable just a decade ago. Young Catholics in particular don’t look askance at traditionalism, and in fact they often embrace it in disproportionate numbers.

But how has traditional Catholicism changed for the worse? It’s become more internally divided. Perhaps that was inevitable. Success bred complacency, and Francis’s death removed the common focal point. There’s no question in my mind that there’s far more infighting among traditionalists today than five years ago. Under Francis, there was a unifying force among traditionalists: resisting the anti-traditional agenda of the Argentine pope. Now, however, with Pope Leo, there are real disagreements among traditional voices as to how to best proceed

My comments:

I see myself as an orthodox Catholic and priest. That means that I am obedient to the Church and her popes and bishops even if I dislike this, that or the other in terms of discipline and change. 

While I loved the option of having two forms of the one Roman Rite freely allowed, it isn’t anymore. I dislike that but as an orthodox priest, I am obedient to the new rules. 

I see that both forms could have benefited from cross-fertilization leading to a new single Roman Missal. But for the time being that isn’t on the table anymore. 

I embraced Summorum Pontificum in a literal way, meaning the Bugnini Mass is the normal, regular, ordinary Mass of the Roman Rite while the 1962 Missal and ancillary liturgies are not the usual, ordinary or regular liturgies of the Roman Rite—these are out of the ordinary, the exception not the rule.

I am not opposed to girls and women allowed to serve the altar, distribute Holy Communion and read the Scriptures. And I accept and wish that the formal ministries of lector and acolyte for adults become the norm and those who serve these without benefit of these official ministries would be suppressed.

I would love to see the Order of the 1962 Mass be an option for the Bugnini Mass to include ad orientem and kneeling for Holy Communion—those two things should not be viewed with suspicion by clergy or laity, to include popes and bishops. 

I would love to see the changing parts of the 1962 Mass celebrated in the vernacular as an option and the Liturgy of the Word, using the 1962 lectionary, offered as in the Bugnini Mass and with lay lectors, male or female—the same for altar servers. 

All of this makes me orthodox not heterodox and that is the distinction that everyone should embrace be they on the right or the left, traditionalists or revisionists. Always orthodoxy seeking unity and never heterodoxy pouring gasoline on disunity. 

IS POPE LEO DOING AWAY WITH THE IDEOLOGY AND INSTRUMENTALIZATION OF INCLUSIVITY AND ALL ARE WELCOME AND GATHER US IN?

TRADITIONALISTS ACTING STUPID…

 Well, when you challenge the Supreme Pontiff and the Second Vatican Council, what do you expect? If only traditionalists were like Pope Benedidict XVI. He never stopped celebrating the Bugnini Mass although he would have preferred a reform in continuity. If he had been pope for 10 more years, maybe that would have happened. Only God knows.

But Bishop Schnieder and others of his ilk have managed to set back the reform in continuity by be so stupid and so Protestant, neo-protetstantism that is. 

Pope Benedict XVI pray for 

Vatican Bars Annual TLM Pilgrimage from Entering St. Peter’s Basilica

According to organizers, the decision was communicated in a letter from the Vatican Secretariat of State.

THOSE WHO SUPPORT EVERY BLESSING ALLOWED BY FIDUCIA SUPPLICANS DO NOT SUPPORT THIS BLESSING!

 POOR ARCHBISHOP JAMES GOLKA IS GETTING CRUCIFIED BY THE HETERODOX RIGHT FOR SILENCING A CELEBRITY EXORCIST AND BY THE HETERODOX LEFT FOR TAKING FIDUCIA SUPPLICAN TO ITS LOGICAL CONCLUSION! 

Trump's campaign X account and a White House communications staffer posted a video on Thursday, Oct. 22, that shows a number of Catholic bishops, including Denver Archbishop James Golka, praying over President Donald Trump in the Oval Office.

Ahead of elections, White House shares video of Catholic bishops praying over Trump

A LIFE AND DEATH HEALTH CRISIS, CARDINAL PAROLIN STATES LEO’S PONTIFICATE NEEDS A RECALIBRATION…MY MUSINGS

Anytime anyone experiences a life and death moment, even popes, things in one’s life and journey are recalibrated and not just short term goals and decisions, but also life choices and directions.

For a pontiff experiencing a life and death situation due to cancer or some other “maybe” terminal condition, it might mean distancing himself from His Holiness’ immediate predecessor’s more controversial decisions and penchant for creating polarization in the Church, division rather than unity, creating broken bridges rather than pontiffs. 

Am I the only one who found it odd that Pope Leo chose not to close his much touted meeting on Amoris Laetitia and instead chose to have lung surgery that more than likely could have taken place the day after His Holiness celebrated the closing Mass outdoors in St. Peter’s Square?  And His Holiness chose not to issue his own musings on that meeting until later, after His Holiness had studied all of the incessant talking and listening that goes on “ad nauseam” in today’s Vatican and Church. 

And now, just today, October 23, we learn that Pope Leo will not close the controversial Interfaith Meeting in Assisi. The reason? He can’t fly due to His Holiness’ lung surgery. But, but, but, it’s only a two hour car ride to Assisi from Rome or, better yet, why not use the train station that is inside the Vatican Complex, and quite lovely, I’ve seen it, and take the train to Assisi? How cool would that be?

Maybe, like Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Leo wants to distance His Holiness from this meeting. 

And then, almost like the Amoris Laetitia “footnote” the document, not dogmatic, but more pastoral, that was issued by the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith yesterday, speaks of allowing the full tradition of the Church’s liturgical heritage to shine forth as a part of dealing with the crisis of faith that new cultural realities have created. (Let’s not forget how interpreting Vatican II in discontinuity with everything that preceded Vatican II was the “camel’s nose in the tent” that opened the Church to all the nonsense that has happened since Vatican II and then shifting the blame to culture and secularism!).

As I read that, it means allowing what Summorum Pontificum made explicit—that’s my interpretation of that “Laetitia Amoris-like footnote” in yesterday’s document and certainly the only interpretation of it!

Am I reading all these tea leafs wrong??? Or am I clairvoyant—and does that make me a pagan and do I need an exorcism? 

FIGHTING AGAINST THE CORRUPTION OF MARRIAGE BY VARIOUS IDEOLOGIES, AND NOT JUST THE LGBTQ+++ KIND, POPE LEO GIVES A GREAT CATECHESIS ON MARRIAGE AND UPHOLDS HUMANAE VITAE!

 Catechesis. The Documents of the Second Vatican Council. IV. Constitution Gaudium et Spes.  6. Commitment to the family in today’s society (GS, 47–52)

Dear brothers and sisters, good morning and welcome!

The first think I would like to say is thank you!. Thank you for the support of your prayers. Thanks be to God for His generosity. Let us all renew our trust in God’s goodness and mercy.

The pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes (GS) of the Second Vatican Council, having illustrated in the first part the dignity of the person and his or her vocation in the world, goes on to consider, in the second part, “in the light of the Gospel and of human experience”, some of the most pressing contemporary issues (cf. GS, 46). It focuses primarily on marriage and the family, in the conviction that “the well-being of the individual and of human and Christian society is intimately linked with the healthy condition of that community produced by marriage and family” (GS, 47).

To this end, it does not merely reaffirm their values and aims, but proposes a renewed conception of marriage as an “intimate partnership of married life and love” (GS, 48). By incorporating the legal dimension of marriage as a contract, the foundation of this union is recognized in the “conjugal covenant”, understood as the “human act whereby spouses mutually bestow and accept each another” (ibid.). The mutual self-giving of man and woman, such that ‘they are no longer two but one flesh’ (Mt 19:6), underlies the requirement for “total fidelity” and the “unbreakable oneness” of the spouses, finding vivid expression in the procreation and upbringing of children (cf. GS, 48). As a reflection of the Divine Trinity, conjugal and parental love, through the Sacrament of Marriage, is “governed and enriched by Christ’s redeeming power”, so that spouses may love one another “just as He loved the Church and handed Himself over on her behalf” (ibid.).

Having shed light on the reality of marriage in the light of Christ’s love, which is the truth of both human and divine love, Gaudium et Spes turns its attention to conjugal love and marital fruitfulness. Not limited to erotic attraction, which it nonetheless encompasses, conjugal love involves the entire will of the spouses, enlivening the affections of their hearts and expressing itself through sentiments and gestures of tenderness (cf. GS, 49). Embracing the good of the whole person of both man and woman, who are equal in dignity, this love pervades the entire life of the spouses, finding expression in acts proper exclusively to marriage (cf. ibid.). Whilst signifying integral love from person to person, the unique intimacy between the spouses fosters their mutual self-giving and enriches their shared joy (cf. ibid.).

Furthermore, the fruitfulness of conjugal love is expressed in the procreation of children, “the supreme gift of marriage” (GS, 50). By transmitting and educating human life, which must never be rejected, spouses become “cooperators with the love of God the Creator, and are, so to speak, the interpreters of that love” (ibid.). Called to this human and Christian responsibility, they are bound to allow themselves to be guided by a sound judgement regarding their own good and that of their children, whether already born or yet to be born. Such a judgement, which, in the final analysis, the spouses themselves must form before God, requires that their conscience conform to divine law, as interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church in the light of the Gospel (cf. ibid.).

The emphasis on loving communion and procreative fruitfulness within marriage leads the Council to rule out the possibility of there being “a true contradiction … between the divine laws pertaining to the transmission of life, and those pertaining to authentic conjugal love” (GS, 51) and to affirm, instead, that “when there is question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life”, one must “preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love” (ibid.). From this it follows both that “from the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care”, renouncing “abortion and infanticide”; and that “the acts themselves which are proper to conjugal love and which are exercised in accord with genuine human dignity must be honoured with great reverence” (ibid.).

The teaching of Gaudium et Spes on the conjugal and family community thus goes on to highlight the social function of the family, defined as “a school of deeper humanity” and “the foundation of society” (GS, 52), calling upon all those with social responsibilities, especially in the political and cultural spheres, to fulfil their duty to “work efficiently for the welfare of marriage and the family” (ibid.).

Dear friends, this task is more urgent than ever before. The Church is well aware of this, as shown by the pastoral concern of the Popes who have succeeded one another since the last Council, right up to the two Synodal Assemblies convened by Pope Francis, which were addressed again in recent days by the Heads of the Eastern Catholic Churches and the Presidents of the Episcopal Conferences. May the Holy Family of Nazareth enlighten us on our journey and protect families throughout the world.

CELEBRITY BISHOPS AND PRIESTS SHOULD BE RARE BUT SAFE

Because social media especially of the video kind, can make just about anyone a celebrity influencer, when it comes to bishops and priests, these celebrities should be rare and always safe.

Blessed Fulton Sheen was a celebrity bishop in the 1950’s and until he died having had a prime time television show on ABC TV in the 1950’s. But he was about it, rare and safe His Beatified was. 

A famous celebrity exorcist, yes, you read that correctly, a celebrity exorcist, has been asked and he has consented to “fast” from publicly speaking for a year, especially on social media. Thank God he was obedient to his bishop’s request as all priests make promises of obedience to their bishop and also that of celibacy. Religious priests make a vow of poverty too. 

PRIESTS ARE NOT IN PRIVATE PRACTICE!

I think exorcists should be very circumspect about becoming celebrities. Am I wrong? 

Traditional, orthodox Catholics should be applauding the celebrity exorcist for obeying his bishop’s order to “shut-up” for a year. Heterodox Catholics will not do that and scream bloody murder that the celebrity exorcist is obeying his bishop. I guess they would applaud the exorcist priest if he were breaking his promises/vows of celibacy and poverty. 

There’s a Jesuitical celebrity priest who promotes ideologies that irk a lot of people, especially the orthodox Catholics among them. I guess it will take more courage for his bishop to silence him, given that particular ideology and I think that bishop would be the bishop where the Jesuitical celebrity priest lives—that bishop is responsible or am I wrong? 

I do believe, though, that if that Jesuitical priest were silenced, he would be obedient and I would applaud that and the bishop who silenced him. 

POPE LEO APPOINTS A THEOLOGIAN WHO CRITICIZED POPE FRANCIS AND TRADITIONIS CUSTODIS

 Pope Leo is appointing a variety of theologians of various theological factions for the listening Church that eventually filters. This appointee needs a listen about TC!

Press the title for the complete article, money byte below it;

"Pedro, the rock, begins to roll": a layman highly critical of Traditionis Custodes joins the Theological Commission

Tück wrote in 2021 that Traditionis custodes put papal authority at risk. In May he said that a schism by the FSSPX would be “also good” for clarification.

The 2021 article appeared on July 22 in the Swiss daily Neue Zürcher Zeitung(NZZ), six days after the publication of the motu proprio, under the title “No to the Old Mass: Pope Francis repeals a decision of his predecessor and thereby endangers the authority of the office.” Tück recalled that Francis had once remarked that he might go down in history as the pope of division, and wrote that “last Friday he almost made that word come true,” because with the decree he had withdrawn “without blinking” the license granted by his predecessor. In his view, by openly correcting Benedict XVI instead of striving for coherence and consistency in the magisterium, the Pope gave many the impression that a pontiff can correct and revise the teaching of his predecessors at will, and that irruption of contingency into magisterial statements, visible to all, threatened to undermine papal authority.

The text acknowledged that there are partial tensions between the ecclesiology of the Council and the Tridentine Mass, and occasional overlaps with the milieu of the political right, but maintained that the argument of instrumentalization applied globally only to the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X. To the Fraternity of Saint Peter and the other groups that expressly recognize the Council and the primacy, he wrote, precisely they were being deprived of “the papal protective roof,” so that they were being punished for their fidelity to the Pope “by the Pope himself.” He also criticized the requirement of Roman authorization for new priests as contradicting the “healthy decentralization” that Francis himself preached, and that leaving the matter to each bishop would produce a mosaic of permissions and prohibitions. “A ban on the old Mass is ultimately an expression of weakness,” he concluded, because it does not trust that the renewed liturgy will impose itself as the best option. At the same time, Tück defended the liturgical reform of the Council, calling it its most visible fruit and, in his judgment, something that “cannot and must not be called into question,” and ended by warning that excluding that tradition ignores its cultural strength and is “tendentially prone to division.”

HALLOWEEN ALTAR?