WHERE PETER IS COMPLAINS BITTERLY ABOUT “CONSERVATIVE” CATHOLICS WHO BEGAN TO BE OVERLY CRITICAL OF POPE FRANCIS AND SOME OF HIS POLARIZING TEACHINGS AND POLICIES AND THE NATIONAL cATHOLIC REPORTER COMPLAINS ABOUT THE FSSPX GLORIFYING THEIR SCHISM, BUT NEITHER COMPLAIN ABOUT THE LIBERAL SCHISM IN THE CHURCH THAT BEGAN IMMEDIATELY AFTER VATICN II

 Should Roman Catholic Women Priests bishops be invited to certain Vatican Masses and Divine Office Liturgies. Are the FSSPX worse than Roman Catholic Women Priests Roman Catholic Parishes? I ask; you answer:

https://www.romancatholicwomenpriests.org/index.php/

And this article in the National catholic Reporter laments the horrors of the schismatic and gloating FSSPX parish in Boston along with their fiddleback vestments—such horrors! 

Since the FSSPX is in schism like the Eastern Orthodox Church, shouldn’t the NcR and others be more conciliatory towards the FSSPX as they are towards the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Anglican Communion and others Protestant Sects.

Shouldn’t the FSSPX be invited by the Pope to certain Masses at St. Peter’s as Eastern Orthodox Prelates are on a regular basis?  Both now share in the glories of not being in full Communion with the Church but the Orthodox are invited to participate in papal liturgies and so have been the Anglicans and other Protestant clergy—is it time now for the FSSPX bishops to be invited? 

SSPX excommunication hasn't stopped Boston church from defying the Vatican

I don’t like using the terms “conservative and liberal” to describe Catholics and what they believe as these are political terms not religious. I prefer heterodox and orthodox.

Mike Lewis complains bitterly that “conservative” Catholics known for their ultramontanism prior to Pope Francis became like the “liberal” Catholics who denigrated Popes Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI for their “conservative” magisterial teachings and this disobedience and disrespect came from cardinals, other bishops, other clergy, the religious and laity in the Church. 

“Liberals” can be heterodox just as “conservatives” can be heterodox. 

I am not sure that when “conservative” Catholics turned on Pope Francis for what they perceived to be his polarizing, incoherent teachings and policies that that was heterodoxy although it may well have been mortal sins against charity in terms of how they did it. 

But I do think that when “liberal” Catholics demand that women or whatever gender or form of marriage an individual may have, they should be ordained to Holy Orders, celebrate their sexual relations with anyone or everyone as Holy Matrimony and that the Most Holy Eucharist should be distributed to everyone, everyone, everyone, no matter their religion or moral status before God. That is heterodoxy pure and simple and the greatest crisis facing the Church today.

It isn’t conservative’s heterodoxy or sins against charity that is the Church’s greatest crisis or the FSSPX schism. It is the liberal schism that is the greatest crisis in the Church today, but not acknowledged in the highest places of the Church. 

LITURGICAL INCULTURATION AND UNIVERSAL COMPREHENSIBILITY—CAN SOMEONE HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND THE PRAYERFUL, COMTEMPLATIVE AND WORSHIP ASPECT OF THIS AZTEC PROCESSION INTO MASS? I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE POINT OF THIS IS DURING THE CELEBRATION OF MASS—CERTAINLY THERE IS A CATHOLIC REASON FOR IT, OTHER THAN BEING A PHOTO OP FOR THE CONGREGATION AS THEY PASSIVELY WATCH THIS SPECTACLE, BEAUTIFUL AS IT IS—BUT I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT IT SIGNIFIES—SHOULDN’T CATHOLIC WORSHIP BE COMPREHENSIBLE SINCE THAT IS WHAT VATICAN II ASKED?

After more than 46 years of priestly ordination, I cannot explain to anyone some aspects of inculturation that certain bishops and other clergy promote and design. I don’t understand what is going on although I do know what the point of a procession is at Mass, but not this kind of procession—what is the Catholic significance of this—it isn’t obvious to me or even comprehensible. 

I would love to hear why certain cultures and organizations get to inculturate the Mass and what the purpose of that is within the context of the Mass.

The Aztec procession into the Cathedral of Los Angeles is a case in point. I am not sure what the point of this is; what its connection is to prayer and contemplation at Mass and why it is done. 

My uneducated eyes tell me this is a performance when you look at the laity seated in their pews, they seem to see it that way too—there is no aspect of prayer or worship coming from them. They are looking at a spectacle and are using their cameras to capture what is going on so entertaining this is. 

Should we ancestors of the immigrants from England who formed the original 13 colonies celebrate our culture at Mass by dressing as the English dressed at the time of colonization?

Should the redneck culture of the south be celebrated at Mass, along with the confederate flag, pickup trucks and all other vulgar aspects of that culture?

Should the cowboy and cowgirl culture of the USA be inculturated into Mass?

Should the country music culture of Nashville be inculturated into the Mass?

What in the Name of God and all is Holy is the purpose of inculturation at Mass, especially when no one seems to comprehend what the point of it is and if it is prayer and worship based upon Catholic conversion? Inculturation to me seems to celebrate cultures and not the One, Holy Sacrifice of Christ and the worship due to Christ alone during the Mass. 

I am asking a question, because when I look at the photo of the Aztec procession into the Los Angles Cathedral for Mass, I don’t understand what the point of it is.

CLUELESS ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND! 

MIKE LEWIS AT “WHERE PETER IS” AKA, “WHERE POPE FRANCIS WAS” IS REALLY, REALLY CONFUSED AS IS MASSIMO FAGGIOLI WHOM HE QUOTES

😂😢

 You can read Mike Lewis’ hilarious full commentary HERE. The following is just but one joke:

The alternate magisterium

This is the problem we founded Where Peter Is to address. As I wrote in 2022, our original concern was not primarily the Latin Mass or the SSPX. It was the transformation of mainstream conservative Catholicism following the release of Amoris Laetitia. The dubia, the attacks on Francis’s teaching on the death penalty, the resistance to Fiducia Supplicans, and the constant denunciations of synodality gradually created an alternate magisterium and effectively rendered the primacy of the successor of Peter as worthless. Catholics who had once defined orthodoxy as fidelity to John Paul II and Benedict XVI learned to treat open resistance to Francis as normal.

Mike Lewis has a very long, long, and very wrong, wrong commentary on traditional Catholics where he denigrates the synodal process of listening, especially to Cardinals Mueller and Burke and others who have a right to speak and with authority even if it questions some aspects of certain papacies. 

We saw that in plain daylight during the Vatican synodal meetings that not only were certain popes criticized but even the Deposit of Faith and Morals. 

The paragraph above shows Mike Lewis is quite wet behind the ears and with extreme naive youthfulness—he’s really a know nothing, to say the least.

Prior to Pope Francis, and beginning in 1968 with St. Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae, cardinals, other bishops, clergy and religious have questioned not only that but most other defined teachings of the Church to include obedience to the pope. The mantra was if you disagree with the pope follow your conscience and be an individual. 

Disobedience to the Pope was put on steroids with the election of St. Pope John Paul II and later Pope Benedict. There was real hatred for them both from the heterodox left. Most will remember the Sister of Mercy and many other religous at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington when John Paul II visited there standing throughout his talk in protest of his magisterium and refusal to ordain women to Holy Orders.

Today, the greatest disobedience isn’t from those who question so many confusing and polarizing teachings of Pope Francis, like in Fiducia Supplicans and Amoris Laetitia, but those who reject outright Humanae Vitae, the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church that is clear that women can’t be ordained to Holy Orders, marriage can’t be redefined according the the LGBTQ+++ ideolgies in the Church and that any and all kinds of sexual relationships can be lived in God’s grace without repentance.

The Mike Lewis commentary would be a laughing stock if not so sad. 

Sadly, Mike Lewis doesn’t know how to use AI technology on the internet to fill in the gaps of his complete ignorance on post-Vatican II questioning of popes, especially St. Pope Paul VI.

So I provide an AI summary for Mike Lewis:

When Pope Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae in 1968, it prompted unprecedented and open dissent from several cardinals and bishops. Rather than an outright rejection of the pope, many of the hierarchy protested by expressing extreme discomfort, urging tolerance for dissenters, or issuing statements that allowed Catholics to follow their consciences. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The most notable figures and episcopal bodies involved in the protest included:

Cardinal Leo Jozef Suenens (Belgium): One of the most vocal critics among the hierarchy. He publicly questioned the encyclical and urged the pope to reconsider his position. [1, 2, 3, 4]
The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops: In September 1968, the Canadian bishops issued the famous Winnipeg Statement. While acknowledging the teaching, the bishops included a paragraph asserting that couples who sincerely tried but failed to follow the papal directives could still receive the sacraments in good conscience. [1, 2]
The Austrian Bishops' Conference: The Austrian bishops issued a declaration emphasizing the primacy of individual conscience, noting that Catholics could disagree with the document because it was not an infallible teaching. [, 2]
The Dutch Hierarchy (Netherlands): The Dutch bishops were among the most liberal in their response, openly criticizing the encyclical and defending the right of Catholics to follow their own formed consciences on the matter of birth control. [1, 2]
The French and Scandinavian Bishops: Several national conferences released pastoral letters that were seen as "minimalist," heavily softening the blow of the encyclical by focusing on the rights of conscience and pastoral leniency rather than enforcing the ban on contraception. [1, 2, 3]
Cardinal Patrick O'Boyle (Washington, D.C.): Interestingly, he was on the opposite end, acting as a strict enforcer of the encyclical. When 19 priests in his archdiocese publicly dissented from Humanae Vitae, Cardinal O'Boyle suspended them—a decision that was later contested by the Vatican. [1]
And this challenge from Sister Kane to JPII in 1979:
Sister Theresa Kane, a Sister of Mercy, famously challenged Pope John Paul II in 1979 during his visit to the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., advocating for the inclusion of women in all church ministries.
Sister Theresa Kane's Challenge to the Pope
Sister Theresa Kane's bold address marked a significant moment in church history.
• Historical Context — On October 7, 1979, Sister Kane welcomed Pope John Paul II and urged him to allow women to serve in all church roles.
• Public Reaction — Her remarks received both praise and criticism, with some viewing her challenge as impertinent.
• Legacy — Kane's advocacy for women's ordination has inspired many within the Catholic community to continue pushing for gender equality.
• Role in the Church — As a prominent member of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, she represented a progressive voice within the Catholic Church.

OH THE NOSTALGIA!

 When I was in major seminary from 1976-1980, we didn’t have any outdoor Masses like this, I don’t recall, but we certainly had many indoor Masses just like this, except the priest below is wearing a stole! Kudos!

When I was in major seminary, only 6 years after the Bugnini Mass had been promulgated in 1970, the new and improved Mass was celebrated with great creativity and planning. 

Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, Mass was for the entire seminary community in our beautiful chapel (which has been spared renovations and wreckovations to this very day! God is merciful).

On Tuesdays and Thursdays we had small group Masses in the priest-faculty apartments in the seminary. These were casual affairs, as appears in the photo above, but inside. No vestments. Mass on the Floor! Everyone sitting “American Indian” style, made-up Eucharistic prayers. These were so meaningful and relevant! NOT!

One priest wore his clerical shirt but with the collar open, the plastic tab to the side and the stole laying near the floor on which the Mass was celebrated. There’s something sacred about floors, no? 

One priest-faculty member would pass the bread to us as we sat in a circle on the floor as he said the words of consecration, the same with the one chalice. I think I got the flu from that, a foretaste of the Covid 19 pandemic. 

More than likely that Mass was not valid in any way at all.

In fact, I wonder if any Masses in the time I was in the seminary, to include my deacon ordination Mass there, were valid.

Maybe you can help me.

We made our own homemade bread for the Eucharist as we called the Mass way back then.

That bread had whole wheat, brown sugar, leaven and honey in it. It was quite chewy. Seminarians called it “chewy Jesus”. But I don’t think so because the ingredients made it invalid, but I’m not sure—what do you think?

Oh, the nostalgia of it all, the glories of the 1970’s Church, the relevancy and meaningfulness and the glories of creativity. It was the very beginning of the new springtime for the Church, which synodality will now take over and create the best church in history. 

REGULAR COMMENTER, RCG’S PARISH IN DAYTON, OHIO…

 RCG SAYS: Also, I confirmed with our priest that we have had about 28 infant baptisms this calendar year. We average about one a week all year long, not counting adults and transfers.  We have three seminarians from our parish, too. 

Vivat Jesus!

Richard C. Goad 

rcg

NICE! PRESS TITLE:

Church of the Holy Family in Dayton, Ohio with Mural by Gerhard J. Lamers

by John Paul Sonnenon July 17, 2026

IS THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IN THE CHURCH PEOPLE JOINING THE SSPX? NO, BUT THE SSPX ORDAINING BISHOPS WHEN THE POPE SAYS NOT TO DO SO IS BIG, BIG DISOBEDIENCE AND SCHISMATIC ON THE BISHOPS’ PART

 People continue to mix apples and oranges when it comes to the SSPX—as far as I can tell, the excommunication of the SSPX isn’t based completely on their non-acceptance of some novel aspects of Vatican II, although serious. The issue of excommunication comes from their direct disobedience to the pope and what His Holiness asked them not to do and that is to ordain new bishops without his imprimatur. 

But yes, the bigger schism in the Catholic Church are all those who have joined other schismatic and heretical groups, be they other Christian sects, non Christian religions or leaving religion altogether. 

The clergy and laity of the SSPX embrace most of the Catholic Faith as the current magisterium teaches. But not all—but they aren’t like Protestants in the traditional sense, maybe more like Eastern Orthodoxy.

Lots of Catholics have joined Eastern Orthodoxy which is far superior to joining the Episcopal Church or any on the new family businesses under the guise of the non-denominational movement in Protestantism. 

Yes, it is better to be an SSPX or Eastern Orthodoxy than to be a “none”. 

Nonetheless, here is a funny question and answer thing I saw at the Remnant Newspaper, known for its cynical and mortally sinfully sins against charity. You can read the article HERE. 
Just keep in mind the last part which is commentary goes off the rails but other than that, this is food for thought:

A diocesan priest—not a SSPX priest—just published what may be the funniest and most devastating critique yet of Rome's SSPX excommunications.

Instead of writing another theological rebuttal, he created a "Schismatic Self-Assessment Test."

Do you prefer Gregorian Chant?

Do you pray the Rosary?

Do you use the Catechism of Trent?

Uh-oh! SSPX or not, you might have some "schismatic tendencies" according to the Tucho's and Cupich's and Martin's of the Church.

The SSAT (Schismatic Self-Assessment Test):

How often do you attend an SSPX liturgy?

0 -What’s SSPX? What’s liturgy?

0 -I don’t go to Mass anymore

3 -Christmas and Easter only

4 -Occasionally, for sake of family

5 -Every Sunday and every Holy day

Were you married in an SSPX chapel?

0 -No. We chose cohabitation

0 -No. They don’t do same sex

0 -Cannot remember. Was drunk

4 -My fiancé made me go to SSPX

5 -Happily married in SSPX chapel

Have you ever confessed to an SSPX priest?

0 -No. Jesus is my only Lord and Savior

0 -1st confession was my last confession

0 -Never. Not even on my death bed

4 -For mortal sins and Easter duty

5 -Frequently or on a regular basis

Which of these catechisms do you use?

0 -Heal Me with Your Mouth (Fernandez)

0 -Hope: The Autobiography (Francis)

0 -Origin of the Species (Darwin)

5 -Catechism of Trent or Pope Pius X

5 -The Baltimore Catechism

What are your music preferences for Mass?

0 -The Saint Louis Jesuits

0 -Abba and The Beatles

0 -Piano and Guitar

5 -Organ and Scola

5 -Gregorian Chant

Which of these do you honor or venerate?

0 -Saint John XXIII

0 -Saint Paul VI

5 -Saint Pius V

5 -Saint Pius X

5 -Archbishop Lefebvre

What do you do at the end of Mass?

0 -Make a beeline for the parking lot

0 -Remain in pew and chat with friends

0 -Participate in small synod groups

5 -Leonine prayers and Thanksgiving

5 -Pray the Rosary or go to Confession

TEST COMPLETE.  Now add up your total schism points and record your SSAT score here _____ [Tell us your score in the comments!]

If you scored 0, you are schism free and no further action is required. If you scored up to 10, you may have schismatic behaviors which should be curtailed. If you scored above 10, you are an adherent to schism and you must contact your local bishop for additional assessment and remedial action. You will be required to renounce Catholicism, profess faith in the conciliar church and burn incense to synodality.

Folks, this canonical action of Rome against the Society of Saint Pius X is an absolute farce and fiasco. Rome has overplayed its hand, not knowing one hand from the other, and exposed its own incompetence.

Father's Last Word: Hey Rome, we support SSPX and adhere to their profession of faith and assessment of Vatican II errors! Please send us an official decree of our excommunication, care of Remnant Newspaper.

A CHANGE AT SAINT PETER’S BASILICA?

 His Eminence

Rolandas Cardinal Makrickas

Because of social media and the internet we poor lowly Catholics know more about the inside gossip at the Vatican more so than ever, especially when we had to wait a month or so for Catholic news to come to us through newspapers before these were placed on the internet.

The gossip for the last few years has been how horrible Archbishop Gambetti is in his role as the head of St. Peter’s. In his reign there have been three desecrations of the altar with men jumping onto the papal altar, knocking off candlesticks and crucifix and damaging these. One man urinating on the papal altar. 

And those plastic chairs! Gambetti replaced the other chairs with ones made out of clear plexiglass in Saint Peter’s Basilica. The basilica becomes a frame for plexiglass chairs!!!!

There are three who are rumored to take over Gambetti’s position as he is demoted to a small diocese in Italy.

They are Cardinal Parolin, which I really, really doubt will be the one.

The other is Archbishop Ravalli, the current papal MC—and that would be possible.

The third and my vote goes to His Eminence, is His Eminence Rolandas Cardinal Makrickas the current head of St. Mary Major Basilica in Rome. I find him impressive. He allows the TLM and he has kept the altar with the traditional set-up. He is quite impressive, that’s why I’m voting for His Eminence. 

MORE AND MORE CARDINALS, OTHER BISHOPS, OTHER PRIESTS, RELIGIOUS AND LAITY AGREE WITH POPE LEO XIV—GENEROSITY TOWARDS THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS “MUST APPLY TO ALL BISHOPS!” —AND I SAY, “DUH!”

Some very high profile cardinals and bishops agree with Pope Leo and his generosity towards those clergy and laity who desire to be able to celebrate the Ancient Form of the Latin Mass and not to be harassed by bishops who are “doctors of the law” as Pope Francis would ridicule them. 

Pope Leo’s liberality and progressiveness in allowing the TLM is greatly appreciated but His Holiness knows that he has to write a Motu Proprio killing off Tradtionis Custodis especially since it sins against not telling the truth and against charity, against flexibility and against progressivenessness. 

Everyone with one ounce of common sense thanks Pope Leo for starting processes to end Traditionis Custodis. Certainly this is the work of the Holy Spirit, no?

From Diane Montagna with video interview:

 Cardinal Sarah: Pope Leo’s Generosity towards the Traditional Latin Mass ‘Must Apply to All Bishops’

In a new video-interview five years after Traditionis Custodes, the Cardinal weighs in on the future of the vetus ordo — and warns that “Synodality” and…

JUL 16 • DIANE MONTAGNA