Press Lifesite title for full commentary:
Worst GOP election since 1974: what you need to know
Democrats will enter office next year with at least 54 U.S. Senate seats and a 241-seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Press Lifesite title for full commentary:
Democrats will enter office next year with at least 54 U.S. Senate seats and a 241-seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Nice, no?
As it concerns the second photo, this is my preference for the marvelous and traditional Benedictine Altar arrangement when the celebrant is facing the nave. I prefer the candlesticks to be upon a reredos behind the altar and not on the altar itself and the crucifix above the altar, preferably hanging.
As it concerns both photos above, did your celebrant at the All Souls Day Mass wear black?
I did at Hilton Head Island’s Holy Family Church’s 8 AM All Souls’ Day Mass. Nice, no?
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.
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.
From St. Peter’s Basilica, Archbishop Nelson J. PĂ©rez presides at Holy Mass with delegations from Villanova University and the University of Notre Dame
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!

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:
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:
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.
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!
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!
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.
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:

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.
Here’s an AI description of the Ecclesia Dei established by St. John Paul II:
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?
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!:
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.
Press title for full Sileri non possum commentary:
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.