Monday, September 25, 2023


 Here’s a screen shot of the magnificent Church and the magnificent liturgy that teaches us how well Vatican II has been implemented as it concerns Ireland and Sacrosanctum Concilium. And just think that they have been able to accomplish this in less that 100 years!

Thank God that Pope Francis has canceled Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI’s going backwards. If they had their way, we wouldn’t have this well implemented Vatican II Liturgy, that took only about 55 years to establish, not 100 years!!! 

Watch the magnificent video on Facebook by pressing HERE


 This is not good…

From Catholic World Report:

The Rupnik business will stain and possibly define Pope Francis’s legacy

Over the past several days, hard-boiled newsman Ed Condon reluctantly conceded that “there is a motivating force for the protection of Rupnik,” and Robert Mickens—a veteran Vatican hand generally well disposed to Francis—openly asked whether Pope Francis isn’t the one protecting him.


And this from La Croix and very progressive Robert Mickens:

Is Pope Francis protecting Marko Rupnik?
By Robert Mickens 

As these lines are being written, Pope Francis is in the middle of an overnight visit to the southern French port city of Marseille. And he's made some very bold and extremely important statements that Europe and its elected leaders needs to hear regarding the Old Continent's policy (or, rather, lack of policy and foresight) regarding the arrival of migrants and refugees from various parts of Africa, the Middle East, and other so-called "third world" areas of the Global South.

Europe, with its aging population and dangerously low birth rate, needsimmigrants. The question, as the pope rightly points out, is how to integrate them in a way that preserves and enriches European civilization. There is much to discuss on this issue and Francis is to be credited for pushing the continent's political and societal leaders to do so more seriously and with greater perspicacity.

But there is an ugly shadow quietly looming over the papal visit, which has nothing to do with the Jesuit pope's prophetic leadership on the migration issue or whatever else he's addressed in Marseille. Indeed, it is a matter that could badly tarnish his entire pontificate and legacy. We're talking about the way Francis has handled the case of Marko Rupnik, the (former Jesuit) priest-mosaic artist who has been credibly accused of sexually and spiritually abusing numerous women religious.

Try La Croix International now for just USD 1 a Month!

The Society of Jesus expelled the 68-year-old Slovenian from the religious order earlier this year after he refused to follow the restrictions (penalties for the abuse) that his superiors placed on him, his artistic work, and his ministry.

Read More

Sunday, September 24, 2023


The Vatican News translation into English of Pope Francis’ high altitude interview differs greatly, in terms of opinion, from Crux’s report on the interview. I will write about that below the two different translations into English. Please note what I highlight in blue as that will be the basis of my comments. The question is on France soon to liberalize its euthanasia laws.

This is Vatican News’ translation of the pope said:

(I) did not speak on this issue (euthanasia) today, but we (Macron) talked about it on the other visit when we met. I spoke clearly, when he came to the Vatican, and I spoke my opinion clearly: life is not to be played with, neither at the beginning nor at the end. We cannot play around. This is my opinion: to protect life, you know? Because then we wind up with a policy of “no pain”, of a humanistic euthanasia…

…Today we should be careful with ideological colonizations that ruin human life and go against human life. Today, for example, the lives of grandparents are erased, and when human wealth comes into play in the dialogue with grandchildren, they are erased. ‘They are old so are of no use.’ We cannot play with life.

This time I did not talk to the president [about this topic], but last time I did. When he came, I gave him my opinion that life is not something to be played with.Whether it's the law of not letting the baby grow in the mother's womb or the law of euthanasia in disease or old age, I'm not saying it's an issue of faith. It's a human issue, a human issue. There exists an ‘ugly compassion’. Science has come to turn some painful diseases into less painful events, accompanying them with many medicines. But life must not be played with.

This is Crux’s translation of what the pope said:

Asked about a controversial law France is preparing to consider on euthanasia, the pontiff, who condemned the practices of abortion and euthanasia in his final Mass on Saturday, said he did not address the issue in his private conversation with French President Emmanuel Macron earlier that day.

He said he and Macron discussed the issue of euthanasia during one of Macron’s three previous visits to the Vatican, and on that occasion, “I told him my view, clearly, [that] you don’t play with life, not at the beginning, and not at the end. You don’t play with it.”

“It’s not just my opinion, it’s safeguarding life, because then, you end up with the politics of non-pain, a humanistic euthanasia,” he said. He once again referenced a 1903 futuristic romance novel titled The Lord of the World by a British convert to Catholicism which, Francis said, depicts “how things will be in the end. It takes away the differences of everyone, and also, they take pain, etc., and euthanasia is one of these things.”

“Sweet death, selection before birth. This shows how this man saw current conflicts,” the pope said, saying, “today let’s be attentive to ideological colonization that ruins human life and goes against human life.”

My commentary: Just which is it, Crux’s “It’s not just my opinion” or Vatican New’s “This is my opinion” and other variations of that??? Throughout his papacy, the pope has been clear about “his opinion” about abortion and euthanasia. In my opinion, I agree with his opinion. 

Therein lies the problem. Vatican News more than once states the good and orthodox moral teachings on these two life issues, abortion and euthanasia as the pope saying these teachings are his opinion! 

Crux, though, indicates he said, “It’s not just my opinion.”

The loose talk of Pope Francis is, in my most humble opinion, the problem of this 10 year papacy. 

If what the pope is teaching President Macron is just the pope’s opinion, as Vatican News translates his answer to a reporter, then is President Macron’s opinion just as good and equal to the pope’s opinion?

The pope would do better to speak of these moral teachings in a more theologically rigid way so as to make clear these teachings are no mere mortal pope’s opinion, but Divine Truth and divinely revealed..

Otherwise Catholics in France and throughout the world will think all opinions are equal and you can pick and choose among men’s mere mortal opinions. 

And therein lies what, in my most humble opinion, is the fatal flaw of Pope Francis’ synodal way: All opinions are equal and we must listen to all opinions and respect them all. 

Certainly if this is true, this ideology is a joke as is Pope Francis’ vision of the synodal way. 

This is a “Google Translation” of his Italian answer to this same question. The article where I found the Italian, also included a photo of the pope sitting alone for several minutes awaiting President Macon to speak with him—The caption says the pope was visibly annoyed to have been kept waiting!

Here’s the Google version:

Pope Francis: Today we didn't talk about this topic, but we talked about it during the other visit, when we met, I talked about it clearly, when he came to the Vatican; I told him my opinion, clearly: you can't play with life, neither at the beginning nor at the end. No playing. It's my opinion: cherish life, you know? Because then you will end up with that policy of non-pain, of humanistic euthanasia. On this I want to quote a book again, read it, it is from 1907 but it is a novel, it is called The Lord of the World, The Lord of the World or The Lord of the Earth, written by Robert Benson the author, he is a writer who it talks about the future, it shows how things will be in the end. And the differences are removed, all of them, and the pain is also removed... and euthanasia is one of these things, gentle death, selection before birth... This shows us how this man had seen current conflicts. Today we are careful with ideological colonizations that ruin human life and go against human life. Today the lives of grandparents are being erased, for example; when human wealth goes into the dialogue between grandparents and grandchildren... it is erased: they are old, they are of no use. You don't play with life. This time I didn't speak to the president, but the other time I did, when he came and I told him my opinion: you can't play with life, let it be the law not to let the child grow in the mother's womb, the law of euthanasia in illness or old age, I'm not saying this is a thing of faith, it's a human, human thing; there is bad compassion. Science has managed to make some painful illnesses less painful and accompanies them with many medicines. You don't play with life.

Another answer the pope gave about the war on Ukraine by Russia was truly befuddling to understand just exactly what the pope was saying as it was so convoluted and incoherent. This caused Vatican News to issue a clarification and this is it:

The Vatican later issued a clarification, saying the pope’s point was that arms merchants never pay the price of their choices, which fall upon “martyred” peoples such as the Ukrainians.


 I drove 30 miles to Hardeeville, SC early this Sunday morning to go to the bank! The bank on Sunday, you ask? Well, not exactly, but to Saint Anthony Catholic Mission, housed in a former bank building. I asked a parishioner there to take a picture of me prior to the procession at their 8:30 AM Mass. It wasn’t until I post this photo that I saw that the carpet I am standing on has the name of the Church. God forgive me for stepping on Catholic! The photographer must have known to include it in this picture. Cool! I gave a five minute homily and used the Roman Canon and the 8:30 AM Mass was mercifully ended by 9:10 AM! God is Good!


Amy Welborn wrote a lengthy rebuttal with some thoughts of her own about Cardinal Dolan’ recent opining about Masses being too long. Cardinal Dolan’s article is HERE

At Amy’s long commentary there is a great comment that alerted me to Wichita’s Pope Francis appointed bishop, Bishop Kemme who wrote a Pastoral letter on the Liturgy released on September 13th. I found this by accident. Why are no other blogs reporting on it? It is a liturgical bombshell! The link to the letter is at the bottom of Stephanie Mann’s comment on Amy’s post below:

 Stephanie A. Mann:

Bishop Kemme in Wichita is leading us to re-orient ourselves at Mass “Ad Deum” instead of at ourselves in a recent Pastoral Letter: 

“Christ left us the memorial of his sacrifice so that we might learn what it means to offer ourselves as a complete and total self-gift to the Father. By participating in Christ’s sacrifice to the Father, we also learn to give our lives as a living sacrifice. When the entirety of the liturgy is prayed, ad Deum, which in Latin means toward God, the liturgy sends us back into the world to live life as self-gift ad Deum. Indeed, many aspects of the liturgy portray the idea of self-gift; however, I want to emphasize how it is revealed in sacred music. . . . 

“In the liturgy, we transcend space and time to participate in the sacrifice of Christ at the one altar that remains in the temple of the Heavenly Kingdom. From the onset, the music accompanying this procession should direct our thoughts to the particular mystery being celebrated, and it should resemble the song of the angels and the saints revealed to us in the scriptures. However, too often, we sing music that focuses not on God but on us. When this happens, the liturgy loses its focus on God and can become self-serving rather than self-giving.” 

I think it’s a good step, although when I attend the Sunday TLM at the one parish church it’s allowed at now, it’s all there already.


The title above this post is not mine, but rather that of the Deacon’s Bench. In the link below my comments is a good analysis of how poorly Vatican II has been implemented in these more than 50 years. 

Some say, it will take another 50 years to implement all aspects of Vatican II properly. But I don’t expect to see it even if it is 10 years. And most who once were practicing Catholics could care less. 

When you have at most 20% of all baptized Catholics attending Mass, and in some places it is less than 5%, who will be around in 10 or 50 years to see the new springtime for the Church that members of a utopian magisterium once predicted????

Cardinal Timothy Dolan’s essay asking if Mass is just too long (the essay is linked in Deacon Kendra’s post), misses the point as Amy Welborn’s response (also linked in the Deacon’s Bench) points out. 

When I was in the seminary, our homiletic’s professor taught us that we should write an outline for our homilies, memorize that outline and speak without notes but not veering away from the planned “talking points” of the outline. He also said that the homily should be 5 to 7 minutes long, never more than 7 minutes but less that 5 minutes was fine. 

In my 44 years of ordination, I began to go 10 to 12 minutes, sometimes a bit longer. I never used notes, except for about a 3 or 4 year period between 2015 to about 2020. Why? Anxiety about speaking extemporaously from a memorized outline got to me. But the problem was that I was getting too theological and wanted to be more accurate in explaining what I was preaching. I sounded stilted.

Since 2020 I’ve gone back to an outline and preach no more than 7 minutes. In retirement, I usually preach no more than 5 minutes on Sunday. People like that I speak off the cuff. I tell them I don’t, but I speak from a memorized simple outline. 

My Masses at a packed church in Bluffton are no more than 45 to 50 minutes long. That is well appreciated, I can tell you.

The other thing that makes the Mass too long is the amount of time it takes to distribute Holy Communion. Kneeling at an altar railing reduces the time, believe I know. Of course, the priest gets a workout but just look it as spiritual works of mercy!

As it concerns music, if a hymn is sung that isn’t the official Entrance Chant, which is sad that the official chant is seldom heard in most parishes, it should end once the priest is at the chair or the altar, wherever he begins the Mass. The parts of the Mass that are sung should be crisp and not dragged out with repeated sentences or God-forbid, refrains, and please, no silly, childish echo parts! And once Holy Communion is distributed, no singing!! And at the recessional, the priest leaves immediately and once he goes the people go, no need to sing endless verses of a recessional hymn or entertain the people with a postlude, but postlude please as people leave!

As far as contrived silences, no more than 10 seconds before the Penitential Act, 5 seconds after the readings and no silence after the homily, unless the congregation needs to recover from an unusually disastrous homily, but most homilies don’t need silence afterwards. 15 seconds of silence after Holy Communion, no singing or instrumental music, is good too. 

My own suggestion might be too backwards for our papal magisterium today. Each parish should have a “principal” Mass which is your traditionally called “High Mass” or more accurately “Sung Mass” and by that I don’t mean singing added hymns, but singing the Mass, priest, choir, assembly, using incense, Holy Water, etc. Liturgy geeks who like all this know when to get it; others no how to avoid it. That Mass could go well over an hour and well appreciated by those who desire it. 

The other Masses can be more simplified, maybe use progressively solemnity or a hodgepodge of liturgical niceties. One or two Masses—no singing, just a. Spoken Mass. 

Deacon Kandra’s post raises many more issues. Press it’s title for it:


Saturday, September 23, 2023


La Croix printed this on Ecumenical Councils in a longer article I can’t access because I don’t want to spend my meager fixed income on their propaganda:

Conventional wisdom holds that it takes a century for an ecumenical council to flower and bear fruit. Altering customs and habits of thought, especially when they are linked to faith, takes a long time. Simply getting word out of a council's teaching and its implications can take decades.

Then there are people and institutions for which new directions, practices, or emphases appear as threats to ideas and practices that have taken years to master. Some people have a vested interest in preventing or holding back change.

Habits of thought that have been nurtured over a lifetime of individuals and institutions do not change easily. And so, it is not surprising that it can take a century for a council to have its full impact on the life of the Church.

My excellent commentary on the implementation of Vatican II:

To understand the meme “that it takes a century for an ecumenical council to flower and bear fruit” you have to go backwards to the early 1970’s, maybe even the late 1960’s. Back then, the implementation of Vatican II had veered off-course beginning with how the liturgy is celebrated. 

My own experience of it was that our pastor tried to explain the changes were meant to make the Mass intelligible  to the laity by two ways, the vernacular and simplification or shortening of the rites of the Mass. Both were meant to promote full, active and conscious participation.

To be honest with you, the initial attempts at the reform of the Mass were well received, especially the vernacular and the shortening of the Mass—keep in mind many, many pre-Vatican II Catholics preferred short Masses, like the early morning Low Mass-the shorter the better!

Problems developed because of liturgical theologians who went beyond the reforms to touch the style and reverence of the Mass and to change it into a more casual, banal experience. This led to the destruction of the beautiful interiors of churches and standing for Holy Communion and untrained laity distributing Holy Communion as though they were clergy (clericalization of the laity).

The other aspect that was well received, but often implemented in a poor way were parish or pastoral councils. These often devolved into a laity against the clergy sort of thing and focused on power—money matters, not pastoral. Or too much talk. 

Another aspect of the Council was the universal call to holiness of the laity. Frankly, many Catholics were holy, but saw the clergy and laity having a special vocation to it. 

A focus on social justice was and is a good thing. But Ofen it devolves into a political meme for a particular political party and often it enables poverty to continue by throwing money and services at people who are capable of finding work, hard work, to support themselves. 

The greatest disaster for the Church is the loss of reverence in the Mass and the self-inflicted loss of respect for the clergy by the laity. This has led to Catholics withdrawing from the institutional Church and embracing secular ideologies in its place or joining Protestant sects that do the Protestant thing a hell of a lot better than Catholic parishes  who play at being Protestant.

The 5% to 30% of those who actually attend Mass at least occasionally, a significant number of those don’t believe what the Church teaches, but they want to pray and meet friends. They don’t believe in  the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and that His one Bloody Sacrifice is made present in a glorious and unbloody way at every Mass—they have a Baptist understanding of the Mass as a symbolic Last Supper. 

Ecumenical relationships have been a blessing and a curse. Some Catholics believe in universalism that you will be saved no matter what religion you choose or no religion as long as you are a good person. But being good means you can choose to abort living human beings, and flaunt any of the 10 Commandments to embrace an alien moral ideology, such as the LGBTQ+++ political agenda such as the Democratic Party promotes.

The only way to implement Vatican II by 2065 is to go back to 1965 and do it right and within continuity with what preceded—what Pope Benedict XVI desired to do. 

Friday, September 22, 2023



 Even a reporter for Crux condemns the Vatican for its love of talking so much and saying so little. 

There are two must read stories. It is a head scratcher. Pope Francis’ shows us how the sex abuse scandal in the 1970’s went out of control. Keep in mind, Pope Francis projects onto others “backwardism” when in fact he is the backward one, in a state of arrested development, as it regards the faux euphoria of the 1970’s.

That euphoria, a pernicious form of original sin, thought that the Church could solve all problems through dialogue, rehabilitation and reintegration of the worst of sinners. Thus, love of sinners and criminals eclipsed the pain of victims and the victims were thrown under the bus in favor of perps. 

I can’t speak for the worldwide Church, but in the USA, priests who committed sexual crimes, some to gross to describe, were sent to cushy treatment facilities around the country which treated priests with these problems. There was no sense of following civil law or informing Catholic clergy and laity, that these miscreants existed, what they did and how effective their so-called rehabilitation was. 

The theology that supported this ludicrous situation is based upon the Church, meaning the baptized people of God can usher in the eschaton here and now by our own merits and all that we do. Heaven on earth by our own good works. We can heal the world and every individual in it. 

Pope Francis seems to embrace this ideology as it concerns sexual abuse.

Read these two articles and thank God that Cardinal Ladaria is saying NO MORE!

Ladaria Will Not Attend Synod- Was He the 'Katechon' Holding Back the Rupnik Rehabilitation?


Today, it was announced that Cardinal Luis Ladaria Ferrer, former prefect of the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF), will not be taking part in the Synod on Synodality 'at his own request.' No other reason was given.


And now the Crux article:


(The) scene this week, after the largely self-inflicted double whammy that hit Pope Francis and the Vatican in the form of developments in two gruesome abuse and cover-up stories. Both set in relief the ironic reality of the Vatican’s addiction to talk, which is at once too much and too little to control the spiraling narrative of disastrous failure to deal effectively with entrenched problems.

The first was the frankly bizarre statement that came on Monday from the Diocese of Rome regarding its “investigation” into Rome’s Centro Aletti – better known as the base of operations for the disgraced former celebrity Jesuit, Marko Rupnik, credibly accused of serial sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse perpetrated against nearly twenty women over three decades – which drew a clean bill of health from the probe.

Read the whole article at Crux:

On recent abuse scandals, Vatican talk is both too much and too little

Thursday, September 21, 2023


Let me join the world of creeping infallibility: this has to be of the Holy Spirit, no question about it, case settled!:

BREAKING: Cardinal Müller defends Bishop Strickland: ‘He should definitely not resign’

Cdl. Müller's strong statement of support for Bp. Strickland comes in the face of rumors that the Vatican will pressure the Texas prelate to resign his see.


From the Register:  The bishop of San Francisco de Macorís in the Dominican Republic, Alfredo De la Cruz, who will be participating in the Synod on Synodality in October at the Vatican, said the event should discuss mandatory celibacy, the diaconate, and the ministerial priesthood for women, among other issues…

…Asked about what could change in Catholic doctrine, Bishop De la Cruz noted: “We must first distance ourselves from everything that fundamentalism signifies, from believing that doctrine can’t be touched. That would be the first temptation we would have, to believe that doctrine can’t be touched. Doctrine is there in order to reflect, to see.”…

 “we would have to address mandatory celibacy; we will have to address Communion to all those who participate in the Eucharist as a feast of the Lord and as a community of faith, because we say that Eucharist is the meeting place of all brothers. ‘Ah, I encounter my brother, but to one group I don’t give anything to eat’ and I leave them hungry,” he added.

Read the Register’s report by pressing link below the bishop’s photo. Certainly the Holy Spirit is guiding the Synod and this bishop:

Bishop Who Will Attend Synod: We Must Address Issue of Women Deacons and Priests


And the Pillar is reporting that Pope Francis has accepted the resignation of the 75 year old Archbishop. The Pope replaced him with a nearby bishop and this is what the Pillar says:

The Vatican said Wednesday that the pope had named Bishop Benno Elbs, head of the neighboring Diocese of Feldkirch in Austria, as Vaduz’s apostolic administrator sede vacante et ad nutum Sanctae Sedis (“the see being vacant and at the disposition of the Holy See”).

Unlike Archbishop Haas, Bishop Elbs is reportedly an advocate of married priestsfemale deacons, and the blessing of same-sex couples.

Commenting on his appointment, Elbs said: “We live in challenging times. It is up to us to shape these times. It is with this inner attitude that I would like to begin my service as apostolic administrator in the Archdiocese of Vaduz and thank already today all those who accompany me on this path, which can only succeed together.” 

All of this, of course, is supported by the Holy Spirit—don’t ever question that! Read the Pillar’s article below the good Archbishop’s photo:

Archbishop’s resignation signals end of era for Liechtenstein’s Catholics


Certainly some will say, to justify it, that all this is the work of the Holy Spirit—yes, that must be it:

Rorate Caeli:

Francis Makes His Most Audacious Move: Rehabilitating His Friend, the Sex Abuser Marko Rupnik

National Catholic Reporter:

Alleged victims of influential Vatican artist left 'speechless' after new Rome diocese report

The Pillar:


At Crux, there is a commentary of the Leopard Nuncio. What Crux fails to report or to see is that the main problem is that the good bishop nuncio is not wearing an alb under the chasuble and more than likely no stole. 

It looks ridiculous not so much because of the animal pattern, which would drive PETA crazy, but because there is no alb or stole:

Papal envoy’s leopard skin vestment stirs social media sensation

Wednesday, September 20, 2023


 If I knew how, I would electronically draw facial features on the back of this priest’s head! It’s ripe for it! 

The Pillar has an article on a new movement which began in Spain and is spreading like wildfire throughout Europe and now in the USA.

I have never heard of it! It is called “Hakuna”. I don’t know what that means, but it sounds more Japanese than Spanish to me.


Since Vatican II, to fill the void of the dreariness of the new liturgy and parish life, new movements galore have developed to fill the vacuum of dismal parish life, devoid of community, excitement and prayer opportunities outside of a dreary, stripped down Mass, the only form of prayer Catholics were experiencing after Vatican II as every devotion, popular or not, was called into question. 

And then the focus of the Mass shifted away from Jesus Christ, to the assembly and all their actions, especially opening the Mass to untrained lectors, cantors, Communion Ministers and altar servers of whatever gender. Back in the day, there were only two unquestioned genders, but not today!

All the new movements, to a certain extent, replaced the local parish in terms of providing vocations to the priesthood. In my Diocese of Savannah, the strongest new movement is the Alleluia Charismatic Covenant Community in my hometown of Augusta. It began around 1972 and has provided more vocations to the priesthood than any larger parish in any of our parishes in the diocese. 

I don’t care for charismatic spirituality or dragging that into the Mass, but for prayer services and devotions, what the heck. To each his own. 

I think the Traditionalist Movement which Pope Benedict XVI encouraged, provides more vocations than any of our post-Vatican II dismal parishes. 

And just think of pre-Vatican II times, especially in the 1940’s and 50’s. Most parishes were popping out vocations like a microwave oven and a bag of popcorn! Back then there were priests and sisters, brothers galore to inspire by their way of life an enthusiasm for the priesthood or religious life. Not after Vatican II though, which some call the “new springtime for the Church!”

Hakuna’s focus isn’t on being self-referential and talking incessantly about changing the Church to accommodate the heretical culture, especially the LGBTQ+++ ideological, political movement. And as a new movement, it certainly doesn’t believe the culture today has anything to teach us, as corrupted as it is by ideologies. 

Hakuna is about JESUS, JESUS, JESUS, and His clear, unambiguous teachings, especially on repentance and salvation in His Divine Mercy and love. 

To the chagrin of progressive liturgists, they advocate and celebrate Eucharist Adoration!

The Mass is at the center of their spirituality, especially the Real Presence of the Risen and Glorified Christ. 

I don’t know for sure, but I fear their manner of celebrating Mass might be akin the the Lifeteen model, but I am not sure. And I suspect they use trendy sounding music that like any fad, will fall out of favor like the groovy folk songs I had to endure in the 1960’s and 70’s.

But overall I think this movement is a good thing. God bless them.



I’m afraid too much chatter isn’t helping out matters as hysteria by some in the Church about the Synod on Synodality as it soon begins its chattering sessions takes place. The far majority of Catholics are completely disinterested in it. The majority have followed Pope Francis’ in condemning a self referential Church that pushes Christ to the side in favor of chatter about who I am and all those existential questions that the Church was once able to teach in an orthodox way without wringing her hands wondering if she needs to talk and talk and talk about herself. 

Bishop Schneider reminds Catholics that no human person can depose a pope and he rightfully states that a pope cannot commit heresy when he speaks ex cathedra. But outside of e cathedra statements, a popes can commit heresies. 

While Bishop Schneider upholds one aspect of the papal office, he seems to open the door to encouraging Catholics to enter into schism with the pope through disobedience. Not sure that is a good thing for a bishop to write down. Schism is a mortal sin. 

Read Bishop Schneider’s whole article here. Here is the sound byte:

The pope cannot commit heresy when he speaks ex cathedra, this is a dogma of faith. In his teaching outside of ex cathedra statements, however, he can commit doctrinal ambiguities, errors and even heresies. And since the pope is not identical with the entire Church, the Church is stronger than a singular erring or heretical Pope. In such a case one should respectfully correct him (avoiding purely human anger and disrespectful language), resist him as one would resist a bad father of a family. Yet, the members of a family cannot declare their evil father deposed from the fatherhood. They can correct him, refuse to obey him, separate themselves from him, but they cannot declare him deposed.

Good Catholics know the truth and must proclaim it, offer reparation for the errors of an erring Pope. Since the case of a heretical pope is humanly irresolvable, we must implore with supernatural faith a Divine intervention, because that singular erring Pope is not eternal, but temporal, and the Church is not in our hands, but in the almighty hands of God.

We must have enough supernatural faith, trust, humility, and a spirit of the Cross in order to endure such an extraordinary trial. In such relatively short situations (in comparison to 2000 years) we must not yield to a too human reaction and to an easy solution (declaring the invalidity of his pontificate), but must keep sobriety (keep a cool head) and at the same time a true supernatural view and trust in Divine intervention and in the indestructibility of the Church.

+ Athanasius Schneider

Read the full commentary there 

Tuesday, September 19, 2023


Cardinal Designate and now Prefect for the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith, like Pope Francis, loves to talk or chatter, (chiacchiere in Italian). Chiacchiere is an Italian onomatopoeia as it sounds like what it is.

And like the Pope, he also appears to be thin skinned about Traditionalists (orthodox) criticizing him like they do Pope Francis. 

I am no psychologist, but perhaps it is a gross insecurity about their positions on their part????

But let’s get back to CHIACCHIERE, the good Cardinal Elect has given his 1 millionth interview since being name the new DDC Prefect.

And you guessed it, he is criticizing the traditionalists and using the orthodox criticisms of him as a proxy to criticize Pope Francis. 

Let me copy the million dollar quotes of the interview and embed my most astute comments in it in RED:

Speaking to Spanish-language outlet Religión Digital in an interview published on September 17, the archbishop addressed the criticisms that have been made about him since Pope Francis appointed him to the new post in early July. (IS HE THINNED SKINNED? INSECURE? OR BOTH?)

Fernández described the criticisms as “completely predictable” and being also “partly directed at Francesco [Pope Francis].” He cited critics in the “traditionalist sectors who consider me dangerous for doctrine,” arguing that such criticisms are not just about doctrine but also about “power in the Church.” (HE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT POWER STRUGGLES FROM HIS SOUTH AMERICAN ARGENTINA ROOTS AND HIS PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTION OF THIS ONTO OTHERS MASKS HIS OWN POWER STRUGGLE TO BE ACCEPTED AS A HEAVY-WEIGHT THEOLOGIAN. KEEP IN MIND THAT ACADEMIC INTELLECTUALS ARE THE MOST “CLERICAL” OR INTO “CLERICALISM” AND BEING A CARDINAL IS A DOUBLE DOSE OF THAT MISGUIDED CLERICALISM FOCUSED ON POWER!)


He accused such critics of taking only “little care of the divine commandments,” since, he argued, they forget that “there is a commandment even more important than the sixth (because it affects justice and charity) that asks not to bear false witness or lie.” (NEED I REMIND THE DOCTRINE PREFECT THAT ALL 10 COMMANDMENTS ARE EQUAL IN IMPORTANCE BUT IN A DIVERSITY OF WAYS! GOOD GRIEF!)

“These are the most numerous attacks, which continue, although I have the impression that it is already boring to talk about me,” he quipped. But he also referenced the “less frequent … attacks that come from an extreme left.” (NO, GOOD CARDINAL ELECT, YOU HAVE MADE YOURSELF BORING ALTHOUGH THERE IS A HINT OF PRIDE THAT YOU DON’T LIKE BEING BORING AND THEN NOT TALKED ABOUT, CHIACCHIERE. AND THE ODD COMMENT ABOUT THE EXTREME LEFT NOT CRITICIZING ONE OF THEIR OWN, HELLO!!!! )

Not surprisingly, the text has been a regular question in the more than 40 interviews Fernández has given in the past two months – a text that he has consistently defended. ( his 1995 work Heal me with your mouth: The art of kissing). The archbishop stated that critics “have been using that text as a hobbyhorse for a long time.” (AND A GREAT HOBBYHORSE IT IS!)

He presented himself as confused over why the text had garnered such attention. “Curiously enough, they stayed there, in a striking but innocent text,” he said of the erotic book. 

Fernández continued by revealing, “I have several other texts from years ago that could be considered much more ‘dangerous’ from the theological point of view and yet they have not even seen them. Maybe I am wrong to mention it, but it is the truth.” (OH MY! HE IS BRAGGING ABOUT EARLIER WRITINGS THAT ARE FAR MORE DANGEROUS THEOLOGICALLY THAN HIS SEMI-PORNOGRAPHIC BOOK ON KISSING WHICH REMINDS ME OF THE HOT AND STEAMY NOVELS THAT THE LATE CHICAGO PRIEST, FATHER ANDREW GREELY WROTE! PERHAPS AT THE POINT IN HIS IMMATURE LIFE HE WAS A ANDREW GREELY WANT-TO-BE?)

He attributed criticism of his book on kissing to the “question of power,” suggesting that those opposed to the book would “use whatever seems most effective to ridicule the other.” (AGAIN, IT SEEMS LIKE ANOTHER CASE OF PROJECTION ON HIS PART!)