IT IS SO SAD, SAD I WRITE, THAT THOSE WHO ONLY KNOW THE BUGNINI MASS AND ROMAN CALENDAR ARE COMPLETLY CLUELESS THAT ASH WEDNESDAY IS THREE WEEKS AWAY AND EASTER 70 DAYS AWAY!

 BUT, TLM CATHOLICS KNOW ALL OF THIS—THEY LIVE IN THE LIGHT, NOT DARKNESS!

THIS IS A POWERFUL CATHOLIC VIDEO AND VERY COMPASSIONATE BUT NO NONSENSE!

YOU CAN WATCH THE FACEBOOK VIDEO HERE AND THE GREAT COMPASSIONATE CATHOLIC COMMENTARY HERE!

ROMAN VESTMENTS AND ALTAR GIRLS: BISHOP GUIDO MARINI HAS NOT SUPPRESSED EITHER OF THESE…AND THEN THERE IS NEW ZEALAND…

 

Holy Family Church, New Zealand:

Brutal outside but glorious inside, like so many of us!

ORGANIC DEVELOPMENT IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLES OF SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM TO THE TRIDENTINE LITURGIES

In the Church today, there are those who say that the Bugnini fabricated Mass did not employ organic development—Pope Benedict XVI was of this school of thought.

There are others who say that the Bugnini fabricated Mass did employ organic development and get over it. Pope Francis was definitely of this school of thought.

But, your most brilliant humble blogger has his own brilliant but most humble thoughts on what organic development might have been if it had occurred for the Tridentine Liturgies.

Here are these brilliant but most humble assertions as it concerns implementing Sacrosanctum Concilium to the Tridentine liturgies:

1. As it concerns implementing “noble simplicity” there should not have been a revamping of the Order of the Mass but rather a pruning away of certain ceremonies associated with the various forms of the Pontifical Masses and even the normal parish Solemn Sung Mass with deacon and subdeacon. All the minutia surrounding which foot to use ascending to the altar, the kissing of the priest’s hands, the holding of the patten with a humeral veil and the ceremony of getting it to the altar and even not using the paten for the entire Canon of the Mass, could all have been simplified and pruned away. But the Order of the Mass, in its entirety, should never have been changed as it developed organically.

2. In terms of useless repetition,  the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar could have been pruned back to eliminate the double comfiteors and absolutions, one for the priest and the other for the servers. The double ceremonies for the Communion of the Priest and then the Communion of the laity rightly should be combined as it is in the Bugnini Mass but not eliminating the triple Domini non sum dignus. It is essential, though, that the priest consumes the Holocaust first to complete the Sacrifice and only then the laity to receive Holy Communion as a share in that Sacrifice. 

3. None of the private priestly prayers of the priest should have been eliminated. This was a chopping down, not a pruning and certainly not organic development. That these prayers are in the 1962 Missal is organic development. 

4. To unify the actions of the priest with what the choir/laity are singing is organic development. For example in the sung Mass, as the choir/laity chant the Kryie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus and Agnus Dei, the priest independently of that says these prayers. For the Kyrie, Gloria and Credo, after he says these prayers quickly, he sits to allow the choir/laity to complete their singing of these parts. And for the Sanctus, after he says it he jumps forward to say the first part of the Canon. Unifying these actions was accomplished in the 1964-65 Tridentine transitional Missal.

5. Saying the Canon in a loud voice rather than a low voice would be organic development. 

6. Kneeling for Holy Communion in the Latin Rite was an organic development and should not have been nipped in the bud or branch!

7. Experiments with celebrating the Tridentine Mass facing the congregation occurred prior to Vatican II and this could be seen as an organic development but the ethos of how the Mass was celebrated facing the congregation never had the priest “playing” to the congregation of reading prayers as if to the congregation.

8. The manner of the Bugnini Liturgy of the Word is an organic development and could have been implemented in the Tridentine Mass and it was in the 64-65 Missal. 

9. More lavish use of Scripture should never have ended with the Propers of the Mass as just one option, although the first, among some other subjective choices that are not Scripture. These should always be sung or said and when sung, it should be in Latin to preserve Latin and Gregorian Chant. Psalm 42 should not be eliminated from the PATFOTA except for Requiem Mass (which should have maintained its unique aspects) and during Passiontide. The Gloria Patri should not have been chopped down from the Mass at various points—that wasn’t organic development but destruction. 

10. The expansion of the lectionary is certainly organic development but the ancient lectionary should have been maintained and the addition years of “b and c” should have been modeled on it. 

11. In terms of including the laity in the sung Mass’s Prayers at the Foot of the Altar, which acts as a pre-Mass Penitential Act, the Entrance Chant could begin after all participated in the PATFOTA, pruned back as I suggest above. Thus after the PATFOTA, the priest ascends to the altar to reverence it and incense it, as the Introit is chanted and then after incensing the altar, the priest goes to the chair for the chanted Kyrie and Gloria and then he greets the laity with “The Lord be with you” at the chair and then prays the Collect at the chair. The Credo and Intercessions (which should be a prescribed litany) should be at the chair as well as the Prayer after Holy Communion, but the Dismissal and Final Blessing at the altar with the private prayers of the priest. (All of this would be an organic development.)

12. Additional votive Masses, Masses for particular needs, as well as additional prefaces are a part of organic development. The organic development of only one Canon in the Latin Rite Mass and said aloud or in low voice in Latin should have been maintained. Additional Eucharistic Prayers goes against noble simplicity and giving the priest choices that he makes alone in the Mass in terms of which Eucharistic Prayer and which Penitential Act creates a clericalism not in the Tridentine Mass. 

13. Progressive solemnity based upon what the priest wants to do should be suppressed but more options of how the Sung Mass could be sung is wise. The Full Sung Mass would have the priest chant the Collect, Prayer over the Offerings (aloud) and Post Communion Prayer as well as the Preface dialogue and Preface. The Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Great Amen, Pater Noster and Agnus Dei would be chanted.

14. A partially sung Mass might see the priest not singing his parts but the laity’s parts are sung. Perhaps the Credo would not be chanted in some Masses.

15. The Low Mass, with no singing except for four hymns, could be recovered but the chanted Mass seen as the norm for the parish’s Principle Mass or Masses. 

16. I think  maintaining Latin and allowing some vernacular means that in the Sung Mass the Propers are always chanted in Gregorian Latin Chant and perhaps the Eucharistic Prayer in Latin as well as the Sanctus, Pater Noster and Agnus Dei. That would be organic development in allowing all else in the vernacular. 

17. I don’t believe that the wholesale revamping of the Roman Calendar was organic development nor the changing of the orations of the Sunday Masses. All of that should have been maintained in its basic foundation. 

REASON 6,666,666,666,666,666,666,666 FOR AD ORIENTEM!!!!

 While not a valid Mass, this is the most valid way for the “Archbishop of Canterbury” to celebrate whatever she is celebrating below. It makes a great photo although a faux sacrament. I wonder how she keeps a zucchetto on her head, though:

THIS IS A FAIR AND BALANCED RECOMMENDATION TO POPE LEO ABOUT WHAT DO YOU DO WITH A MASS LIKE THE TLM (CREDIT: WHAT DO YOU DO WITH A GIRL LIKE MARIA)!

The “New Liturgical Movement’s” article, has two things I have proposed, the Ordinariate route to the TLM and a “reform of the reform” of the Bugnini Mass to make it more in line with what Sacrosanctum recommended for a future reform.

The linked article below makes a good case, actually, an excellent case, for Pope Leo to return the Church to the brilliant solution of Pope Benedict XVI in terms of reestablishing Summorum Pontificum and abrogating the Motu Proprio of Pope Francis, Traditionis Custodis. 

I would add, that returning the magisterial document of Summorum Pontificum should not be done as a motu-Proprio but a more significant document like an apostolic letter or even a Bull. That would prevent future popes canceling various magisterial teachings of predecessor popes. 

What many people, like Pope Benedict and the article I link below, lament, is that the requests of Vatican II concerning the Church’s liturgy were manufactured in a very brief time period and not  allowed to develop organically.

How does one, then, promote organic development over time, on the heels of an Ecumenical Council which said the liturgical books should be revised to promote actual interior and exterior participation, noble simplicity, more Scripture and intelligibility and allowing some vernacular but maintaining Latin?

Where would what Vatican II requested for the reform of the Mass, be today if it were left to organic development over a period of time and how is that done in a universal way??????

You can read the wonderfully excellent recommendation to Pope Leo XIV by pressing the NLM title below:

The Question of the Traditional Mass in Pope Leo XIV’s Pontificate

A guest article by the Canon of Shaftesbury, who serves as a canonist in a major archdiocese.

WHY I AM A CATHOLIC, NOT A PROTESTANT OR AN ANGLICAN OR AN EASTERN ORTHODOX OR A NONE!

At the “Where Peter Is” blog, also known as “Where Francis Was” Pedro Gabriel has a video on why he is a Catholic and remains so:

Pedro Gabriel shares his personal faith journey, as a gradual process shaped by study, experience, and a desire for intellectual coherence.

Pedro talks about the moments that forced him to take his beliefs seriously again: his growing up in Portugal, the 2007 abortion referendum, his work in medicine, and his encounter with the writings of Pope Benedict XVI. He also reflects on how his faith was later challenged and refined during the papacy of Pope Francis.

This is a reflection on faith and reason, authority and conscience, and what it has meant to remain Catholic while trying to think honestly and consistently.

My response:

For me, the hierarchy of reasons why I remain a Catholic consists of the four or so most important reasons:

1. Jesus is One Divine Person, with two natures, Human and Divine

2. In His public Ministry He began to found and form His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

3. By the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ and and mediated through the Catholic Church, which the Risen Lord founded, I can experience salvation through God’s grace that enables me to repent of my sins, and to strive to know, love and serve Jesus Christ in this world and to be happy with Him forever in heaven and with the communion of saints and angels!

4. I am a Catholic because I want God forgives the Original Sin of Adam and Eve and my own personal/actual sins through the ministry of the Church He founded and through that Church leads me to eternal life in heaven won for us by the same Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 

In other words I want to go to heaven. That’s why I am a Catholic.

Everything else, faith and reason, nice liturgies, popes that look like popes in dress and manner, are all icing on the cake but not essential to me remaining a Catholic. Because Jesus founded the Cathoic Church is the only reason I remain a Catholic. If that wasn’t true and heaven is an automatic thing, I’d be a none and practicing pagan in every aspect of the word.   

POPE LEO MAKES IT “CLEAR” THAT HIS HOLINESS DISAGREES WITH CARDINALS ROCHE AND CUPICH WHEN IT COMES TO THE BUGNINI MASS BEING THE SOURCE OF UNITY FOR THE ROMAN RITE: POPE LEO PRAISES THE CATHEDRAL IN TOLEDO (SPAIN) FOR PRESERVING THE “HISPANO-MOZARABIC LITURGY “AS A LIVING TESTIMONY OF FAITH AND COMMUNIOIN WITH THE HOLY SEE OF PETER!”

BOMBSHELL: POPE LEO DECLARES THAT THE HISPANO-MOZARABIC LITURGY OF THE ONE ROMAN RITE IS A TESTIMONY OF FAITH AND (FULL) COMMUNION WITH THE SEE OF PETER!

 Of course, and yes to contradict Cardinals Roche and Cupich, the unity of the Church is not found in the exclusive use of the Bugnini Mass of the Roman Rite, but rather in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen, experienced in every form of the Holy Mass or Divine Liturgy of the Church of the East and West in union with the Successor of Saint Peter! That certainly includes the Hispano-Mozarabic Rite and more importantly and more widely celebrated Ancient Form of the Latin Mass (Tridentine, Extraordinary, TLM)!

Thus, of course, given all the negative rhetoric about the Ancient Form of the Mass that has a 1,600 year tradition, being no longer considered a Mass that brings unity to the Roman Rite (such crap) it is a important what Pope Leo says about the Hispano-Mozarabic Liturgy!

From Vatican News (full story HERE):

Liturgy, music and jubilee

Leo XIV underlined the value of the Hispano-Mozarabic liturgy, celebrated daily in Toledo Cathedral as a living testimony of faith and of communion with the See of Peter. This musical and spiritual tradition forms part of the Centenary Music Programme, which seeks to recover and renew the Cathedral’s rich soundscape, drawing both on its historical archives and on contemporary productions.

• THIS IS FROM AI CONCERNING THE HISTORY OF THE HISPANO-MOZARABIC RITE:
• Suppression & Survival: In 1085, Pope Gregory VII ordered the suppression of the rite in favor of the Roman Rite to unify the Western Church. It was only preserved in a few parishes in Toledo, Spain.
• Cisneros Reform: In the early 16th century, Cardinal Francisco Jiménez de Cisnerossaved the rite from extinction by printing new liturgical books and establishing the Mozarabic Chapel in the Primal Cathedral of Toledo.
• Modern Status: A reformed version of the rite was approved by the Vatican in 1988 following the principles of the Second Vatican Council. Today, it is celebrated daily in the Toledo Cathedral and occasionally in Madrid and Salamanca. 

The Hispano-Mozarabic liturgy (or Hispanic Rite) is an ancient Latin liturgical tradition originating in the Iberian Peninsula (Visigothic era) that was preserved by Christians under Muslim rule (Mozarabs). Centered in Toledo, it is distinct from the Roman Rite, featuring a unique, long structure, daily Creed, and nine-part breaking of the host. It remains a celebrated, albeit rare, Rite in the Catholic Church. 

Key Characteristics and History

• Origins: Developed in the 4th-7th centuries, it is also known as the Visigothic rite.
• "Mozarab" Terminology: Refers to Christians living under Muslim rule after 711 who maintained this tradition.
• Suppression and Survival: Largely replaced by the Roman Rite in the 11th century, it was preserved in specific Toledo chapels (e.g., Mozarabic Chapel in Toledo Cathedral) through the efforts of Cardinal Cisneros in the 16th century.
• Distinct Features:
  • Structure: Significantly different from the Roman Mass, featuring unique prayers like the Illatio (similar to the Preface).
  • The Breaking of Bread: The host is broken into nine pieces, representing mysteries of Christ's life.
  • Creed: The Nicene Creed is recited daily.
  • "And the Son": The creed includes the Filioque ("and the Son") clause.
  • Our Father: The congregation responds "Amen" to each of the seven petitions.
• Modern Usage: Following reform in the 1980s-90s, it is celebrated daily in Toledo and on special occasions in Spain and the Vatican. 

The rite is considered a crucial element of cultural and religious identity for the Mozarab community and a "national treasure" of Spanish Christianity. 

WHILE CARDINALS ROCHE AND CUPICH MAKE SILLY INANE COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THE TLM IS A THREAT TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH’S UNITY, A TRUE HERO OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, CARDINAL RAINER MARIA WOELKI MAKES CLEAR WHAT THE TRUE HERETICAL/SCHISMATIC THREAT TO THE CHURCH IS AND IT ISN’T THE TLM!

 FROM ZENIT NEWS:

We cannot vote on the Resurrection”: Cardinal of Cologne absent from German Synodal Path meeting and considers it over The German Synodal Path has become a test case for how far local churches can go before they collide with the apostolic structure of Catholicism itself. For the Cardinal of Cologne, the line has already been crossed 

 (ZENIT News / Cologne, 01.29.2026).- As Germany’s Synodal Path convenes its sixth and final assembly in Stuttgart on January 29, 2026, one of the country’s most prominent cardinals is notably absent. Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki of Cologne has chosen not to attend. His reason is blunt: for him, the Synodal Path is over. “I took part in all five agreed assemblies,” Woelki said in a recent interview with Domradio. “But for me, this process has reached its end.” 

His decision marks more than a personal withdrawal. It highlights the deep theological and ecclesiological fault lines running through the German Church — divisions that Rome has repeatedly warned could lead to rupture. Launched in December 2019 by the German Bishops’ Conference and the Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK), the Synodal Path was presented as a reform process in response to the sexual abuse crisis. 

Over time, however, it evolved into a forum advancing proposals that directly challenge settled Catholic doctrine: calls for women deacons, blessings of same-sex unions, revisions to moral teaching on homosexuality, and even the acceptance of “transgender” priests. In 2023, more than two-thirds of Germany’s bishops joined overwhelming majorities in approving several of these texts. Woelki belonged to the minority who opposed them. Yet his critique goes deeper than individual documents. At stake, he argues, is the very nature of the Church. 

“The problem for me is how this Synodal Path has been structured,” he explained. “Synodality has not been practiced in the sense Pope Francis — and now Pope Leo XIV — have repeatedly described it: as a spiritual process, ordered toward evangelization.” For Woelki, synodality is not parliamentary procedure. It is not majority rule. And it is certainly not a mechanism for rewriting doctrine. “We cannot vote on whether Jesus rose from the dead,” he said, offering a deliberately stark example. “At some point, the process became focused on implementing particular political and ecclesial positions.” 

Both Pope Francis and his successor, Leo XIV, have insisted that synodality is meant to foster listening, discernment, and missionary renewal — not doctrinal experimentation. Without evangelization at its core, Woelki argues, synodality loses its meaning entirely. Central to his concern is the proposal — backed by a majority of German bishops and the ZdK — to establish a permanent Synodal Council. This body would give lay representatives decision-making authority alongside bishops, effectively placing 27 diocesan bishops, 27 ZdK members, and another 27 delegates on equal footing. Woelki finds this incompatible with Catholic ecclesiology.

 “As Catholics, we live in a hierarchical and sacramental Church,” he said. “This is not merely an organizational question. It belongs to the essence of the Church.” In Catholic teaching, the bishop holds ultimate responsibility for his diocese, a mandate Woelki stresses comes from Christ himself. While he strongly supports lay participation and values their contributions, he draws a clear distinction between consultation and governance. “Listening to one another is essential,” he said. “But above all, we must listen together to what the Holy Spirit is saying. 

The responsibility to decide, however, belongs to those who have received that charge.” For Woelki, this is not theoretical. It is personal. “I am responsible for my ordination vows,” he said. “I promised to protect the faith of the Church and to walk the path of my diocese in unity with the Pope. I intend to keep that promise.” That sense of accountability explains his refusal to join a body he believes blurs the lines of authority and risks introducing what he calls a “new ecclesiology and a new anthropology” no longer aligned with the universal Church. The Holy See shares these concerns, warning that a Synodal Council granting lay bodies authority reserved to bishops could provoke schism across large parts of German Catholicism. Woelki is careful not to question the goodwill of his brother bishops. He acknowledges that all involved desire what is best for the Church. Still, he describes the current polarization within the German episcopate as deeply troubling.

 “Our common ground must remain the faith and teaching of the Church, unity with the Pope, and the ecclesiology of Vatican II,” he said. The cardinal also lamented what he sees as a glaring omission in the Synodal Path’s agenda: evangelization. Pope Francis emphasized this priority in his 2019 letter to the “Pilgrim People of God in Germany,” yet Woelki says it was largely sidelined during the assemblies. 

That absence, he believes, reveals the deeper imbalance of the process. Beyond ecclesial debates, Woelki also reflected on the broader global climate. In a world increasingly shaped by power politics, he warned, societies risk losing their moral compass. “Where force replaces law, dignity is violated and human rights are ignored,” he said. The antidote, in his view, lies in rebuilding shared values: dialogue over violence, protection of the vulnerable, solidarity, trust, and justice. 

As Rome continues to monitor developments in Germany — and as Pope Leo XIV begins to define his own approach to synodality — Woelki’s stand underscores a reality many prefer to avoid: the German Synodal Path has become a test case for how far local churches can go before they collide with the apostolic structure of Catholicism itself. For the Cardinal of Cologne, the line has already been crossed. His refusal to participate in Stuttgart is not a gesture of protest, he insists, but an act of fidelity — to his priestly vows, to the universal Church, and to a vision of synodality rooted not in ballots, but in discernment under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 

Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.

“We cannot vote on the Resurrection”: Cardinal of Cologne absent from German Synodal Path meeting and considers it over | ZENIT - English

THE CRISIS OF THE LOSS OF CATHOLIC LITURGICAL IDENTITY AND BEAUTY

 The Holy Family Cathedral in Tulsa is beautiful, except!

Its free standing altar in no way compares to the magnificent pre-Vatican II altar! In no way does it compare!

When that new altar was placed in front of the original, what went through the minds of children, teenagers, young adults and older Catholics (at the time)?

I would say they thought, as I would have thought, that the Mass had been dumbed down and that there was a dramatic shift in reverence for the Almighty and devotion to him. The Mass was not seen as important as it once was—more iconoclastic Protestant than Catholic, low Church, not high Church.

What says you, from a visceral point of view:

The original altar but now not used for no apparent good reason but nefarious reasons could apply:

The box of an altar, so ugly, it has to be hidden by a full covering:

WHAT IS NOT PRAISED IS AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS PRAISED…THE HOLY FATHER DOES NOT PRAISE FEDUCIA SUPPLICANS OR TRADITIONIS CUSTODIS….

My most humble brilliant comments embedded in text in red.

Also, prior to this message to the DDF, His Holiness, Pope Leo has a private audience with the former Prefect of this once called CDF, Cardinal Mueller!

ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS POPE LEO XIV
TO THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE PLENARY SESSION OF THE DICASTERY FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Clementine Hall

Thursday, January 29, 2026

[Multimedia]

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Peace be with you.

Good morning and welcome!

Your Eminences,

dear brothers in the episcopate,

dear brothers and sisters,

I joyfully welcome you on the occasion of your Plenary Session. I cordially greet and thank the Prefect of the Dicastery, together with the Superiors and Officials. I am well aware of the valuable service you provide, with the aim – as stated in the Constitution Praedicate Evangelium – of “assisting the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops in the proclamation of the Gospel throughout the world, promoting and safeguarding the integrity of Catholic doctrine on faith and morals, drawing from the deposit of faith and also seeking an ever deeper understanding of it in the face of new questions” (n. 69). (Pope Leo in two days has referred to safeguarding the “Deposit of Faith!” Keep in mind that heterodox Catholics don’t like the term “Deposit of Faith” because it implies that the Faith is rigid and can’t be manipulated or changed—but the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith has to push back against those in the synodal Church who want to instrumentalize and change what synodal means in order to take a hammer to the “Deposit of Faith!” Kudos to Pope Leo!)

Your task is to offer clarifications regarding the doctrine of the Church, through pastoral and theological guidelines on often very delicate issues. To this end, in the last two years the Dicastery has published several documents; I recall the main ones: the Note Gestis verbisque, on the validity of the Sacraments (February 2, 2024), which offered clear instructions for resolving doubtful cases relating to their administration; (Yes! Making clear that priests and deacons can’t change the words of baptism and the Consecration of the Bread and wine and also other elements in the Sacraments, renders those sacraments not just illict but also invalid. Cardinal Cupich should take note as it regards that infamous priest and parish in Chicago whose Masses are requently invalid!)the Declaration Dignitas infinita, concerning human dignity (April 2, 2024), which reaffirmed the infinite dignity of every human being, today seriously endangered, in particular by the ongoing wars and by an economy that prioritizes profit; the Norms for proceeding in the discernment of alleged supernatural phenomena (May 17, 2024), which made it possible to resolve cases relating to such events, including that concerning the spiritual experience of Medjugorje, to which the Note The Queen of Peace was specifically dedicated (September 19, 2024); The document "Nota Antiqua et nova," prepared in collaboration with the Dicastery for Culture and Education (January 28, 2025), offers a broad and precise consideration of the relationship between artificial intelligence and human intelligence; the doctrinal note "Mater Populi fidelis," on certain Marian titles referring to Mary's cooperation in the work of salvation (November 4, 2025), which encourages popular Marian devotion, deepening its biblical and theological foundations, and at the same time offers precise and important clarifications for Mariology; finally, the doctrinal note "Una caro. Elogio della monogamia," on the value of Marriage as an exclusive union and mutual belonging (November 25, 2025), which explores in an original way the property of the unity of Marriage between a man and a woman. (It is quite telling that His Holiness, Pope Leo says nothing about Feducia Supplicans which has led to Jesuitical Fr. James Martin, along with the heretical/schismatic Church of Germany to publicly bless mortally sinful unions of all kinds thus undermining the doctrine and dogmas concerning the Sacrament of Marriage.)

This work will certainly greatly benefit the spiritual growth of the holy and faithful People of God. In the context of the epochal change we are experiencing, it offers the faithful a ready and clear word from the Church, especially regarding the many new phenomena that are emerging on the stage of history. It also provides valuable guidance to the Bishops for the exercise of their pastoral action, as well as to theologians in their service of study and evangelization. (Often in the mushiness of statements coming from Pope Francis, it seem to many of us, including your most humble blogger, that in the midst of epochal changes, the Church had to bend to the world. Fiducia Supplicans is an example of this, which truly backfired leading even Pope Francis to clean up his mess. The Consistory to elect the new pope brought up the confusion that had been sown in the Church in the past 13 years.)

I particularly appreciate that in this "Plenary Assembly" you have initiated a fruitful discussion on the theme of the transmission of faith, a topic of great urgency in our time.  We cannot ignore that, in recent decades, a break has occurred in the generational transmission of the Christian faith among the Catholic people [1], and that, especially in contexts of long-established evangelization, the number of those who no longer perceive the Gospel as a fundamental resource for their existence is increasing, especially among the younger generations. In truth, there are many young men and women who live without any reference to God or the Church, and while this causes us believers pain, it must also lead us to rediscover the "sweet and comforting joy of evangelization," [2] which is at the very heart of the life and mission of the Bride of Christ. (The blame must be placed squarely on the pope and institutional Church, since Vatican II, for what has happened in this regard, from superficial catechetical materials, to marginalizing and denigrating orthodox Catholics, young ones in particular, who love tradition, the TLM and clarity of doctrine and dogmas. Traditionis Custodis is of that 1960’s mindset that denigrates everything traditional and praises everything novel, heterodox and inane as fresh and new! Place the blame where it rightly belongs!)

As I recalled during the recent Extraordinary Consistory, we “want to be a Church that does not look only to itself, that is missionary, that looks beyond itself, to others”; [3] a Church that proclaims the Gospel, above all through the power of attraction, as my predecessors Benedict XVI and Francis have repeatedly affirmed. [4]

The foundation of the life of the Body of Christ is the love of the Father, revealed to us in the Son made man, present and active in us through the gift of the Spirit: therefore, “it is not the Church that attracts, but Christ, and if a Christian or an ecclesial community attracts, it is because through that ‘channel’ the vital sap of Charity flows, which springs from the Heart of the Savior.” [5]

The Church proclaims Christ, without self-promotion or particularism, and in it each person is and must always recognize himself or herself as simply “a humble worker in the Lord's vineyard.” [6]

Before concluding, I would like to mention another service of yours, for which I am grateful and which I commend to your care: that of welcoming and accompanying, with all benevolence and discernment, the Bishops and Superiors General called upon to deal with cases of crimes reserved to the Dicastery. This is a very delicate area of ​​ministry, in which it is fundamental to ensure that the demands of justice, truth, and charity are always honored and respected.

Dearest brothers and sisters, finally, I renew my gratitude to each of you for the valuable contribution you make to the life and work of the Dicastery and of the entire Church, especially when this contribution is offered in a humble and unassuming way.  A sign of this gratitude is the Apostolic Blessing that I wholeheartedly impart to all of you and your loved ones. Thank you.

THE FIRST MAJOR TEST FOR POPE LEO: HINT, IT IS NOT CARDINAL CUPICH’S ATTITUDE TOWARD THE TLM OR EVEN THE TLM ITSELF—THAT’S PEANUTS COMPARED TO WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN

 

From a commentary at Rorate Caeli:

The German Bishops' Conference has convened itself to lead a “synodal path,” which aims to extend to the universal Church the ‘binding’ decisions of their “permanent synod,” including the equalization of clergy and laity, the ministerial ordination of women, the inclusion of homosexuals in the Church, opening all the sacraments to them, including marriage.

The Holy See has intervened more than once to warn the German bishops, ever since Abp. Filippo Iannone, whom Leo XIV appointed head of the Dicastery for Bishops in 2025, wrote to their president, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, to warn that these disruptive issues, “do not concern the Church in Germany but the universal Church and, with few exceptions, cannot be the subject of deliberations or decisions by a particular Church.”

 The German bishops, however, have repeatedly ignored Rome's warnings. Their goal, as Vaticanist Nico Spuntoni observes in Il Giornale on January 17, seems to be to “spread a German contagion to the rest of the Church.” 

Will synodal neo-Communism find a new and more radical expression in the concluding assembly of the Synodaler Weg, to be held in Stuttgart from January 29 to 31? Or will the revolutionary process of the German bishops undergo a strategic retreat? In any case, Pope Leo XIV will face one of the first decisive issues of his pontificate. 

AS I SCRATCH MY HEAD, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR CARDINAL CUPICH, BLESS HIS EMINENCE’S LITTLE HEART…

Cardinal Cupich has a degree in liturgy. Unfortunately he received it in the 70’s or 80’s. That time was not the zenith of liturgical thought or praxis.

I knew Cardinal Cupich when he was Monsignor Cupich and the rector of the Pontifical College Josephinum in Columbus. He navigated the “reckovation” of their main chapel and it was horrible, but very much following the ideologies concerning the Modern Mass of that period of time , which, by the way, went way beyond Vatican II and what was recommended there and even what Bishop Bugnini fabricated with his new Mass codified by Pope Paul VI and thus becoming the Mass of Paul VI. 

Before and after by Cardinal Cupich:

It took another rector to restore that chapel to what is was and should have remained. Oddly, that rector is also a priest of my Diocese of Savannah.

After Cupich restoration:

See the Liturical Arts Journal article on this chapel and more photos of the restored look HERE.

But we know that Cardinal Cupich recently has made an incredible statement concerning the unity of the Roman Rite that requires that the Liturgy codified by Trent (but not a newly created Liturgy) be eliminated . Only doing so, according to the Cardinal, bless his little heart, will that bring about the unity the Church of the Roman Rite needs. 

It is an incredible statement, to say the least. 

These are my questions to Cardinal Cupich, bless his heart:

1. What about the liturgy at Saint Sabina’s in Chicago—does it and that parish promote unity in the Roman Rite in general and the Archdiocese of Chicago in particular?

2. What about the Ordinariate Mass approved by Pope Francis in 2013? Does that too break the unity of the Roman Rite, especially as it has its own bishops?

3. What about the Ambrosian Rite, the modern version, in Milan. Does that damage the unity of the Church?

4. What about all the various languages in which the Mass is celebrated even in one diocese or archdiocese? Does that create division too?

5. What about the various parishes that incorporate into the Bugnini Mass various forms of inculturation, some approved others not? Does that create disunity in the Church?

Pope Leo, God willing, is well informed about how the Bugnini Mass is distorted by liturgical abuses and the personalities of bishops and priests who celebrate it. He must be informed about the wild liturgical abuses that go on in a huge number of parishes and the sloppiness that occurs also, which is a liturgical abuses also.

How can bishops, some who are cardinals, as well as priests who are in the know convince Pope Leo not to listen to Cardinal Cupich and others of his liturgical ideology formed in the 70’s?

How can we in the Roman Rite trust our bishops, some cardinals, who are ignorant about the liturgy in 2026 and promote memes and ideologies that are blatantly incorrect? 

The Truth has set me and so others like me, free. And we have eyes to see and ears to hear. Does Pope Leo and most of the Roman Rite cardinals? 

THIS HAS TO BE A PRE-VATICAN II LITURGY, BECAUSE THERE IS NO NOBLE SIMPLICITY, ACCRETIONS THAT HAVE ENTERED INTO THE MASS THAT NEED PURIFICATION AND THAT GODAWFUL TRIUMPHALISM THAT SO CHARACTERIZES THE PRE-VATICAN II MASS!

BELOW MY TEXT IS THE VIDEO OF THE  ORDINATION OF THE NEW ARCHBISHOP OF VIENNA. THIS IS A PRE-VATICAN II MASS IN THE MOST POST VATICAN II WAY POSSIBLE!

The irony is that this is suppose to be a Post-Vatican II Bugnini Mass. But is it? 

The Video begins with pre-Mass entertainment in and outside the marvelous and quite splendid St. Stephen’s Cathedral in Vienna. An hour or so into the video and after the entertainment, The Mass of Ordination of a Bishop begins.

It has 1970’s written all over it. There is no doubt in my mind that it was planned by a liturgical committee because they created a Giraffe of a Mass! (I needed Alexa to spell that for me!)

The good things about the Mass:

1. The Cathedral is splendidly beautiful and breathtakingly so!

The bad and the ugly of the Mass:

1. The vestments are horrible, just horrible and quite a contrast in ugliness compared to the beauty of the Cathedral.

2. The free standing modern altar doesn’t belong in this Cathedral and it is opposite of the cathedral, just plain ugly in a grotesque kind of way

3. The Music is splendid but triumphant. Triumphalism reigns in the music, especially the Entrance “chant.” Breaking that godawful triumphalism  and thus following Vatican II, Gregorian Chant would have been far more suitable. Deacons, priests, bishops and archbishops should never have a triumphalistic Mass to begin their ministries!

4. I could not watch the whole Mass but two things stand out in terms of not doing the red of this neo- Bugnini Mass. First, why do we need laymen (women ) holding the Book of the Gospel over the bishop? Why make an ideological statement in a Mass for Ordaining a Bishop, by adding something to the Rite that is not in the rubrics!? Read the black and do the red!!! 

5. What in the name of God and all that is holy is with this passing of the Pastoral Staff (Crozier) from  person to person, and of a variety of kinds of people in the Catholic Church until it finally gets to the ordaining bishop who then hands it to the new Archbishop? What stupid, silly and long, repetitious creativity. 

6. And all those servers holding candles for the Eucharistic Prayer and throughout the Cathedral and the pompous overuse of incense—and this coming from me, the incense king! 

WE NEED VATICAN III AND BUGNINI ON STEROIDS TO REFORM THIS MASS!!!!!

VIENNA (LifeSiteNews) — Josef Grünwidl was ordained Archbishop of Vienna on Saturday in a ceremony at St. Stephen’s Cathedral. The rite included notable deviations from the liturgical texts, with an emphasis on layperson involvement, including women-led roles in the ceremony.

On January 24, Josef Grünwidl was consecrated archbishop during a solemn Mass in Vienna, Austria, after having been appointed by Pope Leo XIV as successor to Cardinal Christoph Schönborn. During the consecration, elements not provided for in the liturgical texts for the ritual were introduced which appeared to express the modernist vision the new bishop holds regarding certain aspects of Christian life, nature, and the structure of the Church.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? WHAT DOES THIS MEAN? OH! WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

Really, I don’t know. What does it mean?

Press title for the article:

Pope Leo XIV is starting to make waves — and some are worried (And the strange case of the visit to Spain)

By Wanderer

Argentina

POPE LEO XIV TELLS MEMBERS OF THE APOSTOLIC TRIBUNAL OF THE ROMAN ROTO: DO NOT RELEVATIZE THE TRUTH BUT SPEAK THE TRUTH IN LOVE! IN OTHER WORDS, NO TO THE DICTATORSHIP OF RELEVATISM!

 

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Peace be with you!

Your Excellency,

Dear Prelate Auditors of the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota,

In this our first meeting, I would first of all like to express my appreciation for your work, which is a precious service to the universal judicial function that belongs to the Pope and in which the Lord has called you to participate. "Speaking the truth in love" (Eph 4:15): this is an expression that can be applied to your daily mission in the administration of justice.

I thank His Excellency the Dean for his words, which express the union of all of you with the Successor of Peter. And my grateful thoughts also extend to all the tribunals of the Church present in the world. The ministry of judge that I have had the opportunity to exercise allows me to better understand your experience and to appreciate the ecclesial relevance of your task.

Today I would like to return to a fundamental theme that has been dominant in the Addresses given to the Tribunal of the Roman Rota from Pius XII to Pope Francis. It concerns the relationship of your activity with the truth that is inherent in justice. On this occasion, I intend to offer you some reflections on the close connection between the truth of justice and the virtue of charity. These are not two opposing principles, nor values ​​to be balanced according to purely pragmatic criteria, but two intrinsically linked dimensions that find their deepest harmony in the very mystery of God, who is Love and Truth.

This correlation requires constant and careful critical exegesis, since, in the exercise of jurisdictional activity, a dialectical tension often emerges between the demands of objective truth and the concerns of charity. Sometimes there is a risk that an excessive identification with the vicissitudes – often troubled – of the faithful may lead to a dangerous relativization of the truth. Indeed, a misguided compassion, even if seemingly motivated by pastoral zeal, risks obscuring the necessary dimension of ascertaining the truth inherent in the judicial office. This can happen not only in the context of marriage nullity cases – where it could lead to pastoral decisions lacking a solid objective foundation – but also in any type of proceeding, undermining its rigor and fairness.

On the other hand, there can sometimes be a cold and detached affirmation of the truth that fails to take into account everything that love for people demands, omitting the solicitude dictated by respect and mercy, which must be present in all phases of a process.

In considering the relationship between truth and charity, a clear orientation comes from the teaching of the Apostle Paul, who exhorts us: "Speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ" (Ephesians 4:15).  Veritatem facientes in caritate: it is not simply a matter of conforming to a speculative truth, but of "doing the truth," that is, a truth that must illuminate all actions. And this must be done "in charity," which is the great driving force that leads to true justice. With another biblical phrase, this time from Saint John, you are called to be "fellow workers for the truth" (3 John 8). Benedict XVI, who chose these words as his episcopal motto, emphasized in his Encyclical Caritas in veritate the "need to combine charity with truth not only in the direction, indicated by Saint Paul, of 'veritas in caritate' (Ephesians 4:15), but also in the inverse and complementary direction of 'caritas in veritate'. Truth must be sought, found and expressed in the 'economy' of charity, but charity in turn must be understood, valued and practiced in the light of truth" (n. 2).

Therefore, let your actions always be guided by that true love for your neighbor that seeks above all his eternal salvation in Christ and in the Church, which implies adherence to the truth of the Gospel.  Thus, we find the horizon within which all ecclesial legal activity must be placed: the salvation of souls as the supreme law in the Church. [1] In this way, your service to the truth of justice is a contribution of love to the salvation of souls.

Within the framework of truth in charity, all aspects of canonical processes can be understood. First and foremost, the actions of the various participants in the process must be entirely guided by the active desire to contribute to shedding light on the just judgment to be reached, with rigorous intellectual honesty, technical competence, and an upright conscience. The permanent striving of all towards the truth is what makes the overall activity of the tribunals profoundly harmonious, following that institutional conception of the process, masterfully described by Venerable Pius XII in his Address to the Rota in 1944. [2] The goal that unites all those involved in the processes, each in fidelity to their own role, is the search for truth, which is not reduced to professional fulfillment, but is to be understood as a direct expression of moral responsibility. This is primarily driven by charity, knowing how to go beyond the demands of mere justice, to serve, as far as possible, the integral good of the people, without distorting one's function but exercising it with a full ecclesial sense.

Service to truth in charity must shine through in all the work of the ecclesiastical tribunals. This must be appreciated by the entire ecclesial community and especially by the faithful involved: by those who request a judgment on their marital union, by those accused of having committed a canonical crime, by those who consider themselves victims of a grave injustice, by those who claim a right. Canonical processes must inspire the trust that comes from professional seriousness, intense and careful work, and a convinced dedication to what can and should be perceived as a true professional vocation. The faithful and the entire ecclesial community have the right to a correct and timely exercise of procedural functions, because it is a path that impacts consciences and lives.

In this light, the truth, and therefore the good and the beauty, of all the offices and services related to the processes must be highlighted. "Doing the truth in charity": all those involved in the administration of justice must act according to a code of ethics, which must be carefully studied and practiced within the canonical framework, ensuring that it truly becomes exemplary. In this sense, a style inspired by ethics must also permeate the work of lawyers when they assist the faithful in defending their rights, protecting the interests of their clients without ever exceeding what is considered just and in accordance with the law. The promoters of justice and the defenders of the bond are cornerstones in the administration of justice, called by their mission to protect the common good. A purely bureaucratic approach in a role of such importance would clearly prejudice the search for truth.

The judges, called to the grave responsibility of determining what is just, which is the truth, cannot fail to remember that "justice walks with peace and is in constant and dynamic relation with it. Justice and peace aim at the good of each and every person, and therefore demand order and truth. When one is threatened, both falter; when justice is offended, peace is also jeopardized." [3] Viewed in this perspective, the judge becomes an agent of peace who contributes to consolidating the unity of the Church in Christ.

The trial is not in itself a tension between conflicting interests, as is sometimes misunderstood, but is the indispensable instrument for discerning truth and justice in the case.  The adversarial process in judicial proceedings, consequently, is a dialogical method for ascertaining the truth. The concrete nature of the case, in fact, always requires that the facts be ascertained and the reasons and evidence supporting the various positions be compared, based on the presumptions of the validity of the marriage and the innocence of the accused, until proven otherwise.  Legal experience demonstrates the essential role of the adversarial process and the decisive importance of the investigative phase. The judge, maintaining independence and impartiality, must resolve the dispute according to the elements and arguments that emerge in the trial. Failure to observe these basic principles of justice – and favoring unjustified disparity in the treatment of similar situations – is a significant violation of the legal profile of ecclesial communion.

These considerations could be applied to every phase of the process and to every type of judicial case. By way of example, in the shorter process for marital nullity before the diocesan bishop, the seemingly manifest nature of the ground for nullity that makes it possible must be judged with great care, without forgetting that it will be the duly conducted process itself that will confirm the existence of the nullity or determine the need to resort to the ordinary process. It is therefore fundamental that the study and application of canon matrimonial law continue with scientific rigor and fidelity to the Magisterium. This science is indispensable for resolving cases according to the criteria established by the law and jurisprudence of the Roman Rota, which, in most cases, merely declare the requirements of natural law.

Dear friends, your mission is lofty and demanding. You are called to safeguard the truth with rigor but without rigidity, and to exercise charity without omission. In this balance, which is in reality a profound unity, true Christian legal wisdom must be manifested. I would like to conclude these reflections by entrusting your work to the intercession of Our Lady, Mirror of Justice, the perfect model of truth in charity. Thank you!