The Catholic Thing
HOME        ARCHIVES        IN THE NEWS        COMMENTARY        NOTABLE        DONATE
Hating the Pope? Print E-mail
By Austin Ruse   
Friday, 05 April 2013

What a terrible thing for a supposedly faithful Catholic to hate the pope. Is hate too strong a word? How terrible then to dislike the pope, to be angered by the pope, even suspicious of him. Read certain Traditionalist blogs and websites in recent days and you see all of this.

Of course many were concerned and even a little let down when the name Bergoglio was announced. We’d hardly heard his name before. From Argentina? That’s interesting but isn’t that one of the lands of liberation theology? And wasn’t he the progressive candidate against Ratzinger in 2005? That charge turns out to be true and not true at the same time. True that he was their candidate. Not true in that he wanted no part of it.

I was at the United Nations when the white smoke rose, at a panel convened by the Holy See to discuss violence against women. The conference room was packed to the rafters with radical feminists who always show up at these events to take a poke at the Catholic Church. When the white smoke rose, the phones of faithful Catholics lit up all over the world with the news. And in that small U.N. room, too, you could see a few happy faces including the beaming nuncio.

Many of us convened to the U.N. cafeteria, fired up our computers, and waited for the announcement Habemus papam. The wait was excruciating. I was with a large group of students from Steubenville, and when Bergoglio was announced our excitement palpably abated. There was confusion in our ranks. Bergoglio who?

Then we started getting emails from friends pulling quotations from Bergoglio’s past fights on life and family in Argentina. They were very strong, indeed. No one thinks the Bishop of Rome would be anything other than orthodox on the key issues of the day; but will he be outspoken? Clearly this new pope would be.

When Francis bowed his head and asked for our blessing the students wept openly and blessed him and prayed for him right then and there. The LGBT’s sitting all around us knew exactly what was happening – and were appalled.

Immediately though, Traditionalist friends and their blogs lit up with complaints. One friend on Facebook warned that Bergoglio “was not friendly to TLM,” the sine qua non of Traditionalism. (For the uninformed, TLM refers to the traditional Latin Mass, something that was given universal allowance by Benedict XVI.) Pope Francis’s supposed coolness toward the TLM has been repeated endlessly since his elevation.

Besides the Tridentine Mass, the Trads are also on high alert for any other thing that smacks of what they consider Modernism. Is the thurible shaken the requisite number of times on the right and on the left?


           The TLM, ad orientem

Taylor Marshall – a Catholic convert and former Episcopal priest who worked for a time at the Catholic Information Center in Washington D.C. – has become chancellor of Fisher More College in Texas and a prolific author and popular blogger in a traditionalist though quite sensible vein. On March 14, only hours after Francis’ election, he posted this on Canterbury Tales:

Pope Francis hadnt been elected for more than two hours and the vitriol began to spew forth in the comment boxes of this blog and others.Many from the traditionalist crowd reacted against Pope Francis with words that were downright offensive. If one of my sons spoke like that about a priest (or any older man, for that matter), my boy would have a sore backside and a long stay in a dark room.

Within minutes of His Holiness appearance on the loggia, some trads began an online campaign claiming that he was a persecutor of orthodox priests in Argentina. Then they said he forbade the Latin Mass in his diocese. Then they were mocking him for not wearing the scarlet papal mozzetta. They also expressed dismay over how His Holiness prayed in Italian and not in Latin. Next, they expressed their alarm that he took off his stole immediately after the blessing. Then they made much ado over how the tapestry unfurled over the balcony wasn't that of His Holiness predecessor. And these comments arent even the worst of it. I dont even want to list some of the other things they have written online.

Mr. Marshall was right; the blogs and comment boxes were full of panic, anger, even hate, and it was not just the denizens of comment boxes who had become unhinged. Only hours after Francis was announced, Remnant TV interviewed John Rao, a frequent contributor, who is also one of the most prominent leaders in angry Trad circles. Rao said, “It doesn’t look good. It looks like it (the election of Francis) was the result of a political machination on the part of one or the other elements within that faction of the College of Cardinals that is wedded to the so-called spirit of the Council however they interpret that and they don’t care if the Church dies, so long as that spirit is maintained.”

Princes of the Church don’t care if the Church dies? Let this particular Traditionalist mindset sink in for a moment. What hubris, what lack of faith. What a dissenter’s attitude in claiming the personal authority to pronounce on what’s authentically Catholic.

When I was a Traditionalist, we had great disdain for John Paul II. I almost missed his entire pontificate – until I left their ranks. They liked Benedict better because of the blessing he conferred on the Tridentine Mass and traditional practices in general. But now they say that Benedict thwarted the Holy Spirit by resigning and that the elevation of Francis is the Holy Spirit’s punishment for that act.

What a blessing it was on that day to be with faithful Catholic students who wept with joy at the sight of our new Holy Father and how heartbreaking are those who were angry at the sight of him, are angry still, and always will be.

 
Austin Ruse is the President of the New York and Washington, D.C.-based Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), a research institute that focuses exclusively on international social policy. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Ruse’s alone and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of C-FAM.
 
 
The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Rules for Commenting

The Catholic Thing welcomes comments, which should reflect a sense of brevity and a spirit of Christian civility, and which, as discretion indicates, we reserve the right to publish or not. And, please, do not include links to other websites; we simply haven't time to check them all.

Comments (75)Add Comment
0
...
written by Walter, April 05, 2013
It's Friday and time for Mr. Ruse to fit in another dig against gays in his column. It's curious to observe how his utter obsession with homosexuals (and his inability to distinguish the issue from the person) has become an organizing principle of his public profession of the Catholic faith.
0
...
written by Allen Roth, April 05, 2013
How sad that Austin Ruse and The Catholic Thing are feeding the anti-Catholic story line that devout Catholics have declared war on Pope Francis. Repeated references to emails, blogs, and a TV interview hardly constitutes a traditionalist revolt against Francis. The devout Catholics I know are all praying for Francis to succeed by remaining true to the teachings of the Church. They don't give a hoot about whether he conducts himself as a man of the people or an Emperor. They pray he succeeds in defending the Church against its vicious enemies and they pray he does not succumb to the temptation of pleasing Caesar. A few are uneasy that he is from the Society of Jesus which for decades has been seen as being in the forefront of some very troubling actions (Covering the Cross at Georgetown is one oft repeated example.)Professional Traditionalist represent no one but their tiny group of followers. Most everyone else wish Francis and the Church great success.
0
...
written by Achilles, April 05, 2013
Walter, you must have difficulty reading, the article was about the new Pope. Your post is full of deceit and wrong judgment. It seems you can’t distinguish the person from the act, and you have misread the act as well. Mr. Ruse shows courage in speaking out against the second greatest moral outrage of these disordered times. However, I think he spends more time on the first. You slander him. You speak in favor of gay acts? And if someone doesn’t affirm you , you attack them? You are out of order Walter.
0
...
written by Titus, April 05, 2013
Well, I was going to remark on the unbecoming character of needlessly stoking unbecoming internecine squabbles. But Walter has already made the entire conversation strange enough.

So one technical point only: His Holiness did not ask the people in the square to bless him, and no layman, in the square, in New York, or anywhere, did bless him. A blessing is a very particular thing; it imparts a sacral character to the thing or person blessed. This is why not just anyone can bless a person or thing: priests may bless, because the power of the Church has been placed in their hands, and fathers may bless their children, because he has been appointed to rule over them by God. But neither Mr. Ruse, nor myself, nor a billion laymen waving their arms, could bless the Pope. Is it really that hard to understand?
0
...
written by Ken Tremendous, April 05, 2013
As a refugee of Traditionalism myself, I can identify with Mr. Ruse's journey.

If anything though he is too kind to the trads. "sensible traditionalist" is a contradiction in terms from where I sit. Many of them are quite frankly ignorant of the breadth of Catholic tradition, and further, the traditions that they like they choose, they choose selectively (ignoring others) turning them into idols and looking down on anyone else who does not view the Church or the world through their reactionary mindset.

They are much like Jewish converts in Paul's day who thought they had an inside track to God because of fleshly marks like kosher diet and circumcision, except they missed the sermon where Paul (yes as a liberal) relativizes these "traditions of the fathers" to fulfill the gospel by opening up the people of God potentially to the whole human family. What the trads don't get is that the Catholic Church is far too big to suit folks who have a remnant mentality.

So it's not surprising that they hate the Pope.

It will be interesting to see though-- if Francis chooses to emphasize even more than Benedict, the Catholic social gospel, its concern over wealth distribution and the poor, and its (at best) tepid appreciation of the merits of unbridled capitalism-- whether a broader swath of Catholic conservatives in the US, beyond the Latin Mass obsessives, will begin to publicly air their concerns.
0
...
written by Manfred, April 05, 2013
Headline: The Modernist New Pope: A Concern for Traditional Catholics. The Huffington Post, March 24, 2013
"A kind of papalotry is going around. It acts as if no matter what comes out of Rome, it must have been inspired by the Holy Ghost." William Marra+, PhD, former professor at Fordham University. There is no mention in your piece, Mr. Ruse, of the 150 year war in the Church between the modernists now progressives and the integralists now traditionalists. There is no mention either of the abrogation (de facto) of the TLM after the Council and the exposure of this fraud by Benedict with Summorum Pontificum in 2007. But to the immediate point-you do not mention the washing of the feet in the Roman juvenile detention center of two Muslims and two women in direct violation of the rubrics of the Church. If this pope or any other wants to act as if he is some CEO establishing his own "brand", I would prefer to see him as Senor Jorge Mario Bergoglio working with you and the Steubenville students in the U.N. waging the fight against violence toward women or some other social justice cause. He doesn't want to wear the mozzetta or the papal stole? He wants to offer among his first Masses ad populorum on a portable table? He wants to violate the rubrics of the Church he now heads? I am willing to wager that St. Bernadette Soubirous, whose body lies incorrupt in Nevers, France, who did not know what the words "Immaculate Conception" even meant when the Blessed Mother identified herself by this title, did not even know the name of Pius IX who was the Pope who declared the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception four years earlier (1854). I have commented here before that people would be better off looking toward their and their loved ones own salvation rather than have their moods affected by men who, while they are infallible, are not indefectible. Thank you for your poat.
0
...
written by Jacob, April 05, 2013
I think you're going a little too far here.

I'd rather see an article about the shortcomings of leftists than of traditionalists.

This is like suggesting we go after same sex marriage first and then worry about less important things, like abortion, later..

I only wish more people were as offended as the traditionalists by this leftist attitude of disrespect for past traditions. We do have to decide if we want to create a future of reaffirming our beliefs and traditions or constantly attacking the orthodox in our own ranks in order to feel hip and progressive..

They'd have to do a lot more, like, I don't know, murder a hundred million unborn babies, for me to be that upset with them. (Though I understand its easier to be angry at people when you know them well.)

One of the things that kept me from the Church is that very few people there, at least in America, seem to care at all about orthodoxy. Why don't you write articles about their shortcomings, rather than the people who want a little bit of orthodoxy back?
0
...
written by Grump, April 05, 2013
Austin, good column. I enjoy seeing homosexuals squirm so I applaud you for getting another "dig" in as Walter puts it. The so-called LGBT fringe, which represent such a small segment of the population, nonetheless have a disproportional loud and increasingly annoying voice in the public square, allied as they are with the mainstream media, Hollywood and today's generation of modern secularists who have little concept of right from wrong. Collectively, they remind me of those in ancient Sparta who would determine the winner of arguments solely by their ability to outshout their opponents.

Relativism abounds in the culture. Although I have been critical of the Church at times and did not care for Francis' washing the feet of a Muslim, I still think the Holy Spirit made the right call. Humility is in such short supply these days and it's refreshing to see a Pope on his knees and beseeching us to replace hate with love.

Homosexuals should understand that they are not hated but their behavior is; that is quite a difference. Nor can they make a case for so-called "gay marriage" on any reasonable ground, be it legal or moral. As a matter of public policy, they are generally responsible for an alarming increase in cases of STD and HIV, which are detrimental to family life and often have fatal consequences.

In more than 30 states, citizens have rejected same-sex marriage; in 9 states or localities the outcome was otherwise. The Supreme Court would be wise to allow the will of the sovereign states, as Jefferson and other Founders envisioned, to prevail rather than attempting to "federalize" the laws.

Lastly, to Catholics marriage has always been and always will be a sacrament, one of seven defined as "efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us. The visible rites by which the sacraments are celebrated signify and make present the graces proper to each sacrament. They bear fruit in those who receive them with the required dispositions."

I am lapsed but I still believe the Church will remain the last bastion of defending marriage as traditionally defined and outlined in Genesis and that Pope Francis will, as the Vicar of Christ, reinforce the Church's magisterium.
0
...
written by KM, April 05, 2013
Let us pray with great love for those ultra-traditionalists who are so angry. May God have mercy on them, forgive their sins and HEAL them..so that they may also rejoice!
0
...
written by Maggie-Louise, April 05, 2013
I feel as if I have just taken a blow to the side of the head--first from Mr. Ruse and second from the commenters who agree with and support his unfortunate essay.

I might have survived if KM had said, "Let us pray with great love for all who are angry", but that was the a third, perhaps fatal, blow.
0
...
written by Walter, April 05, 2013
Achilles - I don't speak in favor of gay acts or, for that matter, feeding an unrealistic expectation in some quarters that this Pope will somehow change Catholic moral teaching. The problem is that Mr. Ruse and others fail to convey the fullness of Catholic teaching on the issue of homosexuality. Read the catechism and there is a clear distinction of persons with homosexual attraction and the act itself (and it is much more nuanced and more demanding of all of us than the quip "love the sinner, hate the sin"). Unfortunately, people make easier targets and that's where Mr. Ruse consistently aims his comments (remember his use of the words "bitch slap" in one column?)

And, by the way, my comment is very much related to the new Pope. Francis did not hurl invective as archbishop, he washed the feet of AIDS patients. He also supposedly advocated to his brother bishops exploring whether gay civil unions should be worthy of consideration in Argentina, while not bending an inch on Church moral teaching.

Jesus never took delight in seeing people "squirm" in their sin. He did not call people names from afar. He met them where they were - in their everyday lives and full of sin - and with compassion. I am thankful, for I am a sinner too.
0
...
written by DeGaulle, April 05, 2013
Grump, regarding Pope Francis' washing the feet of a Muslim, what about: "The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me for a drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans)."?

Anyway, unlapse yourself, you're almost there!
0
...
written by william manley, April 05, 2013
Question of the day: can Mr. Ruse complete an essay without bashing gays?
0
...
written by Matthew Kilburn, April 05, 2013
I'm a traditionalist - though not such an extreme one as to think that Latin is the only acceptable language of prayer - and I must admit, I've been unhappy with many of the moves that Pope Francis has made. I've been doing my best to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I don't think I've ever felt more alienated from my faith than I have since he was elected. Faith should be glorious, because we are giving glory to the Almighty God. And yet the Pope won't even wear the appropriated garb to meet with visitors. The last time we had a Pope who "simplified" the Papacy, the Tiara - the ultimate symbol of Papal authority and leadership - was abandoned. Here we are half a century later, and we're still waiting for it to return. How much longer will we have to wait before we return to being unashamedly Catholic, embracing our sacred (and secular) traditions, and honoring our full history while doing out utmost to glorify God with all that we do?

And yet I could probably see past the Pope's shortcomings in this area, if only he would do a little more explaining to people of why he makes the choices that he does. He does not, after all, seem to be out to liberalize church practice as much as (being a Jesuit) he simply seems to have little care for such things as what clothes a minister wears. I can accept that. But then he needs to say so. He needs to say "I am a Jesuit, and for us, faith is a simple thing.This does not make it a casual thing, it means that our practice is different". If he did that, I would be content.

Unfortunately, in doing and not explaining, he is paving the way for those who would twist his actions for their own purposes.
0
...
written by Tom O'Reilly, April 05, 2013
If this site were a true "Catholic Thing", it would never allow such an unfair and misleading post to be published. As a result, many faithful Catholics who believe in the dogmatic teachings of the Church are being disparaged because they happen to be a part of a larger body that won't tow the modernist line. This post cleverly singles out a few foolish comments by some Catholics who, though recognizing that the progressive bishops are failing to shepherd their flock, are obviously confused because they have been subjected to the "diabolical disorientation" of the Second Vatican Council. When Jesus does return, He may well fail to find "any faith" because of what you modernist have done to His Church; but on that fateful day, the truth once taught by the true Catholic Church will be revealed. And woe to those who have abandoned that teaching.
0
...
written by DeGaulle, April 05, 2013
I would consider myself a 'traditionalist' with a small 't', and disagree with Modernism and Progressivism, as these movements are opposed to the Eternal. In other words, I consider a Roman Catholic. However, what is most important is the Doctrine, Dogma, and Moral Teaching of the Magesterium, of which Pope Francis seems to be a stout defender. Arguments about language, vestments and the washing of feet, while not unimportant, are inadequate grounds for Schism, I would think. Those of us who wish to maintain the Truth, and I believe that includes the author and every responder so far, need to maintain a common front against the modernists.
0
...
written by fleshman, April 05, 2013
Nice article Austin. The trads in my view are worse than liberals. The latter at least have the honesty to name the Church teachings that they reject (though they would even be more honest to leave the church entirely.)

The trads by contrast want to construct a parallel church, (really a parallel reality) in which they are the true standard bearers while everyone else is at best marginal. Liberals at least acknowledge their dissident status. Traditionalists think that everyone else is has defected but them.

Infallible but not indefectible, Manfred? Come on.
0
...
written by kristinajohannes, April 05, 2013
Each day I have been reading what the pope has to say in his homilies, speeches, etc. We are truly gifted in this pope, I hope people are not tempted to think otherwise.

The most moving thing I read though was this account of the aftermath of his visit to the tomb of St. Peter by those who accompanied him:

"Climbing back up the stairs and having reached the Clementine Chapel, Pope Francis became absorbed in prayer and repeated with a loud voice the three professions of Peter: “Lord, You are the Christ, Son of the Living God”; “Lord, to whom do we go? You have the words of eternal life”; “Lord, You know all things! You know that I love you!”. At that moment, we had the distinct impression that the life of Peter rose out of centuries past and became present and living in the current Successor of the Apostle Peter."
0
...
written by Gabe, April 05, 2013
Yes I'm sure that many of the commenters would have preferred yet another article directed at the usual liberal whipping boys. But I have to take my hat off to TCT for running this piece.

Center right Catholics have been playing footsie with traditionalists for far too long catering to their puffed up, self-righteous and schismatic spirits. No number of indults for Latin Masses is enough for them. Their narrative is that of a war between "integrists and modernists" which they lost and will not come back until the "winners" of this war that they imagine surrender to them. Which of course will never happen.

Maybe it is time for them to go have an "anti-Modernist" Vatican III council that they long for on their own, declare victory, elect their own Latinist pope and leave the rest of us in peace. I hate to say it, but many have spiritually left the Church decades ago.
0
...
written by Lester Zapata, April 05, 2013
It is sad to read this article. We have a holy and humble Pope. Stop beleving the conspiracy theory the holy spiriti have chosen the pope not men. The same people have thought about all popes John XXIII was to old John Paul II was comunist, etc, etc. The sabath was made for men not men for sabath , the same is for liturgi not made of liturgy a God. He has not change anything he is jut simple in his way to aproach God. Had you read his wonderfull homilies? You are thinkg not as a disciple of Cristh but as a politician. Sorry for saying that but that is truth , do not listen to the rumors. What the devil want is we to be divided.
0
...
written by Tom O'Reilly, April 05, 2013
Sorry Fleshman, you are so wrong...and you also are very uninformed about what the anti-modernist (“trads”, if you like that term) oppose. The allotted space for reply does not allow anywhere close to a full and complete response to your error, but to name just two: the redefining of “Religious Liberty” by the Council to now endorse the “right” for anyone to practice a false religion. This was complete reversal of Catholic dogma; and second, the adoption of the false teaching of Ecumenism. In that the Council has led Jews and non-Catholics to believe that they will be saved by their own religion; that there is no need or reason for them to convert and adopt the true teachings of Jesus Christ in the Catholic Church. You, like many modernist, are simply uninformed.
0
...
written by Achilles, April 05, 2013
Dear Walter, I remember when Mr. Ruse wrote “bitch-slap” and I was not comfortable with it, but take it in context. If I remember the context it was about how the transgender community reacted to Chas Bono or some such thing. It was a fitting allusion to the absurdity of the transgender movement in general.
I am not a huge fan of Mr. Ruse’s writing style, but I have not seen any evidence that he does not love the sinner. We must love the sinner, but part of that is speaking to the sinner with truth and charity. Show me where he has not done so.
Your accusation that he has an “utter obsession with homosexuals” and that this “has become an organizing principle of his public profession of the Catholic faith” is much more uncharitable than anything I have ever seen him write and quite frankly it is something I would expect to see from a homosexualist.
You must not grasp the severity of the damage that the LGBT is doing to civilization by trying to normalize “all things gay”. Focusing on just the loving part and excluding the truth part is a serious problem, remember what Jesus said to the woman caught in adultery “go and sin no more.” We are called to speak out on these things, you seem to be speaking out against those who speak out, what does that say about your public profession of faith?
0
...
written by debby, April 05, 2013
maggie-louise -
(i think you are the same louise who has goats and a driveway you could use some help shoveling in the winter - right?)
let me bind up your wounds and kiss your beaten cheeks my dear sister! you are too precious to let these comments pierce you so deeply.
i think austin gets a little away with himself in writing some times, but he is a really good, hard-working, in the thick of the smut of the world Catholic husband and father - if you ever heard him in person, you would "hear" some of his writing with a bit of a different "tone in his voice". frustration is so tough to convey without it sounding "hateful" -
if you call yourself a "Traditionalist" (i personally TRY to stay away from the little tiny boxes of labels-they remind me of coffins for the living), he is not talking about your "kind" of Traditionalist. not after what you wrote to me the other day on this site. so you felt a needless blow. besides, he's not the kind of man who would hit a woman - any "kind".
unfortunately, a post that was in support of Pope Francis was taken as a "Hating the Traddies" instead.
i say let's all HATE SIN, beg for mercy for ourselves and everyone around us, ask for an increase in true Charity, and love our neighbor - especially if we don't like them. i would love to believe that i know who i really am is Mary Magdalen. but i act like the rotten Pharisees trying to trip HIM up too often or make excuses for myself. so who am i to judge anyone? even if manfred aggravates me with his cutting remarks, he is in love enough with Jesus to want what he perceives is the Good and the Beautiful and the Right. God knows his heart. i do not. and God knows austin's...
May Our Lord and Lady have Mercy on us All. (don't leave this site - i love reading what you have to say.)
0
...
written by Manfred, April 05, 2013
One of the great difficulties posed for those who post or for those who comment is the enormous disparity in serious Catholic education among Catholics today. So much of the responses are emotional. Examples: The Latin Mass is called Traditional because it was THE ONLY MASS IN THE CHURCH FOR THE LAST FIVE HUNDRED YEARS until Vat. II. What passes for the Novus Ordo Mass today is man-made: lectors, permanent deacons, Eucharistic (formerly Extraordinary) ministers, female altar servers, Communion received in the hand while standing, the Presider facing the people-NONE of these were called for in Vat.II. Why are they allowed to continuie? Because the same Popes who cannot face the reality of Fr. Marciel Macial, Cdl Mahony, Cdl Bernardin, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Andrew Cuomo, Mario Cuomo, all the Kennedys, legions of predator priests, etc. cannot muster the courage singly or collectively to do ANYTHING about. Cardinals wear scarlet to remind them/us that they may have to give their blood for the Church, Mr. Kainz? The only thing these men would give anything for is government money, and yes, a tira misu. @Fleshman: The fact that the Pope, on matters of Faith or morals may speak INFALLIBLY, but that on other matters he is not INDEFECTIBLE are de Fide. No wonder the whole Institution is in the tank. We have the blind leading the blind. ("How can I be wrong, I mean so well?" Jane Fonda)
0
...
written by Rosemary, April 05, 2013
Yes, my friends and I did sort of pause after we heard the name of Bergoglio announced. What I am feeling so glad about is that he is truly God's man and not man's man. Like Benedict XVI and John Paul II, he forges ahead against the tide. BTW, I have read that fish swim and birds fly against the water and wind, respectively. It is actually easier for them to navigate that way. They don't "go with the flow". If they did, they would be overwhelmed by it.
0
...
written by David Naas, April 05, 2013
Please explain, why one has to be a "traditionalist" Catholic or a "modernist" Catholic, why one must be "liberal" or "conservative", why "cafeteria" Catholics on one side are any different than "cafeteria" Catholics on the other?
Whatever happened to being a mere Catholic?

One side preaches Obedience to teachings (magesterium) of the past, and repudiates Obedience to the teachings (magesterium) of the present. The other side prides itself on having Charity to those special objects of its affection, but has no Charity whatsoever for those who disagree with it.
Neither side exemplifies Obedience or Charity.

In all this, neither side is truly being Catholic, nor is either side being submissive to Christ and His Vicar.

Most churches have Confession this Saturday.
Confession is good for the (proud) soul.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 05, 2013
Achilles, one need not be a huge fan. A simple fan is fan enough.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 05, 2013
How many of us have read Pope Benedict's letter to Bishops of 10 March 2009, on the Remission of the Excommunication of the SPXX Bishops?

In that letter, one sees the mirror held up to various ravenous groups, Catholics of various factions, eating at one another.

Some portion of Catholics who are devoted to the pre-Bugnini Mass, I don't know what portion, behave in a composed and Christian way, I suppose Like the late Mr. Davies, or Msrg. Gamber. Others, I don't know what portion, rave and eat at The Church. Some even clawed at Pope Benedict, who defended their rights, calling him a "modernist," in my view, in ignorance about B16.

And there are those who are ready to smear all who are devoted to the so-called "EF Mass," branding all with the derogatory label of "Trads" and declaiming them. Again, disobeying the warning of Pope Benedict, when he quoted St. Paul's letter to the Galatians.

I have a friend who no longer talks to me. He is a member of SPXX. In my view, we could no longer engage in conversation, because he had written off many people like Benedict/ Ratzinger, and ironically, I don't think he ever actually read anything much from B16/R.

But as a man of 57 who has watched the whole ugly thing, the Church dropped the ball big-time with the production of the "menu" of "OF Masses" developed by the Bugnini committee. Clearly, the implementation of the Paul VI Missal was a determined program to suppress The Roman Canon, claiming continuity by retaining it as an "option," and then obviously suppressing it via the direction of the Bishops and the teaching in the seminaries. There is explicit testimony from supporters and critics of the Paul VI Missal that many supporters rejected the Catholic theology of the Roman Canon. Most Bishops ignored and persecuted people who rightfully and understandably clinged to what we are calling the "EF of The Mass." The Bishops had to be asked by Pope JP2 to "be generous" in enabling the celebration of the "TLM." They ignored Pope JP2. So because they were not generous, they had to be "over-ruled" by a truly generous man, Pope Benedict.

The Church since Pope Paul VI had really made a wreck of the liturgy, and many were/are trying to deconstruct the liturgy altogether. Benedict worked to pull some of the Church out of the ditch, and help get the Church back on the road in the right direction. And some followed. And some stayed in the ditch.
0
...
written by Maggie-Louise, April 05, 2013
Debby,

Thank you for the kind words and encouragement, and, yes, it was I who sent a message of encouragement to you the other day. So, you have the right Louise, except that it was sheep, not goats (and I miss them so much), and now our driveway is flat and short--and not nearly as satisfying to shovel, but the sheep are well cared for and loved just as much by their new shepherds.

I know Mr. Ruse is a fine Catholic gentleman (or he wouldn't be writing here), which is why I was so taken aback by his remarks.

One cannot prove a negative, so if I say that I am, as you say, a small 't' traditionalist, I cannot prove that that is not synonymous with hating those who prefer the Novus Ordo. Why is it assumed? Who makes those assumptions--and why? It reminds me of fourth-grade school girls who immediately assume that the new girl is a snob because she has curly blond hair.

As the day has worn on and I have checked back off and on, I have felt more and more as I did when my children were small and squabbling. I'd turn off the television set, bundle them up in their snow suits or their raincoats and shove them out the door--locking it behind them--and telling them that they could come back into the house when they learned to get along--and not a moment before. Another recurring thought was the famous Smothers' Brothers' argument: "Mama loves you more than she loves me."

It's lovely to hear from you, Debby, and I enjoy your comments very much, also. I recommend this site every chance i get, always assuring people that the commenters are respectful and polite, at least among the regulars. We'll just consider this an unfortunate aberration. Everyone is tired after the long hours of Easter services, one after another, and emotionally draining.

My sincere apologies to Mr. Ruse.
0
...
written by Fr. Bramwell, April 05, 2013
Really great column. It faces an issue that seems to be growing and that is speech that is largely unfounded. Few people actually know enough to make the statements that they do. There are facts missing and the heavy lifting that needs to be done is being avoided. Notably this is all happening on the Internet. On the Internet one can write anything. This is like shouting in the middle of a field. It gets heard by many people but no one thinks that important things are ever said in the middle of a field. So this kind of speech involves the illusion of person to person speech (which after all is the model) without the obligations of person to person speech. Responsible speech involves obligations like respect for the other person, giving them time to make a reply and so on. So except in properly framed occasions such as where an editor is involved and the person to person requirements are observed Internet speech is really more like noise and not worth much attention or time. It would fade to some degree if it was just ignored rather like a squeaky door hinge.
Noise has always been part of this culture, call it gossip or whatever. The Internet just makes it more possible because it is easier. The Internet does not change the conditions for being worthy of my attention.
0
...
written by fleshman, April 05, 2013
@ Tom

This is difficult I know but there is something called the development of doctrine. We have a much more refined understanding of 1)human dignity 2) seeking the truth and following ones conscience in the context of a pluralistic society. "tradition" only had limited insight into these questions since these questions never came up in world of antiquity--or at least not in the same way.

Again, for someone who is looking for a church that purports to stay frozen in time and never advances in her understanding of revelation--you're barking up the wrong tree. You should listen when others try to give you fraternal correction.

But as it is, I think you'd be a better fit for a fundamentalist style of "trad catholicism" --the one that simply memorizes and recycles and offers simplistic answers to all of life's mysteries but has no ability to engage the world as it is or even really penetrate into the mystery of revelation. You leave the Church and embrace your own interpretation of "dogma" then you are no different than Luther or Calvin. It's the most dangerous form of idol worship since it wraps itself in all the trappings of truth.
0
...
written by senex, April 05, 2013
After reading the 31 comments (there maybe more now), I am more dismayed by the mostly angry and immoderate tone of many of the commentators. And all this on first impressions about a man no one heard of or knew before. Let’s give Pope Francis time. He will define himself over the next 6 months or so. Then all of us can take a better and saner look and hopefully have a more informed perspective. Meanwhile let’s keep in mind St. Augustine’s advice: Unitas in essentiis; diversitas in otris; caritas in omnibus. For you traditionalists this translates roughly as: Unity in essential things; diversity in other things; but charity in everything. Let’s try it for a while.
0
...
written by Achilles, April 05, 2013
I am a fan Mr. Ruse, and I admit a simple one, but I am a fan.
0
...
written by Carlos, April 05, 2013
Even though quite apparently I'm become more of a trad I have to agree with this article on how this type of community behaves. Honestly, as much as I love the Latin mass as long as the pope sticks to the most important points of Catholic theology then things seem to be alright, for now. Maybe people here are judging him too quickly, and is it just me or are the hard-core trads, especially the SSPX, becoming more like the Pharisees Jesus condemned so many times because of how obsessioned they are with Tradition?
0
...
written by Wulfrano Ruiz Sainz, April 06, 2013
Do no trust Pope Inodorous I.
0
...
written by Grump, April 06, 2013
A Ruse by another other name would ... never mind : )
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 06, 2013
Amen Fr. Bramwell.

Tradition is the way for handing over the truth from one generation to the next, and it is a hallmark of Catholicism. It can be misunderstood as a dead thing (both by those in The Church, and outside The Church), because it is an ancient oak, it looks very old, with its pendulous branches, but from that living wood springs the green life stamped with the same identity as the sapling from 2000 years ago.

To be Catholic is to believe in tradition. To be Catholic and to oppose tradition is incongruous, a loss of Catholic identity. Benedict XVI knew this and dealt with the problem vigorously. John Paul II wrote about this in his last book, "Memory and Identity."

To be Catholic is to love the ancient tree, and its new growth, and to know what is not of the tree.
0
...
written by Maggie-Louise, April 06, 2013
Thank you, Chris in Maryland. That is the most sane comment posted here. A refreshing conclusion.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 06, 2013
One of the problems with some trads is they reject tradition and don't believe in all the Councils.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 06, 2013
Thank you Maggie-Louise for your kind words of support. God our Father bless your Holy Church, and your servannt Pope Francis, and your servant Pope Benedict, and all of us sailing in the barque of St. Peter.
0
...
written by John Sobieski, April 06, 2013
The word "hate" is thrown around all too loosely these days--usually by leftists engaging in their usual demagoguery. A pity to see Ruse use the same tactic. His pieces on events at the UN are informative, but these hit pieces against traditionalists are useless.
0
...
written by George Sim Johnston, April 06, 2013
People on the hard Catholic "right" and "left" mirror one another in curious ways. Both have the attitude that they will agree with the Magisterium so long as the Magisterium agrees with them. Both are overly preoccupied with "power" arrangements within the Church. Neither is very apostolic; they are more interesting in winning skirmishes with their "enemies" within the Church than evangelizing. Neither accepts the documents of Vatican II. Neither lets up on what they probably consider to be "righteous" anger.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 06, 2013
Sim, it's interesting. In the interview with John Rao he says something like "one good thing is now we can see the end of Pope Weigel." On the one hand, according to Rao, the church is being destroyed but at least we can get rid of Weigel. This goes to your point about the struggle for Rao being about power.
0
...
written by Maggie-Louise, April 06, 2013
God bless you, John Sobieski, and Chris in Maryland, also. The labels that barely concealed a (perhaps unintended) contempt, Chris's reminder of the importance of tradition, and now your post on the overwrought and careless use of the word "hate" all explain what was ill-conceived in this essay. I understand now what lay behind my visceral response to the essay.

I join you in your prayer for the Church and add to it a prayer for each of us who waits impatiently for God to reveal His purpose and plan. Thank you again.

God bless our new Holy Father, Pope Francis.
0
...
written by Gabriel, April 07, 2013
Wow, what jerky comments from the "good guys", right?

I'm a convert, and only by a few years. I have never been a "trad", indeed I really have not even been given the chance yet. But many of their arguments seem quite compelling to me, and I have not found them to be the jerks that your all describing...actually, given the comments thrown around here, that would be some of you guys. Do any of you even understand their arguments? Or do you just take a few bad experiences with some of them and then stereotype? Seriously, when your trying to make the other guy look bad, you usually avoid making yourself look that way, which many of you have not done.
From my experience, Trads love the Church, and were/are horrified by what has happened to it post-V2. While it's true that many have come to identify these problems as stemming from the council itself, few are schismatics or desire to be so. They just love the Church they once knew, and wonder why the Church has seeming abandoned itself. Seriously, Pre-V2 Catholicism does seem a bit different than the Post-V2 faith, I picked up on that when I was pondering crossing the tiber, and indeed I had many people joyously point that put to me as well. I wonder how many Saints, Popes, Crusaders, and simple believers would have felt in this matter? Methinks they would be siding with the Trads, and scratch their heads at many of the "developments of dogma" from the council.
Again, not a radtrad here. Don't shoot your friends. Look, I'm a Catholic, I accept all the teachings and all that is implied, etc, etc, and I will be faithful. But that does not mean I can't opine for the Old (Catholic) world, especially when compared to our lovely age. I think that's what it is for most Trads actually. They long for the old world the faith had made, where as I think many of the, hmm, I don't know what to call you guys, "non-trads but not leftists either Catholics", are classical liberals, and are quite fine with this whole setup, thus why you don't find many problems with V2 seeing as how it seemed to essentially embrace classical liberal ideas, sentiments etc. Maybe that is what is behind this all. At least I think so. As for myself, while I may not be a trad, I long for that old world too, and I often find myself wondering why many Catholics so wish to dispel their history, their traditions, their ideas, or at least hide them in shame. From my experience, as a man, not just a Catholic, the left, all of it (that includes the right-lefties i.e. classical libs, I'm not using the American model here, it's defective) are the ones who commit this wrong the most.
0
...
written by Wulfrano Ruiz Sainz, April 07, 2013
I don't hate Pope Inodorous I. I pity him. He is just a puppet. The puppet-master is Big Z.
0
...
written by Manfred, April 07, 2013
Dear Austin: I am in a circle with wide peripheries which include Prof. John Rao, and I have heard him speak. A lot of these ideas were captured in a book by Ferrara and Wood called "The Great Facade". The quest is not for power but for the Truth. Weigel and others represent the Neo-Catholics, i.e., those who rushed out and accepted Vat. II and its "teachings" without question. Weigel has positioned himself as the authority on John Paul II having written a comprehensive biography of that Pope. Unfortunately, a lot of sound Catholics have some serious questions about JP II including what appears to be his support for Universal Salvation which, as you are aware, is a heresy. Assisi I and Assisi II were a disgrace. EITHER ROMAN CATHOLICISM IS THE ONLY TRUE FAITH WHICH CAN ASSIST ONE TO ACHIEVE SALVATION WITH GOD IN HEAVEN, AS ITSELF CLAIMS, OR IT IS A FRAUD. My notes tell me that you are a convert. You should really have the good sense to step back and let the conversation be conducted by trained, informed Catholics who have invested their entire lives as solid members of the Faith.
0
...
written by Achilles, April 07, 2013
Oh my goodness Manfred, are you serious?

Gabriel, I too lament the state of the world- “So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”

our fallen nature, satan and the world are our enemies- self-deceit blinds us to the first.

good luck!
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 07, 2013
Manfred:

I am sure that many people who style themselves Catholic believe in Universal Salvation, and we can see evidence of that in what they say and write. The Catechism of 1994 signed by John Paul II contradicts Universal Salvation. Please point out where John Paul II proclaimed or otherwise professed Universal Salvation.


0
...
written by Maggie-Louise, April 07, 2013
Dear Gabriel,

My husband and I, too, are converts (twice)--ten years in the Faith on either side of a 20-year stint in the wilderness. We have experienced the "old world" Catholic Faith only in the last year or so. This Easter, we drove five states away to experience the old world, and it was more than worth it. It was interesting to note that we senior citizens were too few to affect the average age of about 30 or so in a fairly large congregation with lots of children. As an aside, I didn't think that children were capable of such good and devout behavior any more--even at 1:00 in the morning. It was an FSSP parish.

Perhaps what makes the traditional Mass so consistently God-centered is that there is no room for experimentation: guitars (although mostly passe, now, I think), hand-clapping, hands waving in the air, holding hands (what IS there about hands?--I have been struck in the stomach more than once by someone who wanted to hold my hand. Wiht my eyes closed in prayer, I didn't see their outstretched hand), --bad, ego-centered music, 1960's peace signs waving in the air. There can be no question of their sincerity--growing up post-V2, that's all they know.

Our pastor celebrates the Novus Ordo, and he does so with the utmost devotion, taking every opportunity to emphasize reverence and dignity in the liturgy. Catholics come from four states (they're small) to worship in this parish. And that's what it is--worship. Our pastor is not afraid to say to his colleagues, "Rome has spoken." But there is only so much one can do with the N.O.

Ours is a Polish parish, and many of the Polish customs are carried on--except the Latin Mass. I can't help but think of Polish history: centuries of invasion, persecution, repression of language and religion, oppression. Would the N.O. have survived 10 centuries of that? Would Fr. Cisek have had any spiritual sustenance saying the N.O. from memory in the Luibianka in Moscow? or Fr. Kolbe, in Auschwitz? would Edith Styne or any of the millions of Polish martyrs have found sustenance in memories of the N.O.? I don't know, but I can't help but wonder. "Dewfall" can carry only so much baggage, and that seems to be the word that is cited to confirm beauty and legitimacy in the new translation.

You can search the web for parishes where the Tridentine Mass is said. I hope you find it. God bless you.
0
...
written by George Sim Johnston, April 07, 2013
We are still having a discussion about the boundaries of Christ's salvific graces? The teaching is not difficult to understand. God wills the salvation of all men, as Saint Paul writes. Salvation comes only through Christ's redeeming action on the Cross and from nowhere else (not from Buddha sitting under the bo tree, for example). All graces are mediated through the Church, which is Christ's mystical body. However, the Church has visible and invisible boundaries. People who are canonically outside the Catholic Church can be saved. This was spelled out by Pius IX in "Quanto Conficiamur Muerore" (1863) and Pius XII in the famous letter to the Archbishop of Boston (1949).
0
...
written by Manfred, April 07, 2013
Thanks for your query, Chris. I will get the reference I read some years ago (Threshold of Hope?) and get it to you.
The very fact JP II called both Assisi meetings makes my point as he gave other religions, many of them pagan, a "recognition" which they did not deserve. The idea that the Jewish people have a separate Covenant for their salvation which JP II and Benedict mentioned, is an absolute falsehood and has been for millenia.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 07, 2013
The great facade is a vicious uncharitable attack on the Holy Father. Tom Woods, one of the authors, later denounced the book. I know these guys, palled around with them.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 07, 2013
Well Manfred,

Yes, I do believe that the Gospel indicates that the old covenant was ended by the new and everlasting covenant.

But no, I don't believe you have proved your point.
0
...
written by Graham Combs, April 07, 2013
In Sunday's bulletin the pastor had to warn extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion to "dress appropriately." There is something to note in the casualness of the Eucharist. And that parish where I attend Mass provides a high Mass but not a Tridentine Mass. In what are still solemn times in South East Michigan one hopes for a liturgy that does not lurch from the holy to the banjo/mandolin/saxophone and back again. In a very real sense, it is difficult to get into mood for receiving the Body of Christ. And curiously, the other comment in the bulletin was that some Masses are so short of these ministers that the parish is thinking of offering Holy Communion only under one species. Those masses by the way are the most extremely "contemporary," from what I have heard.

As for the new Holy Father, can one be blamed for a certain wariness given the great disappointments in leadership provided by the Bishops Conference and its leaders since January 2012? I have too much respect and gratitude for Benedict XVI's service to Christ and His Church to begrudge him his last attempt at retirement. But yes, I miss him every day.
0
...
written by Manfred, April 08, 2013
@Chris in Maryland: You might want to check Ralph Martin's new book "Will Many be Saved?" in which he reviews the approach to this subject by the Fathers of the Council. He references Paul VI's and JP II'S encyclicals on evangelization, Evangelii Nuntiandi and Redemptoris Missio and criticizes them for omitting "the traditional focus on the eternal consequences that rest on accepting or rejecting the gospel that motivated almost two thousand years of mission." While the Council Fathers were clear there was a "possibility" that non Catholic Christians and non-believers might be saved; by means of an "unwise silence" (Martin), it began to be accepted that "probably" these others would be saved. This shift is what lent itself to the drop off of evangelization which Fr. Bramwell cites in his recent post here.
0
...
written by John Sobieski, April 08, 2013
The suggestion that Tom Woods would side with Austin Ruse on this point is laughable. I know Tom Woods. And he did not denounce his own book.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 08, 2013

John,

I have made no claim about Tom Woods agreeing with this column or not. However, he did denounce The Great Facade and he is no longer in contact with his co-author Chris Fererra et al.
0
...
written by Jack Whitler, April 08, 2013
Wow, if the judgmental tone of this article and of many of the comments I see here is supposed to inspire new comers to this site, I'm afraid an opportunity has been missed. What I have read from tradition minded folks over at the Remnant and elsewhere has made a much more favorable impression. I'm still learning and trying to understand Catholicism, so forgive me for making this my last visit to this site.
0
...
written by John Sobieski, April 09, 2013
Mr. Ruse,

I said you suggested it. You are misrepresenting Tom Woods' position with respect to his book, and pretending to make him an ally of yours. He regretted certain statements he made in the book regarding then Cardinal Ratzinger. That is all. As for his relationship with Chris Ferrara, that falling out has to do with a disagreement over economics.

He would in no way support your vicious attack on traditionalists. He counts himself as one, and would certainly share our concerns regarding Cardinal Bergoglio's "coolness" with respect to the Traditional Latin Mass. That coolness is not supposed, as you say, but is an established fact.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 09, 2013
Sorry, John. You are simply wrong about Tom and the book. And neither am I "suggesting" that Tom and I agree on traditionalism. There is more to Tom's split with the Remnant crowd, not just Ferrara, than economics, too.
0
...
written by John Sobieski, April 09, 2013
You disagree with Woods about traditionalism, yet you hold up his supposed denunciation of himself (your source please?) as evidence that traditionalists are Pope-haters? Judging by what he's written on his website about the Pope, he must still fit your definition of a Pope-hater. He hasn't written about the number of times the thurible must be swung--I haven't read anything on that. You accuse Dr. Rao of "claiming the personal authority to pronounce on what’s authentically Catholic." Frankly, I see more of that coming from you.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 09, 2013
Go to Tom's website where he lists all his books. That vicious tome is missing. He does not own it any more.
0
...
written by John Sobieski, April 09, 2013
Not having his book up for sale on his website hardly amounts to a denunciation. And is that really good enough for you? On March 15th, he wrote a blog post entitled: "The New Pope and the Liturgy: Bad News." Seems to me he still belongs on your Pope-hater blacklist.

If only you attacked the errors of the Protestants or the Muslims with such alacrity. You've got it out for the traditionalists even though they represent a minute segment of the Catholic world. One has to wonder why.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 09, 2013
John, you're kind of becoming unhinged here as per usual in some circles.

The only reason I brought up Tom is because someone up there used that vicious book as proof of something or other. I was merely and ONLY pointing out that the author of the book no longer claims the book and has distanced himself from it. Ok?
0
...
written by russ rentler, April 10, 2013
Austin:
Your article was a tremendous breath of fresh air on the blogosphere which has been so clouded and polluted by those nay sayers of our pope and Church. Sadly, those naysayers have unwittingly been influenced by the spirit of Martin Luther who claimed to know more than the pope at the time. We all know how that turned out. Keep up the good work! God bless you for not being afraid to speak the truth.
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 10, 2013
Thanks, Russ...and very nice to meet you, virtually. Keep up your own good work...
0
...
written by rod, April 10, 2013
I am a traditionalist and proud of it.
The fact that people seem put off by trads not fully embracing and showering the new pope with praise doesn't mean they hate him, but what it does mean is that the pope's since V2 need to make a greater effort to restore the trust that was broken with the Catholic laity after their irresponsible and high-handed attempts to change the Church to make peace with the modern world.
If the Church doesn't respect its own traditions and if the new pope doesn't respect his own office of pope enough to embrace the signs and symbols, then why should lay people respect him personally?
I pray for him, but I don't like him. Until he genuflects at the consecration at mass and respects the liturgical rules and the symbols of his office, which are not his to arbitrarily disregard, he doesn't deserve to be admired and praised.
Pray for the pope, that he will act more as a pope and less as Cardinal Bergoglio.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 10, 2013
Manfred:

Thank you for your most recent reply...I do agree that there is reason for Catholics to fear the Lord, and the possibility that his justice may mean that many of us are not saved. And there is also the deference to Him, whose mercy endures forever. As for myself, woe to me if I do not live The Gospel, and give witness to The Lord.

I will read the Ralph Martin piece.

I close by stating again, the Catechism of JP2's signature, and Ratzinger's 'nihil obstat' contradicts universal salvation, making that claim against them a big mistake.
0
...
written by Chris in Maryland, April 10, 2013
I agree with Rod...every priest, every Catholic should genuflect at the consecration...period.

Every knee should bend...
0
...
written by Austin Ruse, April 10, 2013
Bingo, Rod. You make my case.
0
...
written by stan J, April 13, 2013
How does one morph from that of a Traditionalist to that of a Compromise Catholic?

The old Communist strategy of two steps forward, one back has proven successful since 1917. They understand that with every democratic culture therein dwells a percentage of willing compromisers. With patience the left eventually back their rivals to the proverbial cliff.
0
...
written by Jacob, September 21, 2013
This is the ugliest, most pathetic, most un-Christ-like article I've ever seen on TCT.

You can be sure I won't ever donate to this website again..

I guess I'll be "hateful" with all my "Trad" friends at Latin Mass, while Mr. Ruse continues to pontificate because he's insecure about his dance with heresy.

Austin, you're acting like an angry little child, and the way you're policing your own comment board proves it.. Remove the log in your eye, REMOVE THE LOG IN YOUR EYE!!!
0
...
written by Jacob, September 21, 2013
And Father Bramwell, I'd be happy to say any of this to you in person..

My name is Jacob Richard Ford and I go to the Latin Mass at St. Mary Magdalen chapel in Camarillo, CA. Why don't you come confront us and tell us how we're all heretics for not sharing your beliefs on everything?

What a joke.. A bunch of children screaming how everyone else is so childish.
0
...
written by anonymous, May 07, 2014
this post has got the question wrong. the question should be, why does pope francis hate catholics and hate the church that baptised and confirmed him? and further, hating it as he obviously does, why did he agree to take on the role of pope? (admittedly he has refused the title). and why refuse to live in the vatican? an already paid for accommodation, to go live in an expensive hotel? the question, as I said, should be, why does francis hate his faith?

Write comment
smaller | bigger

security code
Write the displayed characters


busy
 

Other Articles By This Author

CONTACT US FOR ADVERTISERS ABOUT US
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner