Catholic Bloggers And Unfaithful Priests.

Bad priests don't like it very much...

I read around of an otherwise unknown to me, but apparently respected priest launching a torpedo or two against “Traditionalist” Catholic bloggers, for the reasons you can easily imagine.

I allow myself here to express a couple of thoughts, which may or may not meet your approval.

Firstly, let me say my blogging activity – provided you want to call me a “Traditionalist” blogger; which is fine, though I am certainly not one of those who refuse to attend Novus Ordo masses – is first and foremost the result of the astonishing cowardice I have in the meantime elected as the main feature of the V II clergy. Whilst countless people like yours truly do not miss an occasion to risk losing even a dear friend rather than compromise on our allegiance to Jesus, it is rare to see a priest able and willing to even risk the one or other harridan in his own parish declaring that she is “hurt” by his being Catholic.

Whilst everyone of us must do his best, it is first and foremost the job of the priest to make himself unpopular so that he may save souls. The priest is also the one to whom a degree of unpleasantness – or worse – in the pursuit of his profession can and must be asked in much greater measure than to a layman. Why? Because he is a priest, period.

Blogs like mine – and countless others – are the result of the genuine suffering and righteous anger of many sincere Catholics who feel that the post V II clergy are culpable of dereliction of duty in the gravest of ways, and possibly in an unprecedented manner in the history of Christianity. Our elementary religious feeling simply rebels at seeing so much – I must say the word, because I find it appropriate – brown-nosing to the world, going on at all ecclesiastical levels since the beginning of the Sixties. This, and nothing else, is what leads us to blog. I for myself would not even dream of being here at 11pm writing this angry blog post, rather than sitting with a good book, a glass of Porto and Schubert in the background, if I knew the clergy are doing their job. If they did, blogs like ours would be of no interest for the reader even provided we were – which would not be my case – willing to write them. People would, very simply, follow the events in the Catholic world through the interviews, the homilies, the books, the blogs, the calls to battle of the good clergy themselves. If we had a halfway decent clergy, every church would resound of their rage against the abominations and godlessness of our times, and the parish magazines would contain long lists of locally, nationally and internationally excommunicated politicians. Instead, the pulpits – if they are still used – are generally used for convenient waffling about peace, luv, social justice, & Co.

We talk and write, because our priest and bishops and popes don't. Our blogs are read, because good Catholics have pretty much nowhere else to go.

Secondly, most of us are not priests. We do not pretend to be what we aren't, and we do not demand – nor would we have any right to – that our words are listened to with particular attention or deference because of some role that we have. Mostly, we are angry laymen fed up with the ravaging of Christianity whilst the main concern of the clergy seem to be to encourage illegal immigration, or to pursue a populist agenda of the stupidest sort. As a result, each and every reader who happens to land on our blogs is forced to evaluate it according to the quality of the arguments therein contained, rather than the position of the one making the argument. The explosion of traditionalist Catholic blogging seems to indicate the arguments of the bloggers aren't bad. Alas, they can't be silenced with Clericalist arguments, because these aren't unknowing peasants. Too bad, uh, Father Grima?

Thirdly, many bloggers and commenters – like myself – are totally anonymous. Not even my mother knows that I write a blog. Absolutely no one this side of heaven, though I am sure the Blessed Virgin is aware. If I were to get knocked down by a bus, or a flower vase were to fall on my head, this blog would stop suddenly, and no one would ever know why. No friend can ever compliment me saying “I have read your latest blog post, great!” I will get no kudos from anyone in flesh and blood, someone who knows who I actually am. Many others do, in their own way, the same. Thousands, as I write, blog and comment and quarrel and stay up late at night for no other reason than their love of God and their suffering at seeing Christianity wiped out from the West; all this whilst our utterly, utterly disgraceful Pope tells us it's good that Catholics are now a minority in Italy, because they can be the leaven and blabla and blabla. Heaven, the bread was already leavened! One can't destroy a Catholic culture with fifty years of cowardly nonsense and then say it's all fine, because the destruction allows us to build one! Such is the stupidity of our clergy, and such is the reason why so many blog, or comment, or read, or symphatise. A priest who can't understand – and be glad of it – that countless people stay in front of a monitor at night because they love the Church and thirst for sound words they don't hear from the pulpit is a priest unworthy of his habit. Many of those, I am afraid. The majority in the West, I can safely say. But no, for the bad priest it is not he who has completely failed. Those who are bad are the critical bloggers, and their readers.

Which is why many others besides yours truly sit here blogging or reading or commenting until too late. Gratis et amore Dei. Often without even our friends or relatives knowing. And all this should come from… what exactly? Vanity? Greed? Boredom? Or perhaps, simply, Catholicism?

It would be high time a couple of priests and bishops and the occasional Pop bishop of Rome understood the utter failure of the clergy to halfway decently transmit and defend Catholic values is what caused the explosion of conservative Catholic blogs. Thanks to the technical developments of the last decade, the bloggers are simply doing – as well as they can – the job the clergy has systematically refused to do since the beginning of the Sixties. Not to understand this means not to understand much, at all.

Let the clergy start being Catholics again, instead of a bunch of effeminate idiots waffling about the “joy of giving witness” whilst Sodomarriage becomes law, abortion is considered normal, fornication a bodily function, and contraception a human right. Let them start being unpopular, and hated by the world, rather than the usual slightly high-pitched chaps who are “always so nice” with their relentless message of universal salvation and quiet complicity with every sin or outright abomination under the sun. Let them be savagely attacked by the same atheists newspapers and journalists they now go at such extreaordinary lengths of nonsense and even heresy to please.

Let them start doing it. You will see, when this happens many bloggers will do like myself.

They will switch to a good book.



Posted on November 4, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 11 Comments.

  1. Well said, indeed.

    Let them consider the scandal of the modernist blogs that undermine Catholic truth and the scandal of ‘theologians’ that preach the lies of Satan. Funny how the cries of “sensus fidei” and “liberty of conscience” only seem to apply to those resisting the undermining of the Faith.

    And do stay away from flower vases for a little while longer!

  2. Mundabor, you are so correct. We tend to blog because we are irritated: my concern is (and I am speaking here only for myself) is that my tendancy to wrath will be let loose. Let our righteous anger be a controlled anger, and may it lead to prayer, for a godly church.

    • My suggestion is that in these cases the decision is to speak out first and do our best to control our anger second.
      We shall not be silenced merely because we are humans.

  3. Thank you for stating it so clearly.Thank God for bloggers like you who help us stay sane and provide a place of truth…a port in the storm. Thank you.

  4. Wonderful post!

    St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, says:

    “Who, asks St. John Chrysostom, has forced you to be come a priest ? Before your ordination, adds the saint, you ought to have examined your fitness for this duty; but now that you are a priest you must work and not examine; and if you are not fit for the work, you must qualify yourself for it.”


    Priests who see insults offered to God and remain silent are called by Isaias mute dogs. But to these mute dogs shall be imputed all the sins that they could have but have not prevented. “Do not be silent,” says Alcuin, “lest the sins of the people be ascribed to you.” Some priests abstain from reproving sinners because they do not wish to disturb their peace of mind; but, says St. Gregory, for this peace that they desire, they shall miserably lose peace with God. An animal falls, exclaims St. Bernard, and many are found to lift it; a souls falls, and no one is found to raise her up. Yes, sinners are not converted, although, according to St. Gregory, priests are specially appointed by God to point out the path of virtue to those who go astray.
    Hence St. Leo adds: ” The priest who does not withdraw another from error proves that he is himself involved in it.” St. Gregory writes that we kill as many souls as we see committing sin without endeavoring to apply a remedy.
    Page 64
    Doctor of the Church
    PDF online avaivlable

  5. “If a parish priest doesn’t want to be damned, and if there is any loose living in his parish, he must spurn the very thought of public opinion and the fear of being despised or hated by his parishioners. Even if he were certain of being lynched when he came down from the pulpit, that must not stop him from speaking out against it.” – St John Vianney

  6. I know the priest in question well. He is generally very good. He does have concern that people will be scandalized out of the Faith, go sede vacantist, whatever. He’s seen it happen many times. But I think the blanket opposition to faithful Catholic blogs – which is pretty much what he communicated, just condemning them all without noting any redeeming qualities – is a bad mistake. I also think he may have been directed, more or less, to give this sermon. The pastor of our parish has no use for blogs, and some tendencies towards clericalism, in spite in general being a very good priest. It could be he got some direction from the pastor, or – and this I fear more – from the fraternity he belongs to. I am getting the sense this fraternity is wanting to lower its profile and doesn’t feel comfortable having a bunch of souls who are associated with it – lay or otherwise – out there criticizing the Pope.

    They are having a sort of emergency meeting of the entire North American district next week. For the first time in years (first time I can remember), we will have no priests the entire week at our parish. Related? I don’t know. It could simply be election time, but generally they try to prevent the people being totally shepherd-less for days on end. My nightmare scenario is that some soft elements in this fraternity will try, as they did in France back in 2000, to force the fraternity to compromise on the Novus Ordo or something. That we’ll see a Franciscans of the Immaculate scenario play out with the fraternity.

    That’s probably extremely unlikely, but who would have predicted, a year ago, what’s happened with the FFIs?

    • I see far more risk of Sedevacantism, or apostasy, if this fantasy concept of the impeccable, Holy Ghost-remote controlled papacy is promoted further. Then when people wake up they might throw away the baby with the bath water.
      Surprising, also, that the priest in question is not worried for the overexcited liberal hype, which is absolutely everywhere.


    • It wasn’t his best sermon. I feel it was made under some duress.

      Normally, he’s stellar.

%d bloggers like this: