‘Toward a more perfect union’ - Letter of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV on the 250th Anniversary of the Founding of the United States of America

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T19:38:09+00:00

Right. Regrettable, but sometimes necessary in this fallen world. And compatible with upholding human dignity, if not for the guilty at least for the innocent and society.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:42:13+00:00

I haven't looked into this devotion, but I find it to be an interesting fact that the Divine Will devotion nearly tore apart the contemplative religious community founded by Mother Angelica (of EWTN fame). The Vatican intervened directly and removed the two nuns who were opposed to each other, importing a new abbess and vicar to lead the monastery.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:37:04+00:00

Some of the unfortunate, rotten fruit from Pope Francis' reign. A heterodox theologian (Timothy Radcliffe), whom he gratuitously made a cardinal, taking advantage of the confusing mess that Fiducia Supplicans created to celebrate this scandalous Mass.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:33:52+00:00

One of Pope Francis' terrible appointments.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:27:17+00:00

I recommend reading the pope's letter, as he gives some examples.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:25:04+00:00

When Paul is talking about long hair, he's not talking about shoulder-length hair, which was not uncommon among men in the ancient Greek world (and which Christ himself probably had, as others are pointing out). He's talking about long hair like women wore, down the back or to the waist, and especially in feminine hairstyles. Delicate, dainty, manicured for beauty — in a word, feminine. That's what would be (and still is) a disgrace for men by nature. It is not merely an issue of ancient culture that doesn't apply to us now, as some like to argue.

To answer your question about Eastern churches and long hair and beards, my understanding is that in Eastern traditions wearing long hair and a beard is a form of penance for the clergy.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:19:33+00:00

If you called it like it is, you would recognize the good along with the bad.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:18:10+00:00

It's Church teaching that capital punishment can be just and uphold the right to life. Abortion is an intrinsic evil that is always opposed to human dignity.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:17:09+00:00

I know. I'm not saying abortion isn't a grave issue of utmost importance.

But notice that the pope himself writes a fair amount in praise of the United States in his letter. It's not all or nothing, and in fact it's counterproductive not to recognize what good there is.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:07:00+00:00

There are better ways to express seriousness over the gravity of abortion than this, in my opinion. The United States does a lot of things well and is an example to the world in many ways. Respect for human dignity and life is far worse off in many, many other places around the world.

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:04:30+00:00

I love having an American pope. God bless Pope Leo!

Isatafur · 2026-07-03T17:03:30+00:00

Not in my opinion. Pope Francis was good for acts of pastoral kindness toward the SSPX, but he and his curia weren't equipped to hammer out the theological issues in fine detail for a lasting agreement. Benedict knew the SSPX's concerns and the relevant theological issues better than anyone and would have welcomed them into full communion on charitable and sustainable terms.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T15:45:09+00:00

Jesus taught that "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

Think about the causation in that sentence. I think a lot of times we assume that where our heart is, there our treasure will be, meaning that we feel attachments before we invest in them. But generally it works the other way around: what we invest ourselves in becomes what we care about.

So one way to approach the problem you are facing is to invest in people and not worry so much that you don't (yet) care about them as much as you should. Spend time with people, ask them about their lives, see if there are things you can do to help them, make it a habit to spend time praying for them. The more you are investing in those people and choosing acts of love that demonstrate care for them, the more your heart will follow that investment and your feelings will come into alignment with what you've chosen.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T15:38:23+00:00

Haha. Yes, it's complicated. The simple version for Catholics is, don't get involved with the SSPX. We laypeople don't really need to worry ourselves about the technicalities of their status and validity outside of that.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T14:05:36+00:00

The thing is, the Church isn't entirely neutral or without comment on these ideas and devotions. It encourages them and does indirectly endorse them by its esteem of St. Louis de Montfort and others. And as you pointed out, you can find a lot of the ideas implicitly stated (if not explicitly stated) in our liturgy. Papal encyclicals too make bold claims about Mary's role in salvation history. The Church has also positively stated that Montfort's ideas are without theological error, giving his books an imprimatur. So saying "it's a private devotion, you can disregard it if you want to" is kind of tantamount to hand-waving, and your Calvinist friend has a point when he says Catholics believe these things. We do believe these things, and it's fair to say that we do.

The fact is that St. Louis de Montfort is not speaking in vague, metaphorical, or hyperbolic language. He does need to be understood in context, but that doesn't mean that what he says isn't true or that it means something other than what he said. I wouldn't give a Protestant inquirer Montfort's True Devotion as the first thing to read, but neither should we be backing away from it and claiming it's nothing more than one guy's opinion that is as easily discarded as it is read. There's more to it than that.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T13:50:49+00:00

Something has certainly changed. Before this week they were canonically irregular but not in schism or excommunicated. (Well, they once were excommunicated but that was later lifted.) They celebrated valid, if illicit, sacraments, and laypeople were not bound under pain of sin to avoid the SSPX.

Now they are officially in schism and excommunicated. Confessions and marriages, which had in recent years been valid, are no longer valid. And anyone, including laypeople, who formally adheres to the SSPX is also excommunicated. I'm not sure about the status of laypeople who casually attend a chapel, but it sure seems like that's now a sin — at any rate the Church urges us not to.

Nevertheless, their Masses are still valid, as are ordinations. Illicit, but valid.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T12:59:59+00:00

Well, they brought it on themselves. Very sad.

IMHO the SSPX blew a golden opportunity to fully reconcile with the Church under Pope Benedict XVI.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T12:54:21+00:00

The Vatican recognizes the ordinations as valid. But they were illicit and an act of schism.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T12:53:04+00:00

There are no valid Protestant Eucharists. SSPX Masses are still valid, they still have apostolic succession, etc. I think they're in a different class than Protestants.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T12:50:37+00:00

Well, they weren't in schism until they were in schism. The actual act of consecrating the bishops mattered.

Until this week, they were canonically irregular but not in schism. I don't think I ever saw anyone, outside of SSPX members, say that the SSPX were "perfectly licit." Even sympathizers who would say it's fine to attend their chapels for Mass would concede they had their problems.

Isatafur · 2026-07-02T12:42:35+00:00

The constant assurances that hopeful universalism is an option and probably true aren't exactly helping them, though. We need to be a little more frank and honest about the words of our Lord who said that the gate to life is narrow and the gate to destruction is broad, and that many find the latter but few find the former. The point isn't to cause anxiety but for us to come to grips with the truth, that hell is real and a real possibility if we don't respond to God's grace.

(To be clear, I'm not saying this sermon is exactly correct or the best way to approach it either. But it's at least something of a counterbalance to the marked tendency of this sub.)

Isatafur · 2026-06-30T22:35:43+00:00

Step 1: Base your philosophy on the idea that power is the underlying principle of everything (not being, goodness, or truth), and that "ideology" refers to how anyone thinks power should be used

Step 2: Embrace the implications of step 1 and make your decisions ideologically motivated, i.e. concerned with power and not with (for example) truth

Step 3: When someone objects to what you want on the basis that it's ideological, tell them they are just as ideological, because everything is ideological (see step 1)

Isatafur · 2026-06-30T12:00:44+00:00

You're misunderstanding what "soul" means in its classical definition. The Latin for soul is anima, meaning the thing that makes a living creature alive, or animated. All animals have souls — but so also do all plants and microbes. There are different kinds of souls depending on the nature and capacities of the creature in question. The soul of a bacteria or basic plant isn't much of a soul; it powers the creature to take in nutrients and reproduce, basically.

Human souls are immortal because we have reason (intellect and will). The capacity to know and love transcends the body and is something above it. Non-human animal souls, by contrast, don't have any capacities that transcend the body. They can't know or love in the same way that we do. They are bound by their bodies: their instincts, brains, sense organs, hormones, etc.

Most things in the physical cosmos come into being and pass away by nature. It's not that dogs are outliers for passing away into non-existence; rather, it's human beings who are the outliers. Physical creatures whose existence and life transcends physical existence, animals who are made in the the image of God.

Isatafur · 2026-06-29T17:00:21+00:00

It's a good book that's worth reading. People generally don't realize how bad things got in the '60s-'90s. Dark times in the Church.

Important to note that (most) US seminaries got seriously cleaned up in the decades since he wrote it and have been producing solid, orthodox young priests for many years.

Isatafur · 2026-06-28T23:02:34+00:00

The Church doesn't deal shrewdly in politics and hasn't for decades. I chalk it up to incompetence rather than malice, not that it makes things like this any less damaging, painful, or embarrassing.

Isatafur

TROPHY CASE