w/c 29/06/25

ORDO

Dies	29 SUN	30 MON	01 TUE	02 WED	03 THU	04 FRI	05 SAT	06 SUN
Officium	SS. Apostolorum Petri et Pauli	In Commemoratione S. Pauli Apostoli	In Octava S. Ioannis Baptistæ	In Visitatione B. Mariæ Virginis	Eucharistici Cordis Iesu	In Octava Sacratissimi Cordis Iesu	S. Antonii Mariæ Zaccaria Confessoris	Pretiosissimi Sanguinis Domini Nostri Jesu Christi
CLASSIS	Duplex I	Duplex majus	Duplex	Duplex II	Feria major	Feria major	Duplex	Duplex I
Color*	Rubeum	Rubeum	Albus	Albus	Albus	Albus	Albus	Rubeum
MISSA	Nunc scio	Scio, cui	De ventre	Salve sancta	Sciens Iesu	Cogitatiónes	Sermo meus	Redemísti nos
Orationes	2a. Die III infra Octavam SSmi Cordis Iesu 3a. Dominica III Post Pentecosten 4a. Die VI infra Octavam Nativitatis S. Joannis Baptistæ	2a. Die IV infra Octavam SSmi Cordis Iesu 3a. Die II infra Octavam SS. Petri et Pauli 4a. Die VII infra Octavam Nativitatis S. Joannis Baptistæ	2a. Die V infra Octavam SSmi Cordis Iesu 3a. Die III infra Octavam SS. Petri et Pauli	2a. Die VI infra Octavam SSmi Cordis Iesu 3a. Ss. Processi et Martiniani Martyrum 4a. Die IV infra Octavam SS. Petri et Pauli	2a. Die VII infra Octavam SSmi Cordis Iesu 3a. Die V infra Octavam SS. Petri et Pauli 4a. Die II infra Octavam in Vistatione BMV	2a. Die VI infra Octavam SS. Petri et Pauli 3a. Die III infra Octavam in Vistatione BMV	2a. Die VII infra Octavam SS. Petri et Pauli 3a. ie IV infra Octavam in Vistatione BMV	2a. In Octava Ss. Apostolorum Petri et Pauli 3a. Dominica IV Post Pentecosten 4a. Die V infra Octavam in Vistatione BMV
NOTAE	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Apostolis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Apostolis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Beata Maria Virgine	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Sacratissimo Cordis Iesu	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Sacratissimo Cordis Iesu	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Sancta Cruce
Nota Bene/Vel/Votiva

Missio Fidelis

Missio Fidelis – Faithful Mission expresses the unwavering commitment of the Church to proclaim the truth of Christ in season and out of season, regardless of opposition or compromise. It signifies both fidelity to the apostolic mandate and steadfastness in doctrine, liturgy, and pastoral charity amidst a world in revolt.

From the Primus

HE ✠Jerome OSJV, Titular Archbishop of Selsey

Carissimi, Beloved in Christ,

Faithfulness in a Time of Unfaithfulness
On this Feast of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, the twin pillars of the Roman Church, I write to you with paternal concern and apostolic urgency. The days grow darker in the world around us, not only by reason of the deepening moral confusion and the public desecration of life and order, but also due to the increasing collapse of courage within the Church itself.

In this past month alone, we have witnessed the abolition of personhood for the unborn in the United Kingdom, the advance of euthanasia under the guise of mercy, and the growing persecution of Christians across continents—all amid a mounting culture of legislative emotionalism, identity-driven activism, and spiritual amnesia. A generation, spiritually orphaned and politically disoriented, stumbles without shepherds. Meanwhile, the Church—Christ’s spotless Bride—has been defiled by cowardice, compromise, and confusion.

The Crisis Within the Fold
We cannot ignore that many within the hierarchy of the Church have failed to speak clearly where clarity is most needed. From the soft capitulation of bishops to gender ideology, to their silence on the massacre of Christian believers abroad, to their persistent refusal to acknowledge the vocations boom among traditional communities—these betrayals are not accidental. They are the fruits of decades of doctrinal neglect, catechetical voids, and liturgical experimentation that have separated millions from the perennial truths of our holy religion.

Cardinal Nichols himself recently admitted the pressure facing Catholic institutions in light of the UK’s euthanasia legislation. If passed, this law will force Catholic hospices to choose between fidelity to God or compliance with a State that sanctions death as compassion. These are not merely prudential matters. They are theological battles over the very definition of man, the inviolability of life, and the place of God in public reason.

The Family and the War on Nature
Let no one be deceived: identity politics is a counterfeit gospel. It promises belonging, but delivers fragmentation. It names sin as self and preaches affirmation without repentance. But as I have said elsewhere: God knows your sin and calls you by your name; the devil knows your name but calls you by your sin.

What we are facing is not simply error, but a revolution against the created order—against man as male and female, against the family as the domestic church, against authority as a divine ordinance, and ultimately against Christ the King.

A Word to the Young and the Called
To the young men discerning a call to the priesthood: do not be afraid to offer your life in service of the altar of the Most High. The Church is not dead. She suffers. She is in eclipse. But the vocations rising from traditional parishes and apostolates such as our own will soon be the lifeblood of the Catholic future. Already, in France, projections indicate that by 2035, the majority of priests may be traditionalist. And yet, the institutional Church suppresses or ignores this dynamic out of ideological prejudice. Let this not discourage you, but steel your resolve.

The Way Forward
We do not answer the crisis with bitterness or cynicism, but with holiness and fidelity. We must restore the reverence due to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. We must catechise our children in the faith once delivered. We must serve the poor, speak the truth, defend the weak, and live as if Christ really is King of Heaven and Earth.

We are not here to accommodate ourselves to the age. We are here to outlast it.

Let us, like Peter and Paul, bear the chains of fidelity with joy. Let us preach the truth whether it is convenient or not. Let us entrust ourselves to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our sure refuges in the storm.

Conclusion
I commend all of you—our clergy, our families, our catechists, our youth—to the intercession of Saints Peter and Paul, the Princes of the Apostles. May their witness embolden us in this hour of trial, and may their prayers sustain us in our mission.

With paternal blessing and enduring affection, I remain 🔝

---

Recent Epistles & Conferences

---

---

Liturgical Notes

---

A Liturgical Confluence: The Octave-Rich Threshold Before Ordinary Time

Between June 24 (Nativity of St. John the Baptist) and July 6 (Octave Day of SS. Peter and Paul), the traditional Roman Rite presents a tapestry of feasts and octaves that serve as a liturgical intermezzo—a sacred overlap—before the Sundays after Pentecost unfold in earnest. The week surrounding June 29 to July 6 is framed by the close of some octaves, the peak of others, and the entrance into still more:

1. Octave of the Nativity of St John the Baptist (June 24–July 1) This is one of the very few octaves for a saint retained even into later stages of the liturgical reform, underscoring St. John’s unique role as praecursor Domini. It imbues the preceding days with eschatological urgency and penitential light — preparing the world, not for Advent, but for the continuing presence of the Lamb.

2. Octave of SS. Peter and Paul (June 29–July 6) This octave is not only ecclesial but political, theological, and missionary. It affirms the Roman primacy, the unifying blood of martyrdom, and the dual charisms of authority and evangelisation. Its octave day (July 6) often functions as a delayed solemn conclusion to the first half of the liturgical year.

3. Octave of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (Friday after Corpus Christi – Friday following) Falling on July 4th in 2025, the octave of the Sacred Heart saturates the liturgy with the interior life of Christ, His divine charity and mercy. Instituted relatively late (extended to an octave by Leo XIII in 1889), it offers a mystical counterpoint to the more apostolic and ecclesial feasts. Christ’s wounded Heart lies behind the Church’s missionary zeal.

3. Octave of the Visitation (July 2–9, in some usages) In certain calendars, the Visitation also carried an octave, especially before the reforms of St. Pius X. Whether formally observed or not, the theological resonance lingers: Mary brings Christ to others in haste, prefiguring apostolic zeal and incarnational charity.

4. Octave of the Most Precious Blood (July 6-13, pre-1955) Here the theme of sacrificial redemption reaches its climax. Flowing from Calvary and perpetuated in the Eucharist, the Blood of Christ is the price of the Church’s birth, the fuel of her mission, and the antidote to sin. It unites and undergirds all the overlapping feasts: from John the Baptist’s preaching, to Peter and Paul’s martyrdom, to Mary’s Visitation, to the love of the Sacred Heart.

Liturgical Theology: A Pause Filled with Meaning
This rare saturation of octaves accomplishes more than festal repetition:

• It delays the resumption of “ordinary” Sundays after Pentecost, not by accident, but by purpose: to root the Church’s public life (symbolised by the green season) more deeply in the mysteries of redemption, intercession, and sanctity.
• It represents a transition from the solemnity of Corpus Christi (and its related feasts) into the season of spiritual fruit-bearing. These days are like a final deep breath before the missionary work of the Church in time continues.

In liturgical terms, this week functions as a kind of “Second Pentecost Octave”, though without that formal title. The Holy Ghost has descended — now we meditate on what the Spirit builds: a Church of martyrs, of preachers, of charity, of divine love, and of sacramental blood.

Conclusion
The stretch from late June to early July in the traditional Roman calendar is not a liturgical leftover from earlier epochs, but a deliberate spiritual concentration. In the overlap of the five octaves — John the Baptist, Sacred Heart, SS. Peter and Paul, Precious Blood, and Visitation — we glimpse the fullness of the Church’s identity: forerunner, lover, martyr, mother, and Redeemer.

Only when these mysteries have been adequately honoured does the Church return to her “green pastures,” ready to follow the Good Shepherd through the Time after Pentecost. 🔝

---

Feast of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June)

The Church today lifts her eyes to two great pillars—Peter the Rock, and Paul the Apostle of the Nations—whose lives and deaths testify to the unshakable foundation and the expansive mission of Christ’s Church. United in martyrdom, though so different in character, their feast proclaims the unity in diversity of the Church Catholic.

St. Peter, chosen by Christ to be the visible head of the Apostolic College, is the figure of stability and tradition. A fisherman called by the lake of Galilee, he was formed in the school of love and failure: walking on water and sinking, confessing Christ and then denying Him. Yet Christ said to him, “I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail” (Luke 22:32). The mercy that restored Peter is the same mercy that builds up the Church: a Church of sinners redeemed by grace, where authority is not domination but service grounded in humility. As St. Augustine teaches, Peter’s weeping after his denial shows the Church how to weep, and his restoration teaches the penitent that “there is no reason to despair if they weep with Peter.”¹

St. Paul, by contrast, begins his journey as an enemy of the Church, “breathing threats and murder” (Acts 9:1), but is struck down by the risen Christ and raised up to become His most zealous herald. In Paul we see the drama of conversion and the fire of mission. His voice rings through the centuries: “Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!” (1 Cor 9:16). He was not one of the Twelve, but he became an Apostle through the sheer force of divine election. As St. John Chrysostom said, “The Church is indebted more to Paul than to any other man.”² His theology, his journeys, his letters, and above all his sufferings became the pattern of what it means to be conformed to Christ.

And yet, these two men, so different in calling and temperament, are brought together by the providence of God. They died in Rome, the one crucified upside down, the other beheaded. One carried the keys of the kingdom, the other the sword of the Word. In them, as Pope Benedict XVI reflected, we see both “structure and spirit”—the institutional form and the evangelical fire of the Church.³

Today, then, is a feast of apostolic succession and apostolic fervour. To honour Peter without Paul is to forget the call to mission; to honour Paul without Peter is to forget the need for unity and tradition. The Church, said St. Irenaeus, “is founded on the apostles,”⁴ and it is through fidelity to their witness that we too remain faithful to Christ.

As we celebrate this solemnity, let us ask: are we grounded like Peter, yet zealous like Paul? Do we remain steadfast in truth, and yet bold in proclaiming it? Saints Peter and Paul did not begin as heroes. They became saints by grace. And so may we, if we open ourselves to the same transforming love.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us. 🔝

¹ St. Augustine, Sermon 147
² St. John Chrysostom, Homily 2 on St. Paul
³ Pope Benedict XVI, Homily for the Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul, 2008
⁴ St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, III.3.1

---

Missalettes (Corpus Christi/Sacred Heart)

Latin/English

Latin/Español

Latin/Tagalog

---

Spiritual Reflection for the Third Sunday after Pentecost

Missa “Respice in me”

The Third Sunday after Pentecost, with its resonant Collect and Gospel, calls us to the heart of the Gospel: the mercy of God toward sinners. As Dom Guéranger notes, this Sunday continues the “great ascent” of the Time after Pentecost, by which the Church, filled with the Holy Ghost, draws souls upward through the sanctifying mysteries of grace. Today’s liturgy reminds us that the divine economy is not one of cold justice, but of seeking, patient, pursuing mercy.

The Heart of the Good Shepherd
The Gospel (Luke 15:1–10) presents two parables: the lost sheep and the lost drachma. Both reveal a God who seeks the sinner before the sinner seeks Him. This reverses the expectation of human religion. In paganism, it is man who must appease the divine. But as St. Ambrose writes, “Divine mercy does not wait to be asked, but anticipates and seeks out the lost.” Christ, the Good Shepherd, leaves the ninety-nine not because they are abandoned, but because the one is imperiled. He risks the wilderness for the weak. He does not punish the wanderer—He carries him home with rejoicing.

St. Gregory the Great, commenting on this passage, teaches that the ninety-nine represent the angelic choirs, who did not fall, while the hundredth is man—lost, yet sought by Christ and restored to the flock through the Incarnation. The value of the one soul, made in God’s image, outweighs the symmetry of the ninety-nine.

The Coin and the Image
In the second parable, the woman seeks the lost drachma, lighting a lamp and sweeping the house. St. Augustine sees the coin as bearing the King’s image—man, who bears the imago Dei. Sin obscures this image, but it is not erased. The Church, as the woman, lights the lamp of the Word and sweeps the house of the world, seeking the hidden image of God in every soul. The rejoicing of the angels over one penitent testifies to the infinite dignity of each person, however fallen.

The Holy Eucharist and the Seeking Love of God
The Introit “Respice in me et miserere mei” (Look upon me, and have mercy on me) is the cry of the soul that knows it is lost and longs for restoration. The Epistle (1 Peter 5:6–11) urges humility and vigilance. “Cast all your care upon Him, for He hath care of you.” St. Bernard of Clairvaux marvels at the tenderness of this verse: “The Lord bends down to carry our burdens, not because they are heavy for Him, but because He desires our nearness.”

At every Holy Mass, the Shepherd comes again to seek and save. In the Eucharist, He finds us in our wandering and brings us home—not by words alone, but by giving us His very Body and Blood. The altar is the place of rejoicing, not only for the angels but for the penitent who has been lifted up and restored.

Pastoral Vigilance and the Church’s Mission
This Sunday also carries a message for shepherds in the Church. St. John Chrysostom warns pastors not to neglect the lost sheep through complacency or fear: “Woe to the pastor who prefers the safety of the fold to the salvation of the soul.” In an age when many justify sin or abandon the search for the lost entirely, the Church is called not to retreat but to imitate the Shepherd who seeks even one soul with burning charity.

Conclusion
The mercy of God is not indulgence but rescue. It does not affirm our lostness but calls us home. Let us not forget, as St. Thérèse of Lisieux reminds us, that God’s justice is not opposed to His mercy—it is His mercy in action. “How sweet,” she wrote, “to remember that the Lord is just. That is the source of my joy, because He knows our weakness.”

On this Third Sunday after Pentecost, may our hearts be stirred with renewed confidence. We are the sheep He has sought. We are the coin He will not cease to search for. And we are called to rejoice with Him—not only that we have been found, but that we may now share in His mission of seeking, bearing, and rejoicing.

“There shall be joy in heaven upon one sinner doing penance…”
Let us be the cause of such joy—again and again. 🔝

---

Spiritual Reflection for the Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Missa: Salve sancta parens

“And whence is this to me, that the Mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:43)

The Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary to her cousin St Elizabeth is not merely a moment of familial joy—it is a mystery of grace, charity, and prophecy. In the hidden hills of Judea, two women meet: one old and miraculously fruitful, the other young and divinely overshadowed. In their embrace, the New Covenant greets the Old, and the unborn Forerunner leaps for joy before the Word made flesh.

St Ambrose, commenting on this passage, writes: “Mary set out in haste into the hill country… not out of doubt but out of joy, not in uncertainty but in eagerness, not as if compelled but filled with holy zeal.” Her journey is not self-seeking, but self-giving. She who had just received the ineffable mystery of the Incarnation becomes at once the handmaid of the Lord and the servant of others. In this, she is the model of the Christian soul: once touched by grace, we are sent—not to remain still, but to carry Christ to others.

Love Moves Us Outward
The Visitation teaches us that authentic faith overflows into action. As St Francis de Sales observed, “When charity dwells in the heart, it cannot be idle: it urges and excites us to good works.” Mary does not retreat into solitude after her Annunciation. Instead, bearing the hidden Christ in her womb, she hastens to serve Elizabeth. She does not yet know how Joseph will react, nor how Nazareth will treat a virgin found with child. But none of that halts her. Love, like grace, is diffusive of itself.

St Thomas Aquinas explains that “charity inclines the will to the good of another.” This is precisely what we see: Mary, full of the divine life, brings that life to her kinswoman, and with it, the sanctifying presence of the Messiah. At Mary’s greeting, John the Baptist is filled with the Holy Ghost in the womb—a miracle that, as the Church teaches, freed him from original sin before birth. Grace is mediated through her voice, just as one day it will flow from her Son’s touch.

The Song of the Church
Elizabeth’s cry—“Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb!”—has echoed for two millennia in the Hail Mary. Her exclamation, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is the first litany of Marian praise. Yet Mary responds not by magnifying herself, but by magnifying the Lord. “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” This is not false humility—it is true adoration.

The Magnificat, as St Bede the Venerable notes, is the canticle of the humble exalted by God. It is the Church’s hymn of thanksgiving in every age: in the triumphs of the martyrs, in the fidelity of the hidden religious, in the quiet perseverance of the poor. Mary, lowly and small in the eyes of the world, is revealed as the ark of the covenant, the new Eve, the mother of the Redeemer. She speaks not of herself, but of God’s mercy, holiness, and faithfulness.

A School of Contemplative Action
The mystery of the Visitation is one of joyful service, prophetic witness, and silent contemplation. Mary bears Christ not only in her womb but in her gestures, her voice, her love. She does not preach, but Christ is made known. She does not command, but grace is released. The spiritual life is not meant to be self-contained. The contemplative soul must become apostolic, just as the apostolic life must be rooted in contemplation. Mary shows us both.

Pope Benedict XVI once said: “Mary carried in her womb the eternal Son, who became man, and she offered Him to the world with boundless love.” On this feast, we are called to do the same: to carry Christ interiorly, through grace, and to bring Him to the world through charity, witness, and joy.

Let us therefore ask the Blessed Virgin to visit us—not merely as a pious memory, but as a living presence in our souls. May she bring Christ to our homes, our hearts, and our communities, so that we too may leap with joy and cry out in wonder: “Whence is this to me, that the Mother of my Lord should come to me?”

Prayer
O Mary, Ark of the New Covenant, hasten to us as once you hastened to Elizabeth. Bear Jesus into the hills of our lives, into the hidden valleys of sorrow and silence. Make our hearts leap with the joy of your Son, and teach us to magnify the Lord, now and always. Amen. 🔝

---

A sermon for Sunday

by the Revd Dr Robert Wilson PhD (Cantab), Old Roman Apostolate UK

St. Peter and St. Paul/Third Sunday after Pentecost

Today we celebrate the great feast of St. Peter and St. Paul, as well as commemorating the Third Sunday after Pentecost. We mark the feast of these two saints together due to their martyrdom in Rome under the Emperor Nero. Today’s lections focus on St. Peter, while tomorrow’s commemorate St. Paul. Hence, today’s sermon will be about St. Peter.

Simon (later called Peter), along with his brother St. Andrew was a fisherman from Galilee. He was originally a disciple of St. John the Baptist, but was drawn into the following of the one whom John had said would be the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world, who would baptise with the Holy Spirit and with fire. His brother St. Andrew told Simon that he had found the one who would be the promised Messiah, the anointed liberator of Israel. Jesus said that though his name was Simon, he would be called Peter, meaning a rock (John 1). This was heavily ironic because St. Peter was a very unstable and impetuous character. After Jesus began his Galilean ministry, he was drawn (along with his brother St. Andrew and the two sons of Zebedee, St. James and St. John) to leave behind his fishing business and became a permanent follower of Jesus (Luke 5). When Jesus subsequently chose twelve disciples, symbolising the twelve tribes of Israel, Peter emerged as their leader. Despite his unstable temperament, he was clearly the dominant personality among Jesus’ followers and had great energy and commitment.

St. Peter saw, like the other followers of Jesus, that he was the one who would be the anointed liberator of Israel, in whom the prophecies of Isaiah about the age to come in which the eyes of the blind were opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped were being fulfilled. At the climax of his Galilean ministry, after the feeding of the Five Thousand, Jesus was compelled to take evasive action when the people tried to make him king by force (John 6). The world could not be won by the world’s own methods. Jesus subsequently withdrew from Galilee into the region of Caesarea Philippi. He asked his disciples about the nature of his person. They said that some thought that he was Elijah, some said John the Baptist, some said Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. But Jesus asked them who they thought he was. St. Peter, as their spokesman, said that he was the Christ, the anointed liberator of Israel. Jesus responded by blessing this great affirmation of faith. This had not been revealed to him by flesh and blood, but by the Father in heaven. He would be called Peter and upon this rock the Church (the faithful remnant of Israel) would be built. He would be given the keys of the kingdom and whatever he bound on earth would be bound in heaven and whatever he loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven (Matthew 16). The power to bind and loose was later given to the other apostles (John 20), but it was given to St. Peter first as their leader and chief spokesman.

But Jesus discerned that St. Peter and the other disciples had not penetrated into the deeper meaning of his person and ministry. He began to teach them that his messianic destiny, enthronement and rule would paradoxically come about through his own reversal, repudiation, suffering and death. He would be the suffering servant of Isaiah, who would follow the path of non-violence. He would be despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. St. Peter understandably found this message difficult to accept. He had indeed recognised Jesus as the agent of God’s final deliverance of his people, but he had been hoping for another king David, a warrior and a conqueror  who would defeat the pagan enemies of Israel and restore the temple. But Jesus recognised in this the same satanic temptation that he had fought against in the wilderness (Matthew 4), and said that Peter spoke not of the things of God, but of men. The world could not be won by the world’s own methods. Later when St. James and St. John argued about who would have first place in the kingdom, Jesus rebuked them, as he had rebuked St. Peter, by saying that the way of worldly power was pagan, for the kings of the Gentiles exercise authority by force and violence. By contrast, the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10).

It was not only the crowds who brought palm branches and acclaimed him king at his triumphal entry into Jerusalem who misunderstood the deeper meaning of Jesus’ message, but also Jesus’ most intimate disciples, St. Peter, St. James and St. John. St. Peter protested when Jesus washed his disciples feet on the night on which he was betrayed (John 13) and used violence against the servant of the high priest (whose name was Malchus) at Jesus’ arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane (John 18). But Jesus repudiated the way of violence, and did not resist his arrest, for all they that draw the sword shall die by the sword (Matthew 26). Most famously of all Peter denied knowledge and association with Jesus when confronted during Jesus’ trial, though his Galilean accent gave him away as a follower.

In the end Jesus’ disciples all forsook him and fled, even St. Peter, who had professed his undying loyalty. The time had now come when Jesus no longer taught, but acted and suffered. In turning the other cheek and in going the second mile, he offered himself for the sins of the nation.

But the good news of the gospel is that it does not end there. When St. Peter and St. John went to the tomb on the first Easter morning (John 20), they found the tomb empty. Subsequently, Jesus appeared to his disciples in his risen and glorified body, both in Jerusalem and then later in Galilee. It was on an occasion when the disciples had returned to Galilee and were fishing on the lake that Jesus again appeared to them. St. Peter was reinstated as the leader of the disciples, despite his betrayal and commanded to feed the flock (John 21).

It seems that St. Peter had finally grasped the secret of Jesus’ message about non-violence, and he emerges as the leading spokesman of the followers of Jesus from the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) onwards. His early speeches are recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, and they speak of how the Saviour had fulfilled his vocation, not as a warrior and a conqueror, but as a suffering servant. Herod later persecuted the Church, killing St. James and imprisoning St. Peter. But St. Peter miraculously escaped imprisonment (Acts 12). He now no longer resided in Jerusalem, where the leadership of the Church passed to Jesus’ brother St. James, but travelled preaching the Gospel. His ministry was especially associated with Rome (it is usually thought that he first travelled to Rome after escaping his imprisonment in Jerusalem) and Antioch. Hence, the Church has later celebrated feasts of St. Peter’s Chair, for Antioch as well as Rome.

After the great fire of Rome in 64, the Emperor Nero sought to put the blame on the Christians as the scapegoat for what had happened (popular opinion more reasonably supposed that Nero had started the fire himself as a pretext for rebuilding the city). It seems that the fear that the persecution in Rome could spread to the provinces led St. Peter to dispatch a letter to Asia Minor. In this he emphasised the message that his own experience had most impressed upon him, that the way of the Saviour was not one of violence. When he was reviled, he had not reviled again, but had entrusted himself to the one who judged justly. Christian leadership was not about being lords over God’s heritage, but rather about following the example of the Good Shepherd (1 Peter 5). He had given his life for the sheep, and had died not only as a sacrifice for sin, but also to give an example to his followers of the way of non-violence.

It was probably not long after this letter was dispatched that St. Peter himself was martyred in Rome. The word martyr means witness, and he, for all his earlier unfaithfulness and backsliding, had eventually be found faithful.

The way of non-violence was difficult to accept then, as it is now. Let us pray for grace to strengthen us in our weakness and that, like St. Peter, we will eventually be found faithful at the last. 🔝

Third Sunday after Pentecost

Be sober, be vigilant, for your enemy the devil walketh about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour, whom resist, stedfast in the faith.

These words, familiar to us from the office of Compline, were originally written in a letter by St. Peter from Rome (shortly before his own martyrdom) at a time when Christians were facing persecution under the Emperor Nero. The emperor had sought to make the Christians the scapegoat for the fire of Rome, though there were in fact grounds for suspicion that he had started the fire himself as a pretext for rebuilding the city. Fearing that the persecution could spread from Rome to the provinces St. Peter wrote to the Christians in Asia Minor, exhorting them to persevere in the face of likely challenges to their faith. They were to be sober and vigilant, for their enemy the devil walketh about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour, whom resist, stedfast in the faith.

But, we might ask, is it really necessary to believe in the devil and dark forces of evil in the twenty first century? Since the European Enlightenment in the eighteenth century such beliefs have been ridiculed as an antiquated superstition which the human race was now finally able to leave behind. Belief in dark forces beyond human control had held people back in previous ages, but mankind had now finally come of age and was able to employ the use of reason and science to address and resolve problems. There was no longer any need to believe that we have no power of ourselves to help ourselves and to pray for divine grace to enable us to think, will and do that which is good. Humanity had risen, not fallen. History was no longer seen to have reached a climax in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, but rather in the eighteenth century Enlightenment itself.

However, a moment’s reflection should give us pause. It is certainly true that since the European Enlightenment there has been much scientific and technological progress. But sadly it has not always been utilised for good purposes. All too often it has been used to unleash even greater forces of war and violence than were possible in the pre- Enlightenment age. The human race may well have progressed scientifically and technologically, but there remain dark forces at work in the human heart.

In more recent times the limitations of post-Enlightenment rationalism have come increasingly to be  recognised. We are now said to be living in a post-modern age, in which we no longer believe in reason in the old sense, but simply in our own right to follow the devices and desires of our own hearts. Reality is now seen as something that we create, rather than something to which we respond, and the truth is simply whatever we feel at a given time. It is heavily ironic that post- Enlightenment  philosophy originally rejected Christianity in the name of reason and science, only for post-modernism to reject reason and science as well. Post-modernism has to some extent provided a corrective to an over confident belief in human progress, but it leads in the long term only to cynicism and despair.

In this climate many are tempted to revive the old Gnostic or Manichean belief which takes seriously the idea that there are dark and demonic forces at work, but identifies them with the material world. Salvation is hence seen as coming, not through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, but through esoteric knowledge that will enable us to escape the evil material world altogether.

St. Augustine was initially impressed by what he saw as the superior faith of Manicheanism in contrast to the crude and unsophisticated beliefs of Orthodox Christians. But he eventually came to realise that evil should be seen as a privation of good, just as darkness is the absence of light. In other words, the material world was not itself evil as the Gnostics and Manicheans believed. Rather it was the case that a world that God had created as good had gone wrong due to the fall of man, which had unleashed and led the human race into captivity to dark forces. Somehow these dark forces were greater than the merely human. The devil was seen not as an eternally opposing force to the good, but rather as a fallen angel that had been created good. He had succumbed to pride and had hence became the enemy of the good. It was this dark force that led the human race to fall due to pride and had since held it in captivity.

There was indeed an insoluble tension between what is and what ought to be, but this was not caused by the human race being trapped in an evil material world, but because man, though created in the image and likeness of God, had followed the path of the devil rather than God and had fallen through pride. God had chosen one people, the ancient Israelites, and had released them from slavery in Egypt to be a light to the nations in the face of pagan idolatry. But the Israelites were themselves still fallen and sinful and failed to do as they ought. The prophets therefore looked forward to a new covenant in which sins would finally be forgiven.

This came about through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. He took the full weight of human sin and the dark forces that ravaged the human heart upon himself and somehow subsumed them into God. He had finally delivered the human race from captivity to the devil and inaugurated a new age in which sins would finally be forgiven.

But, we might say, this is all very well, but are not the dark and demonic forces still as powerful now as they were then? The world is still full of evil and violence and we continue to await the consummation of history at the end of the age when God will finally be all in all, in that new heaven and that new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

That is indeed the case, but the early Christians were as fully aware that we do not yet see all things subject to him as we are today. That is why St. Peter exhorted them to remain faithful in the face of demonic attacks and persecution.

But the good news is that they were now fighting a battle that had already been won. We cannot defeat the dark forces by ourselves, but when Jesus rose from the dead, he finally defeated sin and death and now nothing can ultimately separate us from the love of God in Christ. St. Augustine compared the devil to a dog tied to a chain. He stated that “some man will say: If he is bound, why is he still so powerful? It is quite true, my dearly beloved brethren, that he is very powerful; but his lordship is over the lukewarm and the careless, and such as fear not God in truth. He is chained up like a dog and can only bite those who are such suicidal fools as to go within the length of his tether. Look you, my brethren, what a dolt a man must be who getteth himself bitten by a dog that is chained up. Let not the desires and lusts of the world draw thee within reach of him, and he will not be able to get at thee. He can bark, he can whine; but he can only bite those who are willing to be bitten. He assaileth us, not by violence, but by persuasion; he asketh, not seizeth our consent.”

Let us take heart to these words today. Let us ask for grace to strengthen us to persevere in the face of demonic attacks, as we pray for the ultimate defeat of the dark forces that strive against us, and look forward to the final coming of the Kingdom, in that new heaven that new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 🔝

Visitation of Blessed Virgin Mary

Today we celebrate the feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Since the Incarnation is the distinctively Christian dogma that marks it out from other religions, the Church rightly gives especial veneration to the mother of God incarnate, who was chosen to be the mother of the Word made flesh. The Council of Ephesus in 431 affirmed her to be the theotokos, the God bearer, for she conceived in her womb the Word made flesh. As the hymn has it

How blest that Mother in whose shrine
The great artificer divine
Whose hand contains the earth and sky
Ordained as in his Ark to lie.

The Church honours Mary as pre-eminent among the saints, not as a figure of independent greatness in her own right, but rather in relation to the child whom she bore, born of a woman, born under the law, in order to redeem those who are under the law, that they might obtain the adoption of sons.

Blessed were the chosen people
Out of whom her Lord did come
Blessed was the land of promise,
Fashioned for his earthly home
But more blessed was the mother,
She who bare him in her womb.

God in Christ has entered the world to redeem us from the curse that fell upon our race as a consequence of the fall of man. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. The Church Fathers develop this point further by saying that Mary’s positive response to the angel Gabriel at the Annunciation, Be it unto me according to thy word, reverses Eve’s disobedience. Our vocation as Christians is to become by grace what he is by nature, who humbled himself to share our humanity that we might share his divinity. Mary is the supreme example of one who became by grace what he is by nature. It is therefore right that we celebrate her Conception, her Nativity, her Purification in the Temple, her Visitation to her cousin Elizabeth (which we celebrate today) and her Dormition or Assumption.

Today’s feast marks the visitation of Mary to her cousin Elizabeth, the mother of St. John the Baptist. Yesterday we marked the Octave of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist. It is therefore fitting that we continue this theme by celebrating today Mary’s visitation to her cousin Elizabeth. She had been informed by the angel who declared to her that she would bear a son named Jesus, that her own cousin Elizabeth, who had previously been barren, would also bear a son who would prepare the way for the coming of the Saviour. Mary therefore left her own home in Nazareth and travelled south into the hill country of Judea, where her cousin Elizabeth lived. She entered into the house of Zecharias, the father of John the Baptist, and greeted his wife Elizabeth. When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the child leaped in her womb. She said to her, “Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed art thou that hast believed, because these things shall be accomplished that were spoken to thee by the Lord.” In response to Mary said the words that we have come to sing at Vespers, “My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.” He had regarded the lowliness of his handmaiden and from henceforth all generation would call her blessed. For he that is mighty has magnified her and holy is his name. His mercy is on them that fear him throughout all generations. He has showed strength with his arm and has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He has put down the mighty from their seats and has exalted the humble and meek. He has filled the hungry with good things and has sent the rich empty away. He has in so doing fulfilled the promise to Abraham that in his seed all the nation of the earth would be blessed.

St. John Chrysostom states: “Thou seest, O beloved, how new and how strange a mystery is here! John is not born, but by leaping he speaketh; he is yet unseen, and he giveth warning; he is not yet able to cry, but by his acts he is heard; he draweth not yet by the breath of life, but he preacheth God; he seeth not yet the light, but he maketh known the sun; he is not come out of the womb, but he hasteth to pay the forerunner; in the presence of the Lord he cannot restrain himself; he rebelleth against the bounds set by nature, and struggleth to break out of the prison set by the belly; his longing is to herald the Saviour…. Great, saith John, is the mystery of that which taketh place here, far from the understanding of men are these doings. It is meet that I should do a new thing in nature for the sake of him who is making new things beyond nature. I see in the womb, because I see the Son of righteousness in the womb. I hear, because I am coming as the herald of the great word. I cry out, because I espy the only begotten Son of the Father clad in flesh. I bond for joy, for I see that he by whom all things were made, hath taken upon him the form of servant. I leap, because I think of the redeemer of the world being made flesh. I run before his coming, and herald his approach unto you with this, as it were, my confession.”

Let us celebrate this feast by making our own the words of today’s collect, “Grant, O Lord, we beseech thee, unto all thy servants, the gift of thy heavenly grace, that even as the Blessed Virgin being made a mother hath been unto them the first step unto their salvation, so the godly and solemn memorial of her visitation, may be the bringer of an increase of peace.” 🔝

---

Feast of Saints Peter and Paul – Apostolic Witness and the Foundations of the Church

The liturgical solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, celebrated on June 29, is not merely a hagiographical pairing of two great Apostles. It is a theological icon, a mystical unveiling of the Church’s very constitution, whose foundation is Apostolic—historically grounded, hierarchically ordered, and supernaturally consecrated.

The Petrine Office and the Rock of Unity
St. Peter, the prince of the Apostles, stands at the head of the apostolic college not by merit of eloquence or boldness—indeed, his human frailty is on full display in the Gospels—but by the sovereign choice of Christ, who confers upon him the keys of the Kingdom. “Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificabo Ecclesiam meam”—this declaration is no mere symbolic gesture. It is the constitutional charter of the visible Church, a Church not built upon charisma or consensus, but upon office and divine institution.

Peter’s confession of Christ’s divinity (Matt. 16:16) and his subsequent restoration and commissioning after the Resurrection (John 21:15–17) mark him as both the confessor and the shepherd—a pattern for all successors in the Roman See. That he should suffer martyrdom in Rome, the centre of empire, is providential. The Vicar of Christ must plant the Cross where the world’s power culminates, that the victory of faith may be proclaimed to the ends of the earth.

The Pauline Vocation and the Mission to the Nations
Yet the Church is not only Petrine in her hierarchical structure; she is Pauline in her missionary dynamism. St. Paul, who calls himself “a priest of the Gospel of God” (Rom. 15:16), exemplifies the theological and evangelical fervour that must accompany and animate the apostolic office. His letters, marked by doxology and dialectic, remain a permanent deposit of sacred doctrine, and his missionary journeys trace the very contours of the Church’s expansion throughout the Gentile world.

Paul is the mystic and the martyr, the theologian and the pastor, the scourge of heretics and the father of the faithful. He preaches not a moral programme, not a social reform, but “Jesus Christ, and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). And he does so with the conviction of one who bears in his body the stigmata of Christ (Gal. 6:17).

Two Thrones, One Church
Peter and Paul die in Rome, but their martyrdom unites heaven and earth. The blood of Peter sanctifies the Vatican Hill; the blood of Paul hallowed the road to Ostia. In their death, they seal the truth they preached: that Christ is Lord, and His Church is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic.

Rome, therefore, is not merely the administrative capital of Catholicism—it is a mystical city, stained with the blood of the martyrs and luminous with the authority of the Apostles. It is the visible sign of the Church’s unity, the point from which the sound of the Gospel went forth into all the world, and the see whose faith, as St. Irenaeus says, “every Church must agree with.”

Liturgical Tradition and the Apostolic Memory
In the traditional Roman Rite, the Vigil of Saints Peter and Paul, once kept with fasting and penitence, prepared the Church for the radiant feast. The octave, cruelly suppressed in the 1950s, once echoed the Church’s deep veneration for her apostolic roots. In this feast, the sacred liturgy becomes the voice of memory and of prophecy, recalling the origins of our faith and summoning us to fidelity.

The prefaces, collects, and chants do not treat Peter and Paul as interchangeable “ministers” or vague inspirational figures. They are Apostles, chosen and sent by Christ; bishops, empowered with jurisdiction; martyrs, crowned with glory. To lose this precision is to lose the very contours of Catholic identity.

Conclusion: Fidelity to the Apostolic Form
In an age intoxicated with novelty, when even within the Church we hear murmurs against “clericalism” and calls to “reimagine” the apostolic office, this feast reasserts the unchanging foundation: Christ, the Cornerstone; Peter, the Rock; Paul, the Herald. The Church is not ours to remake, but Christ’s to receive and hand on unaltered.

Let us then venerate Peter and Paul not only in pious devotion, but in doctrinal fidelity. Let us resist the temptation to pit structure against spirit, primacy against collegiality, hierarchy against charisma. The two Princes of the Apostles stand not in tension, but in harmony. Together, they show us the form of the Church—divinely instituted, apostolically governed, and forever faithful. 🔝

---

Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ – 1st Sunday in July

“You have been bought at a great price” (1 Cor. 6:20)

The feast of the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, long cherished in the traditional Roman calendar and solemnly kept on the first Sunday in July, is a profound liturgical confession of the price of our redemption, the reality of the Sacrifice, and the centrality of the Cross. It is not a pious metaphor but a dogmatic proclamation: that Christ our High Priest has entered once for all into the heavenly sanctuary, “not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own Blood, having obtained eternal redemption” (Heb. 9:12).

The Blood that Speaks More Eloquently than Abel’s
The Epistle to the Hebrews contrasts the blood of Abel, which cries out for justice, with the Blood of Christ, which pleads for mercy (cf. Heb. 12:24). This is no abstraction. The Blood shed at Gethsemane, trickling under the thorns, pouring from scourged flesh, and gushing from His pierced side, is the same Blood mystically offered upon the altar in every true Mass. It is the “price of our salvation,” as the litany of the Precious Blood repeatedly affirms.

St. Thomas Aquinas writes with precision that the shedding of Christ’s Blood was essential to our redemption, not merely as a symbol but as the instrument of our salvation: “efficacissimum nostrae reconciliationis instrumentum”—the most efficacious instrument of our reconciliation (ST III, q. 66, a. 6 ad 2). The Blood is not only a sign of suffering—it is the very medium of the new and eternal covenant (Matt. 26:28).

Dogma Enfleshed in Devotion
The cultus of the Precious Blood was solemnly affirmed by Pope Pius IX in 1849, in thanksgiving for the restoration of the Papal States during a time of revolutionary upheaval. It was Pope St. Pius X who fixed the feast on July 1, giving it liturgical pride of place to begin the month traditionally dedicated to the Precious Blood. And in 1934, Pope Pius XI elevated it to the rank of a double of the first class, a fitting gesture in the face of growing secularism and war.

In the 20th century, the cult of the Sacred Heart and the Precious Blood—twin devotions rooted in the Incarnate Word’s human nature—came to be viewed as the Church’s response to a world increasingly deaf to metaphysical truth and hardened against sacrificial love.

The Blood of the Lamb and the Mass of the Ages
In the traditional Roman Missal, the feast of the Precious Blood is rich in theological density and liturgical dignity. The Collect speaks of the “price of our salvation” (pretiosae redemptionis pretium), the Epistle from Hebrews teaches the typology of the Old Covenant, the Gradual exults that God “has redeemed His people,” and the Gospel from John 19 places us at the foot of the Cross, beholding the open side of Christ.

This is not sentimentality. It is theologia crucis—“theology of the Cross”—at its most sublime. The Church, in her traditional liturgy, gives us no illusions. Salvation is not cheap, and grace is not an entitlement. It was purchased at infinite cost.

That cost is re-presented upon every altar where the Holy Sacrifice is offered according to the Roman Rite. The chalice, veiled in red on this day, is not a token or reminder. It is, in the words of the Consecration, the chalice of the Blood of the new and eternal covenant, which shall be poured out for you and for many unto the remission of sins.

A Feast that Modernity Could Not Bear
That this feast was abolished in the calendar of Paul VI and merged obscurely into Corpus Christi is telling. Modern man, allergic to sin and scandalised by sacrifice, cannot endure the language of blood. The very word repels a generation addicted to euphemism and allergic to guilt.

But for the traditional Catholic, the Precious Blood is not an embarrassment but a boast: “God forbid that I should glory, save in the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal. 6:14). It is the banner under which we march, the shield against the enemy, the balm for the wounded, the seal of our adoption.

Conclusion: Washed and Marked by the Blood
To honour the Precious Blood is to confess the whole Catholic faith: the Fall of man, the necessity of grace, the Incarnation, the Sacrifice, the priesthood, the altar, the sacraments, and the hope of glory. This Blood is not a relic of ancient violence. It is the beating heart of tradition, pulsing through the veins of the Mystical Body.

Let us then kneel and adore the Blood that fell upon Calvary, flows in the chalice, and seals the martyrs. And let us pray with the Church: “Thou hast redeemed us, O Lord, in Thy Blood, and hast made us a kingdom for our God.” 🔝

---

---

Forgotten Rubrics: The Leonine Prayers

The Leonine Prayers—once a familiar feature of Catholic life—have all but disappeared from parish memory, victims of the liturgical upheavals following the Second Vatican Council. Instituted by Pope Leo XIII in 1884, these prayers were originally said after Low Mass, primarily for the defense of the Church’s liberty in the face of secular encroachments, and later explicitly offered for the “conversion of Russia.” Though once universal, they have been suppressed in most parishes, quietly discarded under the mistaken assumption that they belonged to a now irrelevant ecclesial context. But in an age increasingly marked by apostasy, global persecution, and moral confusion, the Leonine Prayers deserve a renewed hearing.

Origins and Purpose
he Orationes Leoninae were first mandated by Leo XIII in the wake of the loss of the Papal States and the increasing hostility of liberal governments toward the Church. These brief but potent prayers were not part of the Mass proper, but a devotional supplement offered immediately after the final blessing and dismissal of Low Mass. The original intention was to beg God’s protection over the temporal independence of the Holy See. As Pope Leo XIII stated:

“These prayers after Mass are to be offered for a most grave necessity, that is, for the freedom of the Church and the Holy See” (Acta Sanctae Sedis, vol. 16, 1883).

In 1930, Pope Pius XI redirected their intention toward the “conversion of Russia,” in response to the spread of atheistic Communism after the Bolshevik Revolution. These prayers thus became a spiritual weapon in the arsenal of Catholic resistance to militant secular ideologies.

Structure of the Prayers
The prayers, familiar to older generations, consist of the following sequence:

1. Three Hail Marys
2. Salve Regina
3. Versicle and Response:
   V. Ora pro nobis, sancta Dei Genetrix.
   R. Ut digni efficiamur promissionibus Christi.
4. Collect (Oremus… Deus, refugium nostrum et virtus…)
5. Prayer to St Michael the Archangel (Sancte Michael Archangele…)
6. Threefold invocation: Cor Jesu sacratissimum, miserere nobis.

They form a compact but theologically rich set of intercessions: Marian, Christocentric, and militant in tone. The prayer to St. Michael, in particular, is a rallying cry for spiritual warfare—an acknowledgment that behind the assaults on the Church stands the prince of darkness himself.

Suppression and Amnesia
In 1964, with Inter Oecumenici (Instruction for the Proper Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy), the Leonine Prayers were officially suppressed:

“The prayers after Low Mass… are to be omitted” (Inter Oecumenici, §48).

The reasons were largely practical and ecumenical: to distinguish clearly between the liturgy proper and devotions appended to it, and to remove anything perceived as politically charged in the context of new Church-State relations or Cold War tensions. However, the effect was to deprive the faithful of a powerful liturgical tradition of post-Mass intercession and spiritual vigilance. Few replacements were offered. The prayers vanished without ceremony.

Relevance Today
Yet the rationale for these prayers remains tragically current. The temporal independence of the Holy See is once again in question—not through military conquest, but through internal financial scandal and external diplomatic manipulation. The conversion of Russia, and more broadly the conversion of secularised nations, is still unfulfilled. A global moral apostasy has replaced open persecution, but the Church is under siege from without and within. And as St. Paul reminds us, “our struggle is not against flesh and blood… but against principalities and powers” (Eph. 6:12).

If anything, the need for the Leonine Prayers is more acute now than ever.

A Call to Restoration
Traditional Catholic communities, including those within the Old Roman, SSPX, and Ecclesia Dei groups, have preserved the Leonine Prayers as part of their commitment to the perennial Roman Rite. There is no theological or pastoral reason why they should not be restored—especially as optional devotions—after Low Masses in any community that recognizes the spiritual battle of our time.

More than a nostalgic throwback, the Leonine Prayers form part of a coherent Catholic spirituality of vigilance, intercession, and militant charity. Their restoration would serve not only to reconnect Catholics with their devotional heritage but to arm them anew for the combat of the faith.

Cor Iesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio.
Sancta Dei Genetrix, ora pro nobis. 🔝

---

5 Holy Doors: What Every Catholic Should Know Jubilee 2025

As the Church prepares to enter the 2025 Jubilee Year—the Jubilee of Hope—the faithful are being invited once again to pass through the Holy Doors of Rome, a rich and symbolic tradition signifying repentance, grace, and new life in Christ. This Jubilee, proclaimed by Pope Francis in his bull Spes Non Confundit (“Hope Does Not Disappoint”) on the feast of the Ascension, will begin on Christmas Eve, 2024, and conclude on the Epiphany, January 6, 2026.

The Five Holy Doors of Jubilee 2025
For this extraordinary Holy Year, five Holy Doors will be opened:

1. St. Peter’s Basilica – opened by Pope Francis on Christmas Eve; it will also be the last to close on the Epiphany 2026.
2. St. John Lateran – opened on Dec. 29, the feast of the Holy Family.
3. St. Mary Major – opened on Jan. 1, the solemnity of Mary, Mother of God.
4. St. Paul Outside the Walls – opened on Jan. 5.
5. Rebibbia Prison Chapel – a Jubilee innovation: a Holy Door among the incarcerated, opened personally by the Pope.

The three major basilicas after St. Peter’s will close their Holy Doors on December 28, 2025, a week before the Jubilee ends.

What Is a Holy Door?
As Spes Non Confundit affirms, the Holy Door is a symbol of Christ Himself—“the door” (John 10:7) by which we enter into salvation. Pilgrims who pass through these doors with faith and contrition express their desire to leave behind sin and enter more deeply into communion with the Church.

St. John Paul II, in his own Jubilee bull Incarnationis Mysterium (1998), powerfully taught that the Holy Door “evokes the passage from sin to grace,” reminding the faithful that to pass through it is to “confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” and commit to the “new life” He offers.

Scriptural Roots and Patristic Imagery
The symbolism of the Holy Door is deeply scriptural:

• “Knock, and the door shall be opened” (Luke 11:9)
• “Behold, I stand at the door and knock” (Rev 3:20)
• “I am the gate. Whoever enters by me will be saved” (John 10:9)

These verses are not mere metaphors but truths fulfilled in Christ, echoed by the Fathers of the Church. St. Augustine sees Christ as “the door by which the shepherds and sheep enter” (In Io. Ev. Tract. 47), while St. Gregory the Great writes, “He is the door because He opens the way to eternal life.”

A Tradition Rooted in History
The tradition of the Jubilee Year began with Pope Boniface VIII in 1300, though the practice of opening a Holy Door came later, first recorded in 1423 at St. John Lateran. In 1499, Pope Alexander VI extended the practice to the other three major basilicas of Rome. By the 16th century, Jubilee Years were fixed every 25 years—with extraordinary Jubilees proclaimed at the Pope’s discretion, such as 1933 (the 1900th anniversary of Redemption) and 2000.

Ritual and Symbolism
From 1525 to 1950, the Holy Door of St. Peter’s was walled up and ceremonially broken open with a silver hammer by the Pope. Since the Jubilee of 1975 and especially in 2000, greater emphasis has been placed on the door itself—now cast in bronze with 16 biblical bas-reliefs depicting the history of sin and redemption, from Adam and the Angel to the Good Thief, Thomas’ doubt, and the opening of the Holy Door itself.

As Cardinal Virgilio Noè once wrote: “The sixteen panels of the door are like the verses of a hymn, which sing of God’s infinite mercy.”

Mercy for the Incarcerated
In a striking gesture, Pope Francis has chosen to open one of the five Holy Doors at Rebibbia Prison, inviting prisoners to experience the mercy and hope of the Jubilee. In Spes Non Confundit, he urges that all prisoners “look to the future with hope and a renewed sense of confidence.” This aligns with his vision of a Church that reaches to the peripheries, a theme he consistently returns to in his pontificate.

Pastoral Significance
The Holy Doors are not talismans, but sacramental signs calling the faithful to conversion, penance, and spiritual renewal. They offer an opportunity for indulgences, as per the ordinary conditions: sacramental confession, reception of the Eucharist, and prayers for the intentions of the Holy Father.

As the master of papal liturgical celebrations has noted, the prayer used before opening the Holy Door is drawn from Luke 4:18, where Christ proclaims “a year of favor from the Lord.” The Church, continuing His mission, invites all to encounter the “Door of Hope” (Hosea 2:15) and to rediscover the promise of mercy and transformation.

Conclusion: The Door Is Open—But Must Be Crossed
Ultimately, the Holy Door confronts each Catholic with a decision. As John Paul II said, “To pass through that door means to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.” It is an act of hope, an embrace of divine mercy, and a step toward renewal. As the 2025 Jubilee of Hope approaches, Catholics are called not merely to admire the door—but to walk through it. 🔝

1. Spes Non Confundit, Bull of Indiction of the Jubilee Year 2025, Pope Francis, May 9, 2024.
2. Incarnationis Mysterium, Bull of Indiction of the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000, Pope John Paul II, Nov 29, 1998.
3. St. Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractate 47.
4. St. Gregory the Great, Homilies on the Gospels, Homily 19.
5. Cardinal Virgilio Noè, The Holy Door in St. Peter’s, Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
6. Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§1471–1479, on indulgences and Jubilee participation.

---

CURRENT AFFAIRS

---

Leo XIV and the Restoration of Social Doctrine
A Return to Rerum Novarum and a Rejection of Modernist Praxis

When Pope Leo XIV addressed the College of Cardinals on 10 May 2025—just two days after his election—he made a striking declaration: he had taken the name “Leo” in honour of Pope Leo XIII and his encyclical Rerum Novarum (1891), the foundational charter of modern Catholic social teaching¹. This was no mere nod to history. It was a deliberate signal that his pontificate would root itself not in post-conciliar ambiguity, but in the perennial moral and theological vision of the Church.

Reiterating this connection to diplomats the following week, and again in his address on May 17, Pope Leo XIV made it clear that Catholic social teaching must begin not with technocratic management, sentimental impulses, or sociological compromise—but with the immutable truths of the Gospel applied through reason and grace.

A Teaching Reclaimed, Not Merely Cited
Some might ask whether this invocation of Leo XIII is more symbolic than substantial. But Leo XIV has gone beyond mere name-dropping. In form, structure, and content, his statements clearly align with the substance of Rerum Novarum and the doctrinal tradition it inspired. He cites not only the text itself, but also its ghostwriters—Thomist giants such as Cardinal Zigliara and Fr. Matteo Liberatore. He identifies and affirms the four foundational principles of Catholic social doctrine that unfold directly from Leo XIII’s vision:

1. The Church is authoritative and necessary in social, political, and economic matters²;
2. The end of economic life is the moral and religious good of the human person, not mere material prosperity³;
3. Property, especially productive property, should be distributed as widely as possible to support family life and domestic society⁴;
4. The state has a duty to regulate the use of property for the common good, without abolishing the natural right to private ownership⁵.

This framework is not a nostalgic reproduction. It is a doctrinal recovery—and it directly contradicts much of the prevailing direction in the Church’s recent social engagement.

Clarity Against Confusion: Leo XIV vs Contemporary Praxis
Leo XIV’s retrieval of authentic Catholic social teaching stands in stark opposition to the dominant modernist tendencies of the post-Vatican II Church. His vision confronts five key areas where the Church’s praxis has drifted from its doctrinal roots:

1. Authority vs Dialogue While modern ecclesial discourse often emphasizes “listening,” “synodality,” and accompaniment, Leo XIV insists that the Church has both the authority and the obligation to pronounce moral judgments on political and economic questions. As Pius XI taught, and Leo XIV reiterates, the Church cannot remain silent without failing her mission as mother and teacher⁶. The social order must be judged in light of the Gospel, not negotiated with secular ideologies.

2. Justice before Mercy Where modern pastoral language frequently prioritizes compassion, inclusion, and emotional resonance, Leo XIV reasserts that the first principle of charity is justice. Helping the poor is not optional altruism; it is a demand of natural law and divine revelation⁷. In stark contrast to contemporary social programs within the Church that mimic secular humanitarianism, Leo XIV restores a moral and theological foundation to all such action.

3. Distributism vs Global Technocracy In contrast to Vatican programs increasingly aligned with UN development goals or global climate initiatives, Leo XIV affirms distributism: the ideal of widespread ownership of productive property rooted in family life and subsidiarity. This stands against both socialist collectivism and capitalist concentration, as well as against the modern Vatican’s often technocratic and centralizing tendencies. Leo XIV’s endorsement of distributist economics implicitly critiques the globalist instincts of Laudato Si’, Fratelli Tutti, and Vatican economic forums⁸.

4. Lay Apostolate in the World, Not the Sanctuary Leo XIV restores the correct interpretation of Vatican II’s Apostolicam Actuositatem. The Council called laypeople to sanctify the temporal order, not to crowd the sanctuary with pseudo-liturgical roles. The pope identifies and condemns two errors:

• Clericalization of the temporal: expecting clergy to lead Catholic social action, which is properly the vocation of the laity;
• Laicization of the sacred: expecting laypeople to find significance only in liturgical or parish roles, rather than in their baptismal call to transform family, economy, and culture.

This correction is radical—not in novelty, but in its return to doctrinal integrity.

5. Evangelization Through Order, Not Sentimentalism Finally, Leo XIV upends the dominant pastoral model that treats evangelization as emotional accompaniment. He revives the principle that the end of social order is the beatific vision, and that all structures—political, economic, legal—must be oriented to man’s eternal destiny. This view, rooted in Pius XII’s doctrine of integrality and Pius XI’s kingship of Christ, contrasts with a Church that has too often substituted sentiment for salvation, or consensus for conversion.

Not Idealism, but Imperative
Pius XI warned against treating the teachings of Rerum Novarum as “a kind of imaginary ideal of perfection more desirable than attainable”⁹. Leo XIV agrees. The four principles he affirms are not high-minded hopes. They are morally binding realities, forming part of the ordinary magisterium of the Church. As he puts it, doctrine teaches us how to approach problems, and even more importantly, how to approach people¹⁰.

That doctrine is not subject to public consensus. It must be taught, applied, and lived—above all by the laity, whom Leo XIV summons to rediscover their mission. As Vatican II stated, “Catholics should feel themselves obliged to promote the true common good”¹¹. Not by waiting for episcopal approval, nor by seeking liturgical roles, but by conforming the laws, culture, and customs of nations to the Gospel.

Conclusion: A Line in the Sand
If Pope Leo XIV’s speeches are followed by consistent teaching and governance, he will have drawn a clear line between the tradition of Leo XIII and the experiments of modernism. He will have called the Church back to her authentic mission: not as a chaplain to secular power, but as Mater et Magistra—Mother and Teacher to all nations.

This is not reaction. It is restoration.

Let those with ears to hear, listen. 🔝

1. Apostolicam Actuositatem, n. 14.
2. Pope Leo XIV, Address to the College of Cardinals, 10 May 2025.
3. Cf. Rerum Novarum, n. 16; Quadragesimo Anno, nn. 41–43; Centesimus Annus, n. 5.
4. Rerum Novarum, n. 23; Mater et Magistra, n. 119.
5. Rerum Novarum, nn. 5–15; Quadragesimo Anno, nn. 53–75.
6. Mater et Magistra, nn. 18–21; Centesimus Annus, nn. 30–31.
7. Quadragesimo Anno, n. 41.
8. Leo XIV, Address to Social Sciences Congress, 17 May 2025.
9. Cf. critiques of the Vatican’s involvement in the Global Compact, World Economic Forum, and secular climate agreements.
10. Quadragesimo Anno, n. 28.
11. Leo XIV, Address to Social Sciences Congress, 17 May 2025.

---

The Seal on Trial: Washington State, Religious Liberty, and the Assault on Sacramental Confession

On 2 May 2025, Washington State Governor Bob Ferguson—a self-identified Catholic—signed into law SB 5375, legislation that mandates clergy to report suspicions of child abuse or neglect, even when disclosed in the Sacrament of Confession¹. The law, set to take effect on 27 July 2025, eliminates the long-standing legal exemption for priest-penitent privilege, threatening jail time and fines for noncompliance². In so doing, it strikes at the heart of the Catholic faith and the constitutional right to the free exercise of religion.

An Attack on Sacrament and Conscience
Canon Law is unambiguous: the seal of confession is inviolable. Canon 983 §1 states that “the sacramental seal is inviolable; therefore, it is absolutely forbidden for a confessor to betray the penitent in any way for any reason”³. Violation of the seal results in automatic excommunication (latae sententiae) reserved to the Apostolic See⁴. The sanctity of this seal is not merely a disciplinary rule—it pertains to the divine law governing the sacrament itself.

Forcing priests to choose between divine mandate and civil penalty is a violation of conscience. As Fr. Gerald Murray observed on The Arroyo Grande Show, such coercion “undermines the priest’s very ability to minister”⁵. Were this principle broadly adopted, sacramental confession in the United States would cease to be safe or sacramental.

The Federal Lawsuit and the Double Standard
On 23 June 2025, the United States Department of Justice filed suit against Washington State, arguing that the law violates both the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment⁶. Harmeet K. Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, stated, “Washington’s law forces clergy to choose between jail and the sacraments—a choice no government has the authority to demand”⁷.

The bishops of Seattle, Spokane, and Yakima filed a parallel suit, warning that SB 5375 “criminalizes the faithful discharge of priestly duty” and discriminates against Catholics by uniquely targeting their sacramental obligations⁸.

Commentator Robert Royal rightly pointed out the ideological hypocrisy: “In the same jurisdictions where school counselors are protected from informing parents about minors’ gender transitions, Catholic priests are compelled to betray their sacred trust”⁹. The contrast is not merely illogical—it is instructive. It reveals the shifting center of public morality, in which religious conscience is expendable when it conflicts with the therapeutic and administrative imperatives of the state.

Historical and Legal Precedent
The protection of priest-penitent confidentiality is not new. In the early American case People v. Philips (1813), the New York Court of General Sessions upheld the seal of confession, establishing a precedent for religious privilege under common law¹⁰. Since then, most states have recognized some version of this privilege—acknowledging its necessity for the integrity of sacramental practice.

Washington State now joins a small and deeply controversial list of jurisdictions—California briefly among them—that have attempted to override this protection. Courts have historically blocked such attempts, recognising them as unconstitutional intrusions into religious practice¹¹.

What Is at Stake
This controversy is not about shielding abusers; it is about whether the state can compel priests to become agents of surveillance under threat of imprisonment. As Fr. Murray has noted, true repentance in confession often includes encouraging the penitent to self-report serious crimes¹². But the decision to confess to civil authorities must arise from penitent conscience, not coerced priestly betrayal.

The confessional is not a counseling booth—it is the tribunal of divine mercy. Undermining its sanctity deprives sinners of a spiritual lifeline, imposes fear and distrust, and assaults the Church’s sacramental life.

A Wider Cultural Pattern
This legislation forms part of a broader pattern in post-Christian societies: the expansion of state power into moral and religious domains previously considered inviolable. Pope Benedict XVI warned of such trends in his 2010 address to the British Parliament, describing the marginalization of religion from the public square as a mark of aggressive secularism¹³.

Washington’s law is not neutral. It expresses a functional disbelief in the supernatural efficacy of the sacraments, treating the seal of confession as a religious superstition to be discarded when inconvenient. But to Catholics, this seal is not negotiable. It is grounded in divine institution, not public opinion.

Conclusion
The defense of the sacramental seal is, ultimately, the defense of religious liberty itself. Catholics cannot—and must not—comply with laws that attempt to insert the state into the sacred encounter between penitent and priest. If this seal falls, no religious freedom will remain secure.

The lawsuits now underway may determine whether American law still recognizes the freedom of religion as a limit to the power of the state—or whether Catholic clergy must face the martyrdom of handcuffs for fidelity to Christ. 🔝

¹ Washington State Legislature, SB 5375, 2025 Regular Session.
² Lynnwood Times, “Gov. Ferguson Signs Law Compelling Priests to Report Confessional Abuse,” 2 May 2025.
³ 1917 Code of Canon Law, can. 889; 1983 Code of Canon Law, can. 983 §1.
⁴ 1983 CIC, can. 1388 §1.
⁵ The Arroyo Grande Show, episode broadcast 25 June 2025.
⁶ U.S. Department of Justice, “DOJ Sues Washington State over Anti-Catholic Confession Law,” 23 June 2025.
⁷ Harmeet K. Dhillon, DOJ Press Conference Transcript, 23 June 2025.
⁸ Pillar Catholic, “Washington Bishops Sue over Seal of Confession Law,” 29 May 2025.
⁹ The Arroyo Grande Show, op. cit.
¹⁰ People v. Philips, New York Court of General Sessions, 1813.
¹¹ Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, “Defending the Confessional Seal,” Legal Briefing, June 2025.
¹² The Arroyo Grande Show, op. cit.
¹³ Pope Benedict XVI, Address to British Parliament, Westminster Hall, 17 September 2010.

---

Faith in the Public Square: A Voice Repeated, A Warning Unheeded

“It’s a great honour to be invited to speak to such a distinguished company. We need Christian faith in the public square.” With those words, Professor John Lennox — renowned Oxford mathematician and Christian apologist — opened his address to more than 170 MPs and civic leaders gathered in Westminster Hall for this year’s National Parliamentary Prayer Breakfast.

The theme, God in the Public Square, could not have been more timely. Amidst legal upheavals over assisted suicide, the removal of unborn personhood in law, and deepening cultural division, Lennox’s message was both a plea and a rebuke: to deny Christian voices in politics is not neutrality — it is to evacuate the public square of any moral anchor.

Everyone Brings a Faith
Lennox rejected the notion that only secular reasoning belongs in legislative debate. “Everyone brings their faith in something into the public square,” he said. “If people of faith are to be kept out, the public square would be empty.” At a time when Parliament is statistically more religiously diverse — and more religiously indifferent — than at any point in modern history, Lennox’s reminder was not sectarian but civilisational.

Drawing on recent high-profile political debates, including a transatlantic exchange between U.S. Vice President JD Vance and former MP Rory Stewart, he reminded his listeners that values like equality and dignity did not arise from abstract reason but are deeply rooted in Christian revelation — even when cloaked in secular language.

“Faith in God is not irrational,” he insisted. “Christianity and science are complementary modes of understanding.” This, from a man who has debated atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens on global stages, was not naïve sentiment but intellectually tested truth.

A Refrain from the Past
Yet Lennox’s appeal echoed another voice — one raised in the same hall fifteen years prior: Pope Benedict XVI, addressing the assembled members of both Houses of Parliament during his 2010 State Visit. Speaking from the spot where Thomas More stood trial, Benedict declared:

“The role of religion in political debate is not so much to supply these norms, as to help purify and shed light upon the application of reason to the discovery of objective moral principles.”¹

He warned that when reason is detached from faith, it becomes vulnerable to ideology — a “dictatorship of relativism” in which policy is shaped not by truth but by popular sentiment or emotional force.

Though warmly received at the time, Benedict’s words have largely been forgotten. In the years since, British political life has veered further into moral subjectivism. Christian moral frameworks are increasingly marginalised, if not vilified. Recent legislation has:

• Legalised abortion to birth under the guise of decriminalisation — effectively removing legal recognition of the unborn as persons²;
• Advanced euthanasia legislation despite clear warnings from palliative care experts, including Professor Mark Taubert³;
• Undermined parental rights and conscience protections in education and healthcare settings.

Far from welcoming the Christian conscience, public policy has progressively reduced it to private sentiment — irrelevant, if not obstructive, to lawmaking.

Reflections from the Hall
Labour MP Rachel Maskell, chair of Christians in Parliament, commented that “this is our public square as parliamentarians… having that focus on Jesus in Parliament today was just so needed.” Tim Collins MP added: “Politics can be non-Christian, but Christianity can’t be non-political.”

But such affirmations only underscore the gulf between sentiment and practice. The Archbishop of York, Most Rev Stephen Cottrell, called on Christian lawmakers to bring the “goodness, beauty, values and truth of the Christian faith” into public affairs — yet failed to mention how Parliament has recently presided over legislative moves that enshrine the very opposite: the destruction of innocent life, the redefinition of the family, and the silencing of traditional moral voices.

As Christian commentator Peter Lynas reflected on social media, the Prayer Breakfast brought a genuine sense of unity and prayerful seriousness — but that unity must be matched by moral courage in the public square. Otherwise, the event risks being reduced to spiritual pageantry amidst political decay.

A Voice Still Speaking
The tragedy of Pope Benedict’s 2010 address is not that it was rejected — but that it was applauded and then ignored. John Lennox’s 2025 speech may fare no differently unless its hearers confront the hard truth: the Christian conscience is not merely a private comfort, but a public obligation. If Christians do not speak, others will. And they already are.

What Lennox and Benedict remind us is that democracy cannot sustain itself on process alone. Without a moral vision rooted in the dignity of man made in the image of God, law itself becomes a function of will — or worse, of feeling. And feeling, as history shows, is no stable foundation for justice. 🔝

¹ Address of Pope Benedict XVI to Civil Society, Westminster Hall, 17 September 2010.
² UK House of Commons Hansard, 20 June 2025, debate on amendment to decriminalise abortion.
³ Prof. Mark Taubert, “I’m a palliative care doctor – the new assisted dying Bill puts the vulnerable at risk,” The Telegraph, 25 June 2025.

---

“Through the Roof”: Christian Charities Warn of Crisis as Welfare Reform Vote Looms

As MPs prepare to vote on the government’s new welfare reform package, Christian leaders, charities, and social researchers are warning that the changes could devastate thousands of vulnerable households. Jessica Foster of the Trussell Trust has called on churches to offer practical and spiritual support, as many claimants experience “anxiety levels through the roof” over the prospect of losing essential benefits.

The proposed reforms to Personal Independence Payments (PIP), Universal Credit (UC), and disability assessments have triggered fierce public backlash. Despite Downing Street’s insistence that the aim is to help people with long-term conditions into work, opposition is mounting—including from more than 120 Labour MPs who signed a motion to block the Bill.

The Trust, which coordinates a nationwide network of over 1,400 food banks, estimates that nearly half a million additional people could be driven to food aid as a result of the legislation. Foster, Head of Church Engagement, stated:

“Two-thirds of people coming to our food banks have a disability—and that figure rises to 75% in households. We are already stretched. This Bill will undoubtedly push more people into poverty, and that’s exactly the direction we are trying to stop.”

She shared accounts from a recent prayer meeting, where individuals reliant on PIP spoke of real and immediate fear:

“Someone has a condition requiring regular massages to stay mobile—these aren’t covered by the NHS, so PIP pays for them. Without it, they’ll be housebound. Another uses PIP to cover rural transport. One person can’t afford to charge their electric wheelchair without that support.”

Foster urged churches to make time for conversations with the disabled and to raise the issue in Sunday intercessions, calling on believers to “email your MP and pray for justice.”

A Fracturing Consensus
Politically, the reforms have caused significant tension within the governing Labour Party. After an internal backlash, Sir Keir Starmer’s team partially walked back the proposals—offering exemptions for existing claimants. But critics, including former shadow ministers, argue that this creates a two-tier welfare state and leaves future claimants exposed to hardship.

An editorial in the Financial Times described Starmer’s handling of the issue as “a rushed recalibration under pressure,” noting that the episode revealed deep fractures over the party’s post-austerity vision. The Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee went further, accusing Labour of betraying its social justice mandate by “siding with fiscal caution over the reality of hunger, disability, and despair.”

The Department for Work and Pensions insists the reforms are fair, stating that “3.8 million families will gain an average of £420 per year” through adjustments to the Universal Credit allowance. Yet according to the Resolution Foundation and the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the cuts will remove between £2.6 and £3.2 billion from the welfare system and are projected by the Office for Budget Responsibility to push 250,000 more people into poverty.

The View from the Church
The Church of England’s Disability Task Group has expressed grave concern, warning that 87% of current PIP standard-rate recipients could lose eligibility under new guidelines. Speaking to Church Times, Bishop Stephen Snow called the Bill “deeply unjust” and said it threatened to “crush the capacity of disabled people to live with dignity, work, or contribute to parish life.”

Other Christian leaders echoed this sentiment. Helen Barnard of the Trussell Trust said the legislation “defies moral reasoning,” while Christians Against Poverty CEO Stewart McCulloch warned of an “avalanche of unmanageable debt, isolation, and spiritual despair.”

A pattern has emerged in which disabled Christians—once volunteers and contributors to parish communities—are being forced into survival mode. Foster reflected:

“This isn’t just about surviving. People who were serving their churches now fear losing their mobility, their connection to others, and even their faith.”

A Crisis of Conscience
This moment reveals a growing tension between economic policy and moral responsibility. The Christian critique is not one of naïve idealism but of incarnational realism: that policy must reflect the dignity of the human person, not reduce them to economic units.

While government spokespeople emphasize fiscal balance and activation of the workforce, critics say this amounts to penalising the poor under a new technocratic veneer. “To call this ‘help into work’ is dishonest,” one think-tank analyst said. “For many, it’s a quiet deconstruction of safety nets—replacing them with barbed wire.”

The welfare vote on Tuesday may well pass with a trimmed majority. But the spiritual and social consequences are already being felt. For many Christians, the debate is no longer just about policy—it’s a test of moral clarity in a society where economic strength is too easily mistaken for virtue. 🔝

¹ Premier Christian News, “Anxiety levels are through the roof over welfare reform,” 26 June 2025.
² The Guardian, UK Politics Live, 27 June 2025.
³ Financial Times, How Starmer averted ‘civil war’ with Labour MPs after diluting welfare cuts, 27 June 2025.
⁴ Polly Toynbee, The Guardian, 27 June 2025.
⁵ Resolution Foundation & OBR briefing figures, June 2025.
⁶ Church Times, Welfare changes “a step backward for disabled dignity”, June 2025.
⁷ DWP Press Office, official figures on UC uplift, June 2025.

---

The Rule of Feeling or the Law of God?
The Eclipse of Moral Reason in Parliament

The task of governance, according to classical and Christian thought, is not to reflect the emotions of the age but to serve the common good in accordance with justice and truth. Legislation should restrain vice, protect the innocent, and promote human flourishing as God intended it. But in Britain today, we are witnessing the growing collapse of this vision. Laws are no longer shaped primarily by moral reasoning or the natural law but by emotional pressure and the fleeting sentiments of cultural mood.

This is not compassion. It is a counterfeit of compassion—a distortion of charity detached from truth. True charity wills the good of the other, but modern emotionalism confuses feeling with goodness, and affirmation with love. The consequence is grave confusion in moral discernment and legislative clarity alike.

Deforming Law through Emotionalism: The Case of Abortion
On 18 June 2025, the House of Commons voted to repeal sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, thereby removing nearly all criminal penalties for self-managed abortion¹. The vote was celebrated as a compassionate victory. But what was being celebrated was, in reality, the removal of legal recognition for the most vulnerable human life.

Dame Diana Johnson MP introduced the amendment by appealing to trauma and personal pain:

*“Imagine the trauma of a miscarriage, and then imagine being investigated by the police as though you were a criminal.”*²

Yet what was conspicuously absent from the debate was any serious engagement with the implicit recognition of unborn human personhood—enshrined both in the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and in the very structure of the Abortion Act 1967, which did not legalise abortion outright but permitted strictly defined exceptions to prosecution for what would otherwise be considered the unlawful killing of a person³.

This silence is not accidental. It reveals the displacement of objective moral truth by rhetorical sleight and sentimental appeal. And this is not how legislators should approach questions of life and law. The deliberate unmaking of legal and moral precedent in favour of emotive storytelling is a betrayal of the dignity of parliamentary governance.

Scripture teaches: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20). When emotionalism supplants philosophical and theological reasoning, it is not progress but regression—a return to the paganism of the self, where truth is not something to be obeyed, but something to be felt.

Assisted Dying: Choice over Conscience
A similar tragedy unfolded with the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which received overwhelming support in Parliament. Emotional testimony again dominated the debate. One of the most striking interventions came from Sir Stephen Timms MP:

*“I watched my wife’s mother suffer in the final weeks of her life. She was in pain, terrified, and crying out that she wanted it to be over. No one should be forced to endure that when they are beyond hope of recovery.”*⁴

Who would not be moved by such an experience? And yet, the role of law is not to sanctify despair but to uphold the inherent dignity of life, even in suffering. Catholic teaching affirms that “euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God”, for *“it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person”*⁵. The pain of terminal illness must be met not with abandonment cloaked in autonomy, but with the Christian response of accompaniment, palliative care, and sacrificial love.

The professional bodies most competent to advise on these questions—the Royal Colleges of Physicians, General Practitioners, and Psychiatrists—warned against the legislation⁶. But their concerns were brushed aside. As with abortion, emotionalism triumphed over moral discernment. Parliament chose choice over conscience, control over care, and despair over hope.

Gender Ideology and the Lost Image of God
The confusion extends to education and healthcare. Gender ideology, under the guise of compassion, now commands institutional power. Children are affirmed in discordant identities, their bodies pathologised, and irreversible treatments administered—all under emotional narratives of affirmation and suicide prevention.

The Cass Review (2024) revealed that many such interventions lacked medical rigour and were driven more by ideology than clinical necessity⁷. And yet, schools and public bodies continue to promote these practices, ignoring not only the empirical evidence but the truth of the human person: male and female, created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Genesis 1:27).

Emotionalism here becomes a false gospel—offering salvation through self-identification rather than sanctification. And the victims are children.

Selective Justice and the Eclipse of Law
Even the foundational principles of justice are now selectively applied. The Equality Act 2010 lists sex and gender reassignment as protected characteristics. Yet following the UK Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling that “sex” refers to biological reality⁸, many institutions have chosen instead to uphold “gender identity” as the superior right.

This inversion of the law—placing subjective identity over objective sex—is justified emotionally, not legally. Women’s rights to privacy, safety, and dignity in single-sex spaces are now routinely overruled by appeals to inclusivity and affirmation. But a law that protects some by erasing others ceases to be just.

In Christian theology, justice is the habit of giving to each what is due—grounded not in emotion, but in truth. When the law is redefined by feeling, it no longer upholds justice; it becomes an instrument of partiality and manipulation.

When Emotion Becomes Tyranny
There is a point at which feeling, unchecked, becomes tyranny. We have reached that point in modern lawmaking. Emotionalism has become the arbiter of right and wrong. Opposition to cultural trends is not reasoned with—it is condemned as hateful, phobic, or dangerous. Emotional harm becomes a tool to silence dissent, and public reason is drowned in sentiment.

This is not the Christian order of things. As St. Thomas Aquinas teaches, the human intellect is the faculty by which we come to know the natural law written on the heart. Without reason informed by truth and grace, politics becomes sentimentality weaponised. The Apostle warns us: “Be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Romans 12:2).

The Path Forward: Restoring Truth in Charity

What, then, is to be done?

We must insist that law be returned to its proper foundation: reason informed by truth, and justice grounded in the dignity of the human person as created by God. Legislators must resist the temptation to govern by emotion and seek instead the moral clarity that comes from ordering human laws to the eternal law. As St. Augustine said, “A law that is not just is not a law at all.”

Parliament must recover its vocation as a guardian of the common good—not the fluctuating feelings of the crowd. And the Church must speak clearly: law and love are not opposed. But law without truth is not love. It is sentiment masquerading as mercy—and in the end, it destroys both justice and the human soul. 🔝

¹ The Telegraph, “MPs vote to allow abortion up to birth in UK law,” 18 June 2025.
² Hansard, House of Commons Debate, 2 June 2025, Dame Diana Johnson MP.
³ The Times, “Ministers likely to back ‘extreme’ plans to decriminalise abortion,” June 2025.
⁴ Hansard, 20 June 2025, Terminally Ill Adults Bill Debate.
⁵ Evangelium Vitae, 1995, §65.
⁶ Royal College submissions to Parliament, April–May 2025.
⁷ The Cass Review, Final Report, April 2024.
⁸ For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers, UKSC, April 2025.

---

Selective Silence and Social Denial: Church Leaders Face Reckoning on Grooming Gangs

Two northern Anglican bishops have sparked renewed scrutiny of the Church of England’s handling of child exploitation scandals, with one denying ethnic patterns in grooming gang cases, and the other admitting he remained silent out of fear of undermining racial justice efforts.

Bishop of Manchester Rejects Ethnic Link
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Thought for the Day, the Rt Rev David Walker, Bishop of Manchester, insisted that “predatory behaviour” in grooming gangs “is not confined to any particular ethnic, cultural or religious group”¹. His comments came just hours before the publication of Baroness Louise Casey’s long-awaited government report on group-based child sexual exploitation, which concluded that some police forces had failed to record ethnicity data for the majority of grooming gang suspects, and that “disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds” were found among offenders in Greater Manchester, South Yorkshire, and West Yorkshire².

Bishop Walker acknowledged that his diocese had “seen more than its fair share” of such cases, with two separate gangs convicted in recent months—one in Rochdale involving men of Pakistani origin, and another in Bolton involving White British men³. Yet he remained firm in opposing any generalisations:

“This is not a pattern of offending confined to any particular ethnic, cultural or religious group… It’s a natural human tendency to want to think that such horrendous crimes are only carried out by people who are not like us.”⁴

He added that, in his experience, the majority of child sexual exploitation occurs within families, a fact he said too often goes unreported. While supporting efforts to protect girls from gang exploitation, he urged a broader focus on the risks within the home:

“It is here, where the words of Jesus might be hardest to hear.”⁵

Bishop of Blackburn Admits Fear-Driven Silence
In stark contrast, the Rt Rev Philip North, Bishop of Blackburn, has admitted that fear of damaging the Church’s commitment to racial justice led him—and many others—to remain silent on the issue. Writing in The Church of England Newspaper, Bishop North revealed that despite “hearing directly and on many occasions” from working-class families about the danger to their daughters, he refrained from supporting a public inquiry⁶.

Reflecting on Baroness Casey’s report, which he described as “fearless,” Bishop North asked:

“Why did I so readily believe the voices that claimed that calling for an inquiry was a collusion with the far right?”⁷

His candid admission revealed a deeper institutional reluctance within the Church:

“There must be hundreds of other church leaders like me who had heard rumours, stories and concerns yet said nothing.”⁸

North pointed to the disparity between the Church’s vocal positions on economic justice, international conflict, and euthanasia, and its collective silence on grooming gangs. The fear, he said, was of being perceived as undermining social cohesion or fuelling racism—yet in hindsight, that silence did more harm:

“By failing to address the issue, community relations were diminished due to the perception that one ethnic group could target members of another with impunity.”⁹

He concluded with a stark diagnosis of the Church’s cultural disconnect:

“Our corporate silence reflects a deeper problem which is the growing distance between a culturally middle-class established church and the needs and concerns of working-class communities.”¹⁰

A Turning Point?
These contrasting episcopal interventions have highlighted an internal crisis of discernment within the Church of England. Bishop Walker’s emphasis on universal risk has been welcomed by some as a call for moral clarity and protection for all children, regardless of background. Yet critics argue that such statements downplay statistical realities and may inadvertently shield systemic failures from scrutiny.

Bishop North’s confession, by contrast, has been praised for its honesty but also raises serious questions about institutional cowardice and the ethical price of political alignment. His phrase “fear-driven silence” has already entered broader discussion among clergy and commentators.

The government’s statutory inquiry, now underway, is expected to uncover more disturbing truths about the extent of abuse and institutional failure. Whether church leaders will meet this moment with candour—or retreat further into cautious generalities—remains to be seen.

As one working-class parent in Greater Manchester reportedly told Nuntiatoria: “We don’t want scapegoats. But we do want the truth. And we want someone to care enough to say it.” 🔝

¹ Rt Rev David Walker, BBC Radio 4, Thought for the Day, 17 June 2025.
² Baroness Louise Casey, Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation: Scale and Nature Review, Home Office, 16 June 2025.
³ Ibid., case summaries in Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire.
⁴ Rt Rev David Walker, Thought for the Day, loc. cit.
⁵ Ibid.
⁶ Rt Rev Philip North, “Fear-Driven Silence,” The Church of England Newspaper, 26 June 2025.
⁷ Ibid.
⁸ Ibid.
⁹ Ibid.
¹⁰ Ibid.

---

Welby’s Reckoning: Abuse, Accountability, and a Changing Gospel

In a pair of striking public admissions, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby, has simultaneously challenged a high-profile abuse report and acknowledged a personal conversion to affirming same-sex relationships—offering a revealing window into both the failures and evolving doctrines of the contemporary Church of England.

Challenge to the Makin Review
In remarks delivered last month at the Cambridge Union and only recently released online, Welby contested part of the 2023 Makin Review, which investigated the Church of England’s mishandling of abuse allegations concerning the late Christian barrister John Smyth. While the review concluded that Smyth, who abused numerous boys in the UK and South Africa under the guise of evangelical mentoring, should have been reported to authorities far earlier, Welby argued that crucial evidence had not been seen by the reviewer, Keith Makin¹.

“The bit of evidence is emails from Lambeth to Ely, and from Ely, letters to South Africa where Smyth was living,” Welby told students, claiming that the police were informed and that Lambeth had complied with their request not to interfere².

Nevertheless, Welby admitted that he had failed to follow up adequately: “I was insufficiently persistent and curious to follow up and check and check and check that action was being taken.”³ He called his resignation from the Archbishopric in November 2024 “one of the loneliest moments I’ve ever had,” and candidly revealed his own experiences of abuse as a child: “I am aware of what it means.”⁴

The Makin Review had argued that had Smyth been reported properly, his victims might have found justice before his death in 2018. The revelation that Lambeth Palace believes it did notify the authorities raises questions about documentation, transparency, and institutional memory—but also invites scrutiny of whether the Church’s internal culture prioritised institutional risk over survivors’ wellbeing.

A Changing Theology of Sexuality
In the same Cambridge Union address, Welby also offered an unexpectedly personal shift in theological stance. Describing himself as having been “thick,” he confessed that he had previously failed to see the good in same-sex relationships: “When they fall in love… it is a huge blessing for them and for society.”⁵

This marks a continuation of Welby’s trajectory toward affirming LGBT relationships, a position that has sparked intense division within the Anglican Communion. While still upholding formal limits on same-sex marriage within the Church of England, he has supported the introduction of blessing services for couples in civil partnerships and “equal marriages” under the 2014 Act.⁶

This theological repositioning, he implied, emerged not from doctrinal inquiry but from personal observation and emotional conviction: “Even I began to realise that I was being thick.”⁷ In a previous podcast interview, he had similarly blurred the moral distinction between heterosexual and homosexual unions, stating that all sexual activity should occur within “a committed relationship”—effectively reducing marriage to affective permanence, rather than sacramental covenant or procreative telos.⁸

Unmoored Conscience and the Crisis of Authority
These statements cast Welby as a figure of contradiction—penitent yet defiant, contrite yet still reshaping doctrine in his own image. In one breath, he acknowledges the cost of institutional silence over abuse, and in the next, he invokes personal sentiment as a theological compass.

For traditional Anglicans and Catholics alike, his words underscore a broader ecclesial crisis: the replacement of moral law with emotional resonance, and the transfer of theological authority from divine revelation to subjective experience. That such reversals come from the former head of the worldwide Anglican Communion only sharpens the stakes.

As the Church of England continues its “Living in Love and Faith” process, seeking consensus on sexuality, the resignation of Bishop Martyn Snow from the process—citing a belief that no agreement can be reached—points to a deeper fragmentation⁹. Doctrine, in such a context, becomes a matter not of fidelity to Christ, but of fragile institutional compromise.

Welby’s public self-examination may win sympathy, but it also lays bare the price of a Church ever more governed by feelings, fractured processes, and forfeited clarity. If this is indeed the legacy of one of the most prominent Anglican archbishops of recent memory, it is a legacy marked less by courage or consistency than by the quiet erosion of Christian moral witness. 🔝

¹ Makin Review, Independent Review into the Church of England’s Response to Allegations Against John Smyth QC, published 6 October 2023.
² Justin Welby, remarks to the Cambridge Union, recorded May 2025; cited in Premier Christian News, “Welby takes issue with Smyth abuse report,” 27 June 2025.
³ Ibid.
⁴ Ibid.
⁵ Justin Welby, Cambridge Union address, May 2025; reported in Premier Christian News, “Welby: ‘I was thick’ over same-sex relationships,” 27 June 2025.
⁶ The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 legalized civil same-sex marriage in England and Wales. The Church of England does not conduct or recognize same-sex marriages, though General Synod has approved prayers of blessing for such unions.
⁷ Premier Christian News, 27 June 2025.
⁸ The Rest is Politics podcast, 2024 interview with Justin Welby.
⁹ Statement of Rt Rev Martyn Snow, Bishop of Leicester, on stepping down as lead bishop of the ‘Living in Love and Faith’ process, June 2025.

---

The Myth of the Female Catholic Bishop
Why Maria Kubin’s Consecration in Austria Has Nothing to Do with the Roman Catholic Church

A wave of confusion has swept across Catholic media channels in recent weeks following the publication of an interview with Maria Kubin in katholisch.de, the official news portal of the German Catholic Bishops. The piece introduced Kubin as “the first female Catholic bishop,” a phrase that has quickly generated both interest and outrage. But the truth is much simpler—and much less sensational: there are no female bishops in the Catholic Church, and Maria Kubin is not Catholic in the sense that the term has always meant.

Who is Maria Kubin?
Maria Kubin is a psychotherapist from Austria who grew up in a devout Roman Catholic family but drifted away from the Church and eventually entered the Old Catholic Church of Austria, a schismatic body in communion with the Union of Utrecht. In June 2023, she was elected and consecrated as bishop of that ecclesial community, becoming the first woman to hold that office within the Austrian Old Catholic structure. Her theological training took place at the Catholic Theological Faculty in Graz—an institution under the auspices of the state-recognised Roman Catholic academic framework in Austria, though it welcomes a variety of students not all bound by Catholic faith or morals.

In the katholisch.de interview, Kubin explains her departure from the Church in terms now familiar to watchers of Western ecclesial dissent: alienation from the hierarchy, dissatisfaction with Catholic doctrine on women’s roles, and a search for a more “merciful” community. She is currently married for the second time and found the Old Catholic Church’s tolerance on remarriage, women’s ordination, and synodal governance appealing. In her words, the Old Catholic congregation she encountered offered a sense of “togetherness” and an inclusive ecclesial identity lacking in her Catholic upbringing.

What is the Old Catholic Church?
The Old Catholic Church refers to those groups that rejected the definitions of the First Vatican Council in 1870, especially papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction. Though initially conservative in doctrine and liturgy, these groups—particularly those forming the Union of Utrecht—have since adopted a host of modern innovations: married bishops, same-sex blessings, intercommunion with Anglicans and Lutherans, and most notably, the ordination of women. In 2023, Maria Kubin became the first woman consecrated as bishop in this schismatic communion’s Austrian branch.

The Roman Catholic Church regards the Old Catholics as valid but illicit in sacramental terms—but this validity ends when they depart from sacramental form and intent, as they do in the case of women’s ordination. Because only a baptized man can receive valid holy orders (cf. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, 1994), a female “ordination” is not only illicit but entirely null. It lacks both matter and form. As such, Maria Kubin’s consecration is no more sacramentally real than a political ceremony or stage performance.

The Role of Modernist Theological Formation
Of particular concern is Kubin’s education at the Catholic Theological Faculty in Graz, Austria. Though structurally tied to the Roman Catholic Church in Austria, it openly promotes a “critical reflection at the intersection of faith and reason, church, culture and society”—a formula often used by modernist faculties to accommodate deconstructionist, relativist, and secularising ideologies. These are precisely the influences condemned by Pope Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), where he warned of an internal attack on the Church by those who profess the faith while subtly altering its foundations.

Indeed, Graz is not an isolated case. German-speaking Catholic theological faculties, long viewed as incubators of modernist thought, were central to the post-conciliar shift in theology. It was theologians from this milieu—Rahner, Küng, Schillebeeckx, and others—who helped shape the ambiguity and experimentation of the post-Vatican II Church. That Kubin found herself at home in such a setting before seeking “ordination” in a schismatic church is no surprise.

The Real Scandal: katholisch.de’s Platforming of Apostasy
That the German bishops’ official news outlet would give such prominence to Kubin’s story is scandal enough. But it is more than merely poor editorial judgment. The interview was presented without doctrinal clarification or rebuttal, and the tone was one of gentle celebration. In the broader context of the German Synodal Way—a process that has proposed women’s ordination, same-sex blessings, lay preaching, and a host of other heterodoxies—the coverage appears less like reportage and more like subtle advocacy.

As Anthony Stein of Return to Tradition noted in his commentary on the interview:

“This woman is now being platformed as a bishop of the Catholic Church by the German bishops’ own news outlet… When katholisch.de do these kinds of things, they’re endorsing what she’s doing.”

And he’s right. Such uncritical presentation of a heretical act—without even a passing reminder of what the Church actually teaches—erodes the very distinction between truth and falsehood, Church and counter-Church.

Theological Bottom Line
The Church has always taught, and continues to teach infallibly, that only a baptized man can validly receive sacred ordination. This teaching is not a matter of policy but of divine constitution. As Pope St. John Paul II declared:

“Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance… we declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”¹

To continue promoting the idea of “female bishops” as somehow Catholic is to deny both the nature of the Church and the authority of Christ who instituted her.

Conclusion
Maria Kubin is not the first Catholic female bishop because there are no Catholic female bishops. She is a bishop only within a small schismatic community whose theological trajectory long ago abandoned Catholic sacramentality. That such a story would be platformed by katholisch.de without clarification is not a mark of inclusion—it is a sign of doctrinal collapse. The faithful deserve better than synodal confusion masked as progress.

The faithful must pray for Kubin, and for all those misled by counterfeit sacraments and pseudo-ecclesial ideologies. But above all, we must renew our fidelity to Christ’s own design for His Church, trusting not in novelty, but in the unbroken witness of Sacred Tradition. 🔝

¹ Pope St. John Paul II, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (1994), §4.
² Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Pope St. Pius X, 1907.
³ See The Rhine Flows into the Tiber by Ralph M. Wiltgen (1967), detailing German theological influence at Vatican II.
⁴ See also the Declaration Inter Insigniores (1976), Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, reaffirming the impossibility of women’s ordination.

---

The Forgotten Premise of Equality
Recovering the Inherent Value of Human Life in a Post-Christian Society

In an age that claims to prize human rights, dignity, and equality, it is sobering to consider how unevenly these principles are applied. Recent parliamentary moves to strip the unborn of legal personhood—thereby removing even the theoretical protections of the most vulnerable—reveal a deeper crisis: we no longer agree on what it means to be human. This article offers a theological and moral reflection on that crisis, appealing not merely to religious sentiment but to reason, Revelation, and the unchanging dignity of the human person made in the image of God.

The Legal Disappearance of the Human Person
The recent vote to decriminalise abortion up to birth by removing personhood protections for the unborn does more than change public policy—it overturns a foundational principle of justice. Until now, even minimal legal consequences for unlawful abortion were grounded in a juridical recognition that the fetus, though unborn, was human. This legal category has now been abolished. In doing so, the State effectively declares that some human lives are not human enough to matter¹.

The implications are grave. Law no longer exists to protect the voiceless but to empower the strong. The mother’s autonomy is absolutised, and the child’s right to life is nullified. But if human rights are not intrinsic to our nature—if they are instead assigned by public consensus—then they can also be taken away by public consensus. This is the logic of tyranny.

Theological Clarity on Human Dignity
The Church teaches with unwavering clarity that the dignity of the human person is not earned, awarded, or granted by the State. It is endowed by the Creator from the first moment of existence. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” says the Lord to Jeremiah (Jer 1:5). The psalmist likewise confesses: “You knit me together in my mother’s womb” (Ps 139:13)².

The Incarnation itself testifies to the sanctity of unborn life. When the Virgin Mary, newly pregnant with Jesus, greets Elizabeth, the unborn John the Baptist leaps in the womb. He recognises the Messiah not by sight or speech, but through the spiritual reality of His presence³. This is not poetic metaphor. It is a truth confirmed by both Scripture and tradition: the unborn child is a person.

Abortion Is Not Healthcare, Nor Is It a Reproductive Right
The prevailing rhetoric of abortion as “healthcare” or a “reproductive right” distorts language to obscure violence. Healthcare is meant to heal, not kill. Pregnancy is not an illness, and the unborn child is not a tumour or parasite. Abortion, by its very nature, terminates a human life⁴.

To call abortion a reproductive right is equally misleading. Reproduction has already occurred; the child already exists. What is sought is not a right to prevent reproduction, but a right to end a life. This is not semantics—it is a matter of moral clarity.

The wider effects of abortion culture cannot be ignored. Beyond the loss of innocent life, many women suffer psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually after abortion⁵. The silence surrounding post-abortive trauma is part of the same systemic refusal to see the unborn as real. Compassion demands we confront the truth—not only about what abortion does, but about what it means.

The Tyranny of Choice
Our culture elevates autonomy as the highest good. But when autonomy is detached from truth, it becomes a license for self-destruction. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, once wrote: “No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother”⁶. Yet that same principle, when extended to its logical conclusion, justifies acts that violate the dignity of others—especially those who cannot speak for themselves.

The same logic now fuels the push for assisted suicide. It is said to be about choice, dignity, and control. But as Lord Sumption warned, once such a “right” is normalised, it quickly becomes an expectation⁷. The elderly, the ill, the depressed—all may begin to feel that they have a duty to die rather than a right to live.

Christians cannot accept such distortions. Freedom is not doing whatever one wills. It is the liberty to pursue the good. When the State affirms the right to kill the innocent or the suffering, it does not extend liberty. It enshrines despair.

The Collapse of Coherence
Across these moral battlegrounds, one theme recurs: a crisis of coherence. Abortion declares that life without autonomy has no value. Assisted suicide implies that life with suffering is not worth living. Gender ideology claims that the body is not integral to identity. Each position denies an essential truth about what it means to be human.

The result is not liberation, but confusion. How can a society simultaneously say that a fetus is not a person in an abortion clinic, but is a murder victim if killed in an assault? Or that a child too young to get a tattoo may still consent to hormonal sterilisation? These are not marginal inconsistencies—they are symptoms of a worldview collapsing under its own contradictions.

From Theology to Prophecy
The Church’s task is not only to teach but to warn. As Isaiah cried: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Isa 5:20)⁸. The Church does not speak to win approval, but to defend the truth—even when the world does not want to hear it.

Yet this witness is not a condemnation. It is a call to repentance and hope. As St. Paul wrote, “Where sin abounded, grace abounded all the more” (Rom 5:20)⁹. The Gospel proclaims the infinite mercy of Christ for those who have participated in abortion, euthanasia, or any sin against life. But grace requires truth, and truth must be spoken.

Conclusion: A Humane, Christian Society
The true measure of a civilisation is not its technological progress or legal sophistication. It is how it treats the least among its members. The unborn, the elderly, the disabled, the unwanted—these are the ones upon whom the Gospel shines its brightest light.

If we forget the intrinsic dignity of the human person, we not only abandon Christian morality—we sever the roots of any coherent human rights framework. The law may cease to recognise the child in the womb. But the Church cannot. Heaven does not forget what earthly parliaments deny.

Let the Church, therefore, be clear, courageous, and compassionate: every human life matters—not because it is powerful, or wanted, or self-aware—but because it is made by God, redeemed by Christ, and destined for eternity. 🔝

¹ Cf. California Penal Code §187(a) (fetal homicide statute) versus permissive abortion laws in the same jurisdiction.
² Psalm 139:13; Jeremiah 1:5.
³ Luke 1:41–44. Cf. St. Ambrose, Expositio Evangelii secundum Lucam, II.19.
⁴ American College of Pediatricians. (2017). “When Human Life Begins.”
⁵ Reardon, D.C. (2002). “The Aftermath of Abortion: A Review of Psychological Effects.” The Linacre Quarterly, 69(1), 29–41.
⁶ Sanger, M. (1920). Woman and the New Race. Brentano’s.
⁷ Lord Sumption, UK Supreme Court, Nicklinson v Ministry of Justice [2014].
⁸ Isaiah 5:20.
⁹ Romans 5:20.

---

The State’s Death Sentence on Conscience: Canada’s Forced Euthanasia Integration—and What It Portends for the UK

In late 2023, the government of British Columbia ordered the creation of a Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) unit on the campus of St. Paul’s Hospital in Vancouver—one of Canada’s most prominent Catholic healthcare institutions¹. Despite being owned and operated by Providence Health Care, an explicitly Catholic body under the Archdiocese of Vancouver, the hospital was unable to prevent this ideological and ethical intrusion². As of June 2025, the facility is open, operational, and physically housed within the hospital grounds—albeit behind fences and with no public signage³.

The decision to embed a euthanasia unit into a Catholic hospital is a brazen act of state overreach, an affront to ecclesial sovereignty, and a foretaste of what may soon follow in other jurisdictions—including the United Kingdom.

A Grave Moral Contradiction
As canon lawyer Fr. Gerald Murray quipped on The Arroyo Grande Show, the logical absurdity is stark: “Maybe they’ll place it next to the suicide prevention room.” His sarcasm lays bare the contradiction. Catholic hospitals are meant to be places of healing and hope, not state-mandated sites of self-destruction. To force a Catholic institution to house death on demand is not only perverse but blasphemous.

Catholic doctrine is unequivocal: euthanasia and assisted suicide are “intrinsically evil”⁴. Pope St. John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae called euthanasia “a grave violation of the law of God” and affirmed that “no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being”⁵. The Canadian state’s coercive intrusion into Catholic hospitals is thus not only a violation of conscience rights—it is a direct assault on the Church’s witness to the Gospel of Life.

Legal Coercion and the Tyranny of Inclusion
In 2024, the family of Samantha O’Neill, a terminal cancer patient denied MAiD on-site at St. Paul’s, filed a lawsuit against the hospital and the province⁶. At issue is not whether euthanasia should be permitted elsewhere—Canada already allows that—but whether Catholic hospitals must participate. In short: does publicly funded care mean conscience must be sacrificed?

Activists from “Dying with Dignity” say yes. They are explicit in their aim: all hospitals, regardless of affiliation, must provide euthanasia access. One campaigner even declared that “no patient should be denied state-sanctioned death based on the religion of their healthcare provider”⁷. But this framing reveals the core issue: the claim that conscience has no public standing unless it submits to the state’s moral orthodoxy.

UK: Echoes and Warnings
This Canadian case comes as the United Kingdom faces its own existential debate over assisted suicide. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill—introduced in 2024 and likely to return for debate in the new Parliament—proposes a framework strikingly similar to Canada’s original MAiD legislation⁸. Proponents downplay fears of a slippery slope, insisting on tight safeguards and individual choice. Yet Canada is the cautionary tale: what began in 2016 as a limited provision for terminal illness has since expanded to include mental illness, disability, and chronic suffering—with active consideration for extending it to “mature minors”⁹.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists, British Medical Association, and Royal College of Physicians have all issued warnings that so-called “safeguards” are routinely eroded once the logic of euthanasia is accepted¹⁰. The Canadian experience demonstrates precisely that: death ceases to be a tragic exception and becomes a therapeutic option.

Baroness Ilora Finlay, a palliative care expert and member of the House of Lords, put it bluntly: “Legalising assisted suicide opens a door that no amount of regulation can truly close. The pressure on the vulnerable—especially the elderly, the disabled, the poor—is real and deadly.”¹¹

Ahead of the parliamentary vote, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster, issued a clear warning about the potential impact of the proposed legislation on Catholic hospices and care homes. He expressed deep concern that “Catholic institutions may be forced to violate their moral and religious principles or risk losing public funding.”¹³ The Archbishop called on MPs to recognise that “true care respects life until its natural end” and that any legal compulsion to assist in suicide would “irreparably damage the fabric of conscience-based care.”¹³

Public Opinion and the Church’s Witness
Polling in Canada reveals a surprising ambivalence: while many Canadians support the abstract “right to die,” a strong majority (58%) believe that religious hospitals should not be compelled to participate¹². Similar findings have emerged in the UK, where conscience protections remain a valued component of professional ethics—even among those who favour legalising assisted suicide in narrow circumstances.

Yet governments, particularly progressive ones, increasingly regard conscience-based exemptions as outdated impediments to “universal access.” In this view, religious resistance is not a respected dissent but a problem to be managed, legislated, or sued out of existence.

A Battle for the Soul of Healthcare
What the Canadian government has done at St. Paul’s Hospital is not mere policy. It is a theological declaration: that death is a public good, and that even the Church must serve the culture of death in the name of inclusivity. It is a moment of reckoning for Catholics everywhere.

Will we defend the sanctity of conscience and the inalienable dignity of life, or will we yield—incrementally, administratively, quietly—until the Church’s hospitals become instruments of state euthanasia?

This question now confronts lawmakers in Westminster. If the UK legalises assisted suicide, the question will not stop at “may it be done?” but “must it be done by all?” The Canadian example gives us the answer. 🔝

¹ Catholic News Agency, “Euthanasia facility quietly opens at St. Paul’s Hospital in Vancouver,” 23 June 2025.
² CathNews, “Euthanasia unit forced on Catholic-run hospital in Canada,” 26 June 2025.
³ Catholic World News, “Government Operates Euthanasia Clinic at Vancouver Catholic Hospital,” 23 June 2025.
⁴ Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2277.
⁵ John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (1995), §65.
⁶ Church for Vancouver, “MAiD lawsuit poses a serious challenge for St. Paul’s and all Catholic hospitals,” 20 June 2024.
⁷ National Catholic Register, “Family Sues Over Hospital’s Religious Exemption for Euthanasia,” 20 June 2024.
⁸ Hansard, “Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill [HL],” debates in House of Lords and Commons, 2024–2025.
⁹ The Guardian, “Canada considers extending euthanasia to minors,” 3 February 2023.
¹⁰ Royal College of Psychiatrists, “Position Statement on Assisted Dying,” 2023.
¹¹ Baroness Finlay of Llandaff, speech in House of Lords, 20 October 2024.
¹² Catholic News Agency, “Survey in Canada: Religious hospitals should not be forced to provide MAiD,” 13 April 2025.
¹³ Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, statement from Cardinal Nichols ahead of parliamentary debate, 24 June 2025.

---

---

In Other News…

---

Global Christian Persecution and Religious Violence
A Rising Tide of Hatred, and the Silence That Follows

On Sunday, 22 June 2025, two events on opposite sides of the globe drew attention to an increasingly undeniable truth: Christians are under attack—not only in regions long known for persecution, but also in nations once thought secure. From the deadly bombing of a Syrian church to a thwarted mass shooting in Michigan, the message is consistent and chilling. And yet, these acts of violence are all too often met with silence, obfuscation, or polite avoidance by the media, international institutions, and even Christian leaders.

Damascus: The Blood of the Martyrs in the House of God
During the Divine Liturgy at the Greek Orthodox Church of Mar Elias in the Dweil’a district of Damascus, a suicide bomber opened fire on the congregation before detonating an explosive device. The attacker killed at least 22 people and wounded over 60 more, including several children¹. The Islamic State claimed responsibility, and the scale of the carnage suggests a renewed campaign of terror against Syria’s dwindling Christian population².

This was not a remote village chapel—it was a major urban parish, attacked in broad daylight. Local media shared footage of shattered icons, blood-stained pews, and grieving clergy carrying the bodies of the dead from the sanctuary. Despite widespread condemnation by the Greek government, the Arab League, and Pope Leo XIV, international news coverage was muted. For many, it was just another act of violence in a war-weary land. But for Syrian Christians, it was yet another reminder that their faith makes them targets³.

Michigan: Vigilance Thwarts Massacre
On the same day, a gunman armed with a rifle approached CrossPointe Community Church in Wayne, Michigan, during Sunday morning services. As he prepared to enter, a member of the church’s volunteer security team drove a pickup truck into him, incapacitating the threat⁴. One congregant was injured, but a larger tragedy was averted.

The assailant had previously met with the pastor, claiming to be a prophet. According to police, he returned intent on violence. Thanks to training, foresight, and courage, the church responded swiftly⁵. Yet, media coverage focused largely on the deacon’s unconventional heroism—rarely probing the motives behind the attack or situating it within the wider trend of anti-Christian hostility in Western nations.

Nigeria, Pakistan, India: A Pattern Ignored
In early June, over 120 Christians were murdered by Fulani militants in Plateau State, Nigeria⁶. Churches were burned, families slaughtered. But with global attention fixated elsewhere, the victims were quickly forgotten. Meanwhile, Christians in Pakistan continue to face imprisonment and mob violence under blasphemy laws⁷. In India, radical Hindu nationalists routinely target Christian pastors and congregations, often with tacit police support⁸.

According to the 2025 World Watch List, Christians remain the most persecuted religious group globally⁹. Whether under the shadow of Islamist violence, totalitarian atheism, or populist nationalism, the reality is the same: Christian faith, especially when publicly professed, incurs real risk.

The Cultural Double Standard
Imagine if a mosque in Europe were bombed by extremists, or a synagogue attacked by a lone gunman. Would the response be as subdued? The discrepancy is telling. Increasingly, Christian suffering does not fit the dominant narrative of victimhood. Religious persecution, when it does not serve progressive political goals, is treated as an inconvenience.

This cultural double standard leaves persecuted Christians doubly isolated—abandoned by their governments, ignored by the media, and often unsupported even by their fellow believers abroad.

The Call to Vigilance and Prayer

What then must be done?

1. Awareness – Catholic and Christian communities must speak frankly about persecution. Silence is complicity.
2. Security – Parishes should prepare prudently for the possibility of attack. The Church must be as wise as serpents, even while remaining innocent as doves.
3. Solidarity – Aid and advocacy must be intensified for persecuted Christians, especially in places where state protection is absent or hostile.
4. Witness – In the face of hatred, the Christian response must remain supernatural: prayer, sacrifice, and love of enemies.

The blood of martyrs is not only the seed of the Church—it is a prophetic rebuke to a world that has forgotten both justice and God. It is our duty to remember what others try to erase. 🔝

1. Associated Press, “Suicide bomber kills at least 22 in Greek Orthodox church in Syria during Divine Liturgy,” 22 June 2025.
2. Financial Times, “Suicide bombing kills 22 inside Damascus church,” 23 June 2025.
3. Vatican Radio, “Pope Leo condemns Damascus attack as ‘blasphemy against God and man,’” 24 June 2025.
4. People, “Man Opens Fire into a Michigan Church, Deacon Runs Him Over with a Truck,” 22 June 2025.
5. Wayne County Police Press Briefing, 23 June 2025.
6. Christian Solidarity International, “Massacres in Nigeria: 120 Christians Killed in Plateau State,” 5 June 2025.
7. U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Annual Report, May 2025.
8. International Christian Concern, “Radical Hindu attacks on Christians in India surge in 2025,” June 2025.
9. Open Doors International, World Watch List 2025, January 2025.

---

Crisis in Vocations & the Suppression of Tradition in France
Willful Blindness or Ideological Hostility?

In recent decades, France has witnessed a precipitous decline in priestly vocations—yet where the Novus Ordo falters, traditional Latin Mass (TLM) communities continue to flourish. Catholic World News recently reported that if current trends persist, “traditionalists will constitute a majority among Catholic priests of France” by the 2030s¹. Yet in the Bishops’ 2025 vocation report, these dynamic communities are entirely omitted. This erasure is no oversight; it is ideological.

The Silent Majority in Formation
At a meeting between Pope Leo XIV and the French episcopate, Rorate Caeli noted the glaring omission of TLM-affiliated seminarians from the national conclusions on vocations². These young men—devout, serious, formative-oriented—are building what one source called “ecclesial vitality.” But if it doesn’t fit the bishops’ cultural narrative, it dangerously disappears from view.

Projection to 2035: A Future Ignored
Thanks to data compiled by Catholic Culture and Rorate, analysts warn that by 2035 the majority of French priests may be rooted in traditional sacraments and liturgy¹². To ignore this shift is not prudence—it’s willful blindness. As one commentator noted, the trend is not merely statistical but existential: “younger, fervent candidates are gravitating to what they see as authentic Catholicism.”²³

Institutional Hostility vs Ecclesial Enrichment
With vocations rising mainly within traditionalist communities, questions arise. Why suppress these flourishing environments? Why restrict TLM celebrations under Traditionis Custodes while giving short shrift to their formative fruit? A leading French priest has even proposed a personal ordinariate for TLM Catholics to ensure pastoral stability⁶. Yet if such movements are stifled, the hierarchy signals that the life of the Church matters less than conformity to ideology.

Royal’s Warning: Ideology Cloaked in Neutrality
Robert Royal has observed that this is not passivity—it is strategic erasure. He warns that ecclesial authorities are “intentionally ignoring the fastest-growing sector of priestly life in France because they cannot control it.”³⁴ With that comes a crisis not just of numbers, but of identity. If the Church discards its most vibrant voices, what future remains?

Conclusion: Reincorporating a Reborn Priesthood
France stands on a precipice. Its future clergy may well be traditionalists, yet the institutional Church refuses to recognise their existence, gifts, or legitimacy. Ignoring this reality is not pastoral care; it is spiritual malpractice. Catholic authorities—local and universal—must reclaim these communities, listen to their voices, and allow them to flourish.

A Church that suppresses its own renewal—even as it blooms—is betraying both faith and future. It is time to stop ignoring the signs and embrace the vitality emerging from the roots of tradition. 🔝

1. Catholic World News, “As French priestly vocations wane, traditionalist groups grow,” 24 June 2025
2. Rorate Caeli, “The Pope meets French Bishops — The Traditional Mass Orders Ignored in Vocation Crisis report,” 24 June 2025
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
5. OSV News, “Traditionalist Catholics see evangelization potential of Latin Mass,” 20 June 2025
6. OSV News, French priest proposes personal ordinariate for TLM Catholics, 25 October 2024

---

Doctrinal Revolt in Germany and the Blasphemy of Fr. Martin
A Crisis of Fidelity from Mainz to Manhattan

The Catholic Church now faces open doctrinal rebellion from within. In Germany, bishops such as Peter Kohlgraf of Mainz and Heinrich Zimmer-Evers of Dresden-Meißen are accused of abandoning the perennial magisterium by relativising Scripture and calling for the acceptance and blessing of homosexual unions. Meanwhile in the United States, Fr. James Martin SJ has taken the scandal further—publicly comparing same-sex unions to the Most Holy Trinity in conversation with former U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. These episodes are not isolated missteps but symptoms of a broader theological crisis.

The German Revolt
Bishop Kohlgraf recently stated that Scripture holds “no eternal truth” on the issue of homosexuality, and that the Church must reinterpret moral teaching in light of “the lived experience of believers.”¹ This relativistic approach was echoed by Zimmer-Evers and others participating in the German Synodal Path, who argue that the Catechism’s condemnation of homosexual acts as “intrinsically disordered” should be reformed.² Some bishops have gone further, characterising homosexual orientation as a “normal variant” of human development.³

This doctrinal shift—pushed through gradual, politically-calculated steps—has been described by critics as “salami-slicing”: the incremental dismantling of Catholic teaching under the guise of pastoral care. Fr. Gerald Murray has urged the resignation of the bishops involved, accusing them of “mutilating the moral doctrine of the Church” and betraying their episcopal office.⁴

Cardinal Kasper and the Trojan Horse of Women Deacons
Alongside the moral revolution, Cardinal Walter Kasper has revived calls for the ordination of women to the diaconate, framing it as a modest pastoral development. In reality, such a move would contradict the Church’s constant tradition and open the door to further innovation. Critics see it as part of the same strategy: breaking down resistance through ambiguity and phased reform.

Fr. Martin and the Trinity
The most shocking development came not from Europe, but from New York. In a June 2025 interview with Pete Buttigieg, Fr. James Martin attempted to draw a parallel between same-sex parenting and the mystery of the Holy Trinity. Buttigieg spoke movingly of his experience as a father, to which Martin responded: “That love, that sacrifice—that’s a window into the Trinity itself.”⁵

Such a comparison has been widely condemned as blasphemous. Fr. Murray stated that “to analogise a same-sex union—objectively sinful—with the divine communion of the Trinity is not only doctrinally false but a desecration of sacred mystery.”⁶ Traditional Catholic voices have called for ecclesiastical discipline, warning that Martin’s increasing platform within Jesuit and Vatican circles threatens to normalise grave theological error.

The Broader Crisis
What is unfolding is not a debate over tone or strategy, but a rupture in fidelity to revealed truth. The Church teaches that marriage is a sacramental covenant between one man and one woman, ordered to the procreation and education of children, and an icon of Christ and His Church.⁷ Homosexual acts, by contrast, are gravely sinful and contrary to both natural law and divine revelation.⁸

To bless such unions, or to suggest they reflect the inner life of God, is to redefine not only morality but God Himself. This is not pastoral outreach; it is theological insurrection.

Conclusion
The time for euphemism and delay has passed. German bishops who promote heresy must be corrected or removed. Fr. James Martin’s analogies must be denounced clearly and publicly. And the faithful must resist efforts to deform Catholic teaching under the false banner of inclusion. The unity of the Church cannot be preserved at the price of truth. 🔝

¹ Kohlgraf’s remarks cited in Catholic News Agency, 23 Feb 2021.
² Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2357.
³ Catholic World Report, “German bishops welcome initiative seeking change in Church teaching,” 25 Jan 2022.
⁴ Fr. Gerald Murray, The Arroyo Grande Show, June 2025.
⁵ America Magazine, “Fr. James Martin and Pete Buttigieg in conversation,” 24 June 2025.
⁶ Fr. Murray, op. cit.
⁷ Catechism of the Catholic Church, §1601–1666.
⁸ Ibid., §2357–2359.

---

---

Israel, Iran, and the Moral Crisis of the West
A civilisational war and the West’s double betrayal

The recent Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure mark not only a pivotal moment in Middle Eastern geopolitics but a profound moral test for the Western world. As Melanie Phillips argued in her wide-ranging interview on The Brendan O’Neill Show, the war is not merely regional—it is civilisational¹. Israel is fighting for its very existence against a theocratic regime that believes apocalypse will usher in the return of the Shia Mahdi². Western intelligence confirms that Iran had made significant progress in mounting nuclear material onto missiles, and had increased its output to over 300 warheads per month, prompting Israeli military action³.

The head of the snake
Iran’s strategy has long been to surround Israel with a “ring of fire” through proxies—Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq⁴. The October 7 massacre by Hamas was not an isolated act but the opening salvo in a coordinated seven-front war, as documented by the Institute for the Study of War and BBC Monitoring⁵. Israel’s response—widely described as among the most “audacious” air campaigns in recent memory—eliminated key Iranian military figures and nuclear engineers in precision strikes that analysts believe delayed, but did not entirely halt, Iran’s weapons programme⁶.

Steve Rosenberg, writing in a U.S. newspaper, calls Israel’s actions “globally justifiable” and credits its restraint and strategic clarity⁷. Despite the military brilliance, some commentators fear that Iran’s capacity to rebound remains intact, and that the West still lacks a coherent strategy for dealing with Iran’s regional ambitions⁸.

The West’s moral failure
Yet while Israel bleeds, the West lectures. European leaders, including Emmanuel Macron and institutions such as the UN, have issued more condemnations of Israeli retaliation than of the original provocations⁹. Nesrine Malik, writing in The Guardian, critiques Western leaders for gesturing toward diplomacy while refusing to name either side as aggressor or victim¹⁰—precisely the moral ambiguity Phillips highlights as symptomatic of postmodern relativism¹¹.

Antisemitism and scapegoating
The refusal to name evil is not an abstract problem—it has bloodied consequences. Since October 2023, antisemitism has surged globally. The ADL reports a 388% increase in antisemitic incidents in the U.S. alone, with comparable rises across Europe¹². In France, over 1,600 antisemitic incidents were recorded in 2023, quadrupling the prior year’s figures¹³. In Germany, 5,164 such offenses were reported, and Berlin alone sees 7–8 incidents per day in 2024¹⁴.

This is not just statistical. Posters of kidnapped civilians have been torn down with visible hatred. Jewish schools and synagogues require 24-hour police protection. The so-called anti-racists are silent. In this climate, as Brendan O’Neill notes, Israel is demonised as “genocidal,” while Iran is infantilised as a misunderstood victim¹⁵.

A beacon of what the West once was
What drives such hatred of Israel? It is not merely about policy—it is symbolic. As Phillips and other commentators like Douglas Murray and Yoram Hazony have observed, Israel is hated because it reminds the West of what it once was: rooted, confident, morally serious¹⁶. Ayaan Hirsi Ali suggests that Israel’s unapologetic defence of its national identity exposes the cultural void in Western societies that have abandoned their own foundations¹⁷.

Phillips goes further: she argues that Israel—not America, not Europe—may soon emerge as the true leader of the free world. It possesses not only moral clarity but also a unity of purpose the West lacks¹⁸. This is echoed by Hazony, who frames Israel’s civil cohesion as a rebuke to post-Christian Western fragmentation¹⁹.

Strategic realism and real threats
Even those more cautious toward Israel acknowledge the Iranian threat. An editorial in The Times declares that Iran is “a direct threat to Britain,” citing its ballistic missiles, ideological hostility to the West, and its use of global proxies²⁰. Israel, in defending itself, is also defending the broader civilisation to which the West once laid claim.

What hope remains?
Despite 20 months of trauma, Israel is unbowed. Its citizens—from Jewish, Arab, and Druze communities—have displayed extraordinary unity and resilience²¹. The country’s collective spirit, forged in crisis, stands in stark contrast to the West’s fractiousness and cynicism.

Phillips concludes that until the West recovers a moral compass and acknowledges the true stakes of the war, it will remain mired in confusion and hypocrisy. As she puts it, “Only when the West begins to understand what it has done to itself… will it begin to admire, trust, love, and respect Israel and the Jewish people. Not until then.”²² 🔝

¹ Melanie Phillips, The Brendan O’Neill Show, June 2025.
² Ibid.
³ AP News, “Israel killed at least 14 scientists…”, June 2025.
⁴ ISW, Regional Warfare Update, May 2025.
⁵ BBC Monitoring, 2024; ISW Intelligence Briefs, April–June 2025.
⁶ The Guardian, “Israel, US and Iran all claim to have won…”, 24 June 2025.
⁷ Steve Rosenberg, Journal Courier, June 2025.
⁸ Financial Times, “Trump’s Step into the Dark”, 22 June 2025.
⁹ The Times, June 2025; UN Watch Voting Record, 2015–2023.
¹⁰ Nesrine Malik, The Guardian, 23 June 2025.
¹¹ Phillips, The Brendan O’Neill Show.
¹² ADL, Annual Report, April 2024.
¹³ French Ministry of Interior, April 2024.
¹⁴ German Interior Ministry, June 2024.
¹⁵ Brendan O’Neill, The Brendan O’Neill Show, June 2025.
¹⁶ Douglas Murray, The War on the West (2022).
¹⁷ Ayaan Hirsi Ali, UnHerd, October 2023.
¹⁸ Phillips, The Brendan O’Neill Show.
¹⁹ Yoram Hazony, Jerusalem Post, May 2024.
²⁰ The Times, 23 June 2025.
²¹ Phillips, The Brendan O’Neill Show; corroborated in Reuters, June 2025.
²² Ibid.

---

The Cost of Denial: Estrogen Use, Youth Transition, and the Forgotten Duty to Do No Harm

Introduction
In the name of affirmation, we are now witnessing a growing body of evidence that gender medicine—particularly the administration of estrogen to trans-identified males—poses significant, long-term health risks. While policymakers and media outlets continue to frame “gender-affirming care” as life-saving, peer-reviewed studies now confirm elevated rates of blood clots, stroke, cardiovascular death, cognitive decline, infertility, and even cancer. Behind the medical terminology lies a stark ethical reality: vulnerable young people, particularly same-sex attracted boys, are being sacrificed at the altar of ideological dogma.

As the Church teaches, the body is not a mere vessel for self-expression, but the sacramental form through which the human person participates in divine life. To mutilate or irreversibly alter it for psychological conformity is not an act of liberation—it is a violation of nature, truth, and personhood.

1. The Medical Evidence: A Growing Crisis
A 2025 meta-review by Schwartz et al. in Discover Mental Health has compiled data across several studies and national registries, identifying alarming trends among trans-identified males (TIMs) on estrogen therapy¹:

• Blood Clots (VTE): 2.2× higher risk, especially with oral estradiol²
• Stroke: Up to 10× higher risk after six years of estrogen therapy³
• Cardiovascular Mortality: 3× higher risk with estradiol use⁴
• All-Cause Mortality: 1.8× higher compared to cisgender male controls⁵
• Breast Cancer: 22.5 to 40.7× higher than baseline male incidence⁶
• Insulin Resistance: 72% increase after one year; additional 9% in year two⁷
• Cognitive Decline: Reduced brain volume and slower neural processing⁸
• Fertility Collapse: Only 0–24% retain sperm production⁹
• Autoimmune Conditions: 6.6× higher incidence of multiple sclerosis¹⁰
• Rare Complications: Documented cases of pancreatitis, autoimmune flares, and meningiomas¹¹

These findings are consistent with previous data from the Amsterdam Cohort Study, the STRONG study (USA), and ongoing longitudinal research from the Netherlands and Scandinavia. Notably, the risks increase with duration of hormone exposure, compounding over time, and often remain unacknowledged in clinical settings, where the urgency of “affirmation” overshadows the duty to ensure true informed consent¹².

2. Theological Foundations: The Body as Gift, Not Canvas
The Catholic theological tradition, rooted in Scripture and natural law, regards the human body as integral to the person. As Pope Saint John Paul II wrote in Veritatis Splendor, “The body reveals man and expresses the person”¹³. Altering the body to match a subjective sense of identity violates its sacramental role, separating form from purpose.

St. Thomas Aquinas argued that natural inclinations reveal divine order. One such inclination is the integrity of the body and the proper ends of sexuality, including procreation and union within complementarity¹⁴. Hormonal manipulation to erase sexual differentiation is not a healing of disorder, but a radical reconfiguration of nature into artifice.

Furthermore, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, “Man and woman have been created… in their respective beings as man and woman [they] reflect the Creator’s wisdom and goodness”¹⁵. To disrupt this order under the guise of identity affirmation is to distort God’s image in man.

3. A Disproportionate Cost to Same-Sex Attracted Youth
Clinical and social data show that a significant proportion of young males pursuing transition later identify as gay or bisexual. Studies by Littman and others have raised the concern that the “affirmation model” may actually reroute homosexual development into a trans medical pathway, particularly in cultural environments hostile to effeminate or gender-nonconforming boys¹⁶.

In this light, the transition industry’s promotion of early medicalization—often under the language of “suicide prevention”—resembles not a liberation, but a sterilisation campaign for the protogay population. If this medical model were deployed in any other context with such a demographic skew, it would be rightly condemned as unethical.

4. Informed Consent and the Collapse of Medical Ethics
Informed consent presumes that a patient has the capacity, time, and understanding to weigh the risks of treatment. But studies consistently show that minors—and often their parents—are not adequately informed of the irreversible harms and long-term consequences of hormone use, including sterility, loss of sexual function, and heightened risks of chronic illness¹⁷.

Moreover, the psychological framing of gender dysphoria as a condition only treatable by affirmation forecloses the possibility of psychotherapeutic or developmental exploration. This is not choice—it is coercion with a smiling face.

5. A Moral Framework for Reform
The current medical regime surrounding trans-identified youth violates several fundamental principles of ethical healthcare:

• Non-maleficence (Primum non nocere): The principle of “do no harm” is foundational to medicine. When long-term risks outweigh perceived short-term relief, the treatment becomes morally indefensible.
• Beneficence: True care must promote authentic flourishing, not just subjective comfort. Enabling sterility, chronic illness, and alienation from one’s biological sex is not beneficent—it is betrayal.
• Justice: The disproportionate targeting of same-sex attracted and autistic youth raises grave concerns about exploitation of vulnerable populations.
• Truthfulness: Medical professionals must not be complicit in affirming falsehoods about human biology or the reversibility of these interventions.

Healthcare policy must reject ideological capture and return to first principles rooted in truth and charity. Medical boards must reintroduce ethical review of gender clinics, restrict hormonal treatment to fully consenting adults, and reinstate psychotherapeutic protocols as the first line of response.

Conclusion
In the name of compassion, we have institutionalised cruelty. In the name of affirmation, we have sanctioned mutilation. The silence of the Church and the cowardice of the medical profession must give way to truth spoken in love. If we do not protect the young, especially those most vulnerable to manipulation, then we have failed not only as Catholics, but as human beings.

As our Lord warns: “It would be better for a man to have a millstone tied around his neck and be cast into the sea than to scandalise one of these little ones” (Luke 17:2). The time for polite hesitations has passed. We must speak. 🔝

1. Schwartz et al., “Emerging and Accumulating Safety Signals in Transfeminine Hormone Use,” Discover Mental Health, 2025.
2. Asscheman et al., “Venous Thromboembolism Risk with Estrogen in Male-to-Female Transsexuals,” European Journal of Endocrinology, 2014.
3. Nota et al., “Stroke Incidence in Transgender Individuals,” BMJ, 2021.
4. Gooren & T’Sjoen, “Endocrinological Treatment of Transsexual People,” Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2017.
5. Dhejne et al., “Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons Undergoing Sex Reassignment Surgery,” PLOS ONE, 2011.
6. Brown & Jones, “Breast Cancer Risk in Male-to-Female Transgender Patients,” British Journal of Surgery, 2020.
7. Elamin et al., “Metabolic Effects of Cross-Sex Hormones,” Clinical Endocrinology, 2010.
8. Mueller et al., “Neuroanatomical Effects of Hormone Therapy in Transgender Women,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2023.
9. Skordis et al., “Infertility in Transgender People,” Frontiers in Endocrinology, 2022.
10. Simons et al., “Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy and Multiple Sclerosis,” Autoimmunity Reviews, 2024.
11. StatsForGender.org, “Complications and Adverse Outcomes,” accessed June 2025.
12. Amsterdam Cohort Studies; STRONG Study (Kaiser Permanente).
13. Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, §48.
14. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 94, a. 2.
15. Catechism of the Catholic Church, §369.
16. Littman, L., “Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria in Adolescents,” PLoS ONE, 2018.
17. Levine, S., “Informed Consent in Transgender Care,” Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 2022.

---

---

🔝

Archbishop Mathew’s Prayer for Catholic Unity
Almighty and everlasting God, Whose only begotten Son, Jesus Christ the Good Shepherd, has said, “Other sheep I have that are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd”; let Thy rich and abundant blessing rest upon the Old Roman Apostolate, to the end that it may serve Thy purpose by gathering in the lost and straying sheep. Enlighten, sanctify, and quicken it by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, that suspicions and prejudices may be disarmed, and the other sheep being brought to hear and to know the voice of their true Shepherd thereby, all may be brought into full and perfect unity in the one fold of Thy Holy Catholic Church, under the wise and loving keeping of Thy Vicar, through the same Jesus Christ, Thy Son, who with Thee and the Holy Ghost, liveth and reigneth God, world without end. Amen.

🔝

---

Old Roman TV

OLD ROMAN TV Daily Schedule Lent 2025: GMT 0600 Angelus 0605 Morning Prayers 0800 Daily Mass 1200 Angelus 1205 Bishop Challoner’s Daily Meditation 1700 Latin Rosary (live, 15 decades) 1800 Angelus 2100 Evening Prayers & Examen 🔝

🔝

---

Litany of St Joseph

Lord, have mercy on us.	Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ, have mercy on us.	Christ, have mercy on us.
Lord, have mercy on us.	Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ, hear us.	Christ, graciously hear us.
God the Father of heaven,	have mercy on us.
God the Son, Redeemer of the World,	have mercy on us.
God the Holy Spirit,	have mercy on us.
Holy Trinity, one God,	have mercy on us.
Holy Mary,	pray for us.
St. Joseph,	pray for us.
Renowned offspring of David,	pray for us.
Light of Patriarchs,	pray for us.
Spouse of the Mother of God,	pray for us.
Guardian of the Redeemer	pray for us.
Chaste guardian of the Virgin,	pray for us.
Foster father of the Son of God,	pray for us.
Diligent protector of Christ,	pray for us.
Servant of Christ	pray for us.
Minister of salvation	pray for us.
Head of the Holy Family,	pray for us.
Joseph most just,	pray for us.
Joseph most chaste,	pray for us.
Joseph most prudent,	pray for us.
Joseph most strong,	pray for us.
Joseph most obedient,	pray for us.
Joseph most faithful,	pray for us.
Mirror of patience,	pray for us.
Lover of poverty,	pray for us.
Model of workers,	pray for us.
Glory of family life,	pray for us.
Guardian of virgins,	pray for us.
Pillar of families,	pray for us.
Support in difficulties,	pray for us.
Solace of the wretched,	pray for us.
Hope of the sick,	pray for us.
Patron of exiles,	pray for us.
Patron of the afflicted,	pray for us.
Patron of the poor,	pray for us.
Patron of the dying,	pray for us.
Terror of demons,	pray for us.
Protector of Holy Church,	pray for us.
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world,	spare us, O Jesus.
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world,	graciously hear us, O Jesus.
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world,	have mercy on us, O Jesus.
He made him the lord of his household	And prince over all his possessions.

Let us pray:
O God, in your ineffable providence you were pleased to choose Blessed Joseph to be the spouse of your most holy Mother; grant, we beg you, that we may be worthy to have him for our intercessor in heaven whom on earth we venerate as our Protector: You who live and reign forever and ever.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Note: Pope Francis added these titles to the Litany of St. Joseph in his “Lettera della Congregazione per il Culto Divino e la Disciplina dei Sacramenti ai Presidenti delle Conferenze dei Vescovi circa nuove invocazioni nelle Litanie in onore di San Giuseppe,” written on May 1, 2021:

Custos Redemptoris (Guardian of the Redeemer)Serve Christi (Servant of Christ)Minister salutis (Minister of salvation)Fulcimen in difficultatibus (Support in difficulties)Patrone exsulum (Patron of refugees)Patrone afflictorum (Patron of the suffering)
Patrone pauperum (Patron of the poor)

---

🔝