w/c 10/08/25

ORDO

Dies	10 SUN	11 MON	12 TUE	13 WED	14 THU	15 FRI	16 SAT	17 SUN
Officium	S. Laurentii Martyris	Secunda die infra Octavam S. Laurentii Martyris	S. Claræ Virginis	Quarta die infra Octavam S. Laurentii Martyris	Quinta die infra Octavam S. Laurentii Martyris	In Assumptione Beatæ Mariæ Virginis	S. Hyacinthi Confessoris	S. Joachim Confessoris, Patris B.M.V.
CLASSIS	Duplex II	Semiduplex	Duplex	Semiduplex	Semiduplex	Duplex I	Duplex	Duplex II
Color*	Rubeum	Rubeum	Albus	Rubeum	Rubeum	Albus	Albus	Albus
MISSA	Conféssio	Conféssio	Dilexísti	Conféssio	Conféssio	Gaudeamus	Os justi	Dispérsit
Orationes	2a. Dominica IX Post Pentecosten	2a. Ss. Tiburtii et Susannæ Virginis, Mm	2a. Tertia die infra Octavam S. Laurentii Martyris	2a. Ss. Hippolyti et Cassiani Mm	2a. In Vigilia Assumptionis B.M.V.	NA	2a. Secunda die infra Octavam Assumptionis B.M.V. 3a. Septima die infra Octavam S. Laurentii Martyris	2a. Dominica XI Post Pentecosten 3a. Tertia die infra Octavam Assumptionis B.M.V. 4a. In Octava S. Laurentii Martyris
NOTAE	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Trinitatis Ev. propr. ad fin. Missae	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis Ev. propr. ad fin. Missae	Gl. Cr. Pref. de B.M.V.	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Communis	Gl. Cr. Pref. de Trinitatis Ev. propr. ad fin. Missae
Nota Bene/Vel/Votiva		Missae votivae vel Requiem permittuntur		Missae votivae vel Requiem permittuntur	Missae votivae vel Requiem permittuntur

Veritatem Praedicare

Veritatem Praedicare — “To Preach the Truth” — expresses the core mission of Nuntiatoria 10.08.25: a bold, unapologetic proclamation of the Catholic faith in its fullness amid a world darkened by error and compromise. It recalls the apostolic mandate to “preach the word in season and out of season” (2 Tim 4:2), affirming that truth is not only to be defended but declared.

From the Primus

HE ✠Jerome OSJV, Titular Archbishop of Selsey

Carissimi, Beloved in Christ,

The times in which we labour are not merely turbulent—they are revelatory. They strip away illusions and compel every soul, every institution, and every nation to decide: will we serve the Lord, or will we fall prostrate before the idols of the age?

It is in this spirit that I write to you, reflecting on the recent contents of Nuntiatoria 10.08.25, which has not only chronicled but confronted our present crisis. The editorial decisions taken over this period were neither casual nor reactive. They form a coherent testimony: that fidelity to Christ and His Church must involve clear speech, hard truth, and the spiritual courage to stand where others retreat.

The Collapse of Truth in the Public Square
Several articles in this issue have laid bare the consequences of a civilisation that no longer believes in truth. We have seen, with sorrow and clarity, the erosion of free speech in the United Kingdom under the guise of “safety”—a euphemism for ideological control. The Online Safety Act and the Labour government’s attempts to criminalise so-called “conversion therapy” are not isolated phenomena. They are symptoms of a deeper disease: the State’s rejection of objective moral order.

But as Nuntiatoria has rightly insisted, the Church cannot yield to the culture’s new dogmas. Where speech is forbidden, truth must become witness. Where belief is silenced, martyrdom may once more be our portion.

The Crisis Within the Church
This issue has also confronted painful realities within the household of faith. The coverage of Pope Leo XIV’s alleged mishandling of abuse cases in Peru, and his silence in the face of attacks on churches in Syria and Gaza, was not sensationalist. It was necessary.

We must not mistake charity for complicity. The Church’s credibility is not preserved by suppressing the truth, but by cleansing her inner courts. The editorial position taken here is consonant with the example of the prophets and the spirit of St Paul, who rebuked even Peter “to his face, because he stood condemned” (Gal 2:11).

If the Vicar of Christ is to be respected, it must be for his fidelity to Christ. And if he falters, the faithful have a duty—not of rebellion—but of filial correction, offered with gravity, clarity, and sorrow.

The Betrayal of Children and the War on Innocence
One of the defining themes of Nuntiatoria 10.08.25 has been the plight of children. The refusal of the UN to deliver aid to starving families in Gaza, the push for “affirming care” in defiance of the Cass Review in Ireland, and the promotion of gender ideology in UK schools are not separate news items. They are part of the same spiritual war.

In every age, Satan seeks the blood of the innocent. Today, he cloaks himself in the language of health, rights, and compassion. But his goal remains the same: to deface the image of God in the child, to sever the bond of natural family, and to make sterile a generation meant for fruitfulness.

Nuntiatoria has shown how the Church must respond—not with timidity or public relations spin, but with clarity of doctrine, sacrificial love, and protective zeal. The Faith must no longer be content to “dialogue” with darkness. It must proclaim the light.

Liturgy, Identity, and the Restoration of Order
In these pages we have also found reason to hope. The reflections on the Tridentine feasts—St Laurence, the Assumption, St John Vianney—remind us that the Church is never truly conquered. So long as the sacrifice of the Mass is offered in the traditional rites, so long as saints are venerated, so long as the priest lives not for popularity but for holiness, the light of Christ endures.

We see signs of a revival—not the shallow revival of slogans and political optimism, but the deeper stirrings of a people returning to the old paths, the proven faith, the Catholicism that does not bend with the times. The calls from Cardinal Koch to restore the Latin Mass are not yet victories—but they are signs that even within the Vatican, the voice of Tradition is not entirely silenced.

The Pastoral Reflections of this issue—particularly those on martyrdom, liturgical beauty, and Christian social renewal—point to the only way forward: through penance, fidelity, and the rediscovery of God’s law as the path to human flourishing.

Conclusion: A Church Militant or a Church Irrelevant
Nuntiatoria 10.08.25 does not flatter. It exposes. It calls to repentance. It summons us to fight—not with the weapons of this world, but with the courage of truth and the shield of faith. In doing so, it fulfils a sacred duty: to be watchmen on the walls (cf. Ezek 33:7), crying out not when it is convenient, but when it is most needed.

To those who seek a comfortable religion, a worldly Church, a silent sanctuary—this issue has been an unwelcome trumpet blast. But to the faithful remnant, to those who hunger for righteousness, it has been a clarion call. We are not called to blend in. We are called to stand out.

May Christ the King reign in our hearts, our families, our communities, and—by grace—in our nations once more.

With my Apostolic blessing, and in the Sacred Heart of Jesus,

---

Recent Epistles & Conferences

---

---

Liturgical Notes

---

The Time after Pentecost in the Tridentine Rite
The Time after Pentecost in the Tridentine liturgical calendar, sometimes called the “Season after Pentecost,” corresponds to what is now known in the modern Roman Rite as “Ordinary Time.” Yet unlike the postconciliar terminology, the Tridentine designation is not “ordinary” in tone or theology. It is profoundly mystical, drawing the Church into a deepening participation in the life of the Holy Ghost poured out upon the Mystical Body at Pentecost.

A Season of Fulfilment and Mission
The Time after Pentecost is the longest of the liturgical seasons, extending from the Monday after the Octave of Pentecost to the final Saturday before the First Sunday of Advent. It represents the age of the Church — the time between the descent of the Holy Ghost and the Second Coming of Christ. Where Advent looked forward to the coming of the Messiah, and Easter celebrated His triumph, the Time after Pentecost lives out His indwelling. It is the season of sanctification, corresponding to the Holy Ghost in the economy of salvation, just as Advent and Christmas reflect the Father’s sending, and Lent and Easter the Son’s redeeming work.

Dom Prosper Guéranger writes that “the mystery of Pentecost embraces the whole duration of the Church’s existence” — a mystery of fruitfulness, guidance, and spiritual warfare. It is not a neutral stretch of ‘green vestments’ but a continuation of the supernatural drama of the Church militant, sustained by the fire of divine charity.

The Green of Growth — But Also of Struggle
Liturgically, green dominates this time, symbolising hope and spiritual renewal. Yet the Masses of the Sundays after Pentecost contain numerous reminders that the Christian life is not passive growth but an active battle. Readings from St. Paul’s epistles dominate, especially exhortations to moral purity, perseverance, and readiness for the day of judgment. The Gospels often feature Christ’s miracles, parables of the Kingdom, or calls to vigilance — all designed to awaken souls from spiritual sloth.

Fr. Pius Parsch notes that “the Sundays after Pentecost are dominated by two great thoughts: the growth of the Church and the interior life of the Christian.” These twin aspects — ecclesial expansion and individual sanctity — are ever present in the collects and readings, pointing to the fruit of Pentecost as the Church’s leavening power in the world.

The Numbering and Shape of the Season
In the Tridentine Missal, Sundays are numbered “after Pentecost,” beginning with the Sunday immediately following the octave day (Trinity Sunday stands apart). The exact number of these Sundays varies depending on the date of Easter. Since the final Sundays are taken from the “Sundays after Epiphany” not used earlier in the year, the readings and prayers of the last Sundays are drawn from both ends of the temporal cycle. This produces a subtle eschatological tone in the final weeks — especially from the 24th Sunday after Pentecost onward — anticipating the Second Coming and the Last Judgment.

In this way, the Time after Pentecost includes both the lived reality of the Church’s mission and the urgency of her final consummation. The Kingdom is already present, but not yet fully manifest.

The Role of Feasts and the Saints
The richness of the season is also punctuated by numerous feasts: of Our Lady (e.g., the Visitation, the Assumption), of the angels (e.g., St. Michael), of apostles and martyrs, confessors and virgins. Unlike Advent or Lent, which are penitential in tone, the Time after Pentecost includes joyful celebrations that model Christian holiness in diverse vocations. The saints are the mature fruit of Pentecost, witnesses to the Spirit’s indwelling.

As Dom Guéranger says, this season “is the longest of all in the liturgical year: its length admits of its being considered as the image of eternity.” It teaches that the gifts of the Holy Ghost are not given for a moment, but for a lifetime of growth in grace — and for the eternal life to come.

Conclusion: A Time of Interiorisation and Apostolic Zeal
The Time after Pentecost is not a liturgical afterthought, but the climax of the year — the age of the Church, the time in which we now live. Every soul is invited to be a continuation of the Incarnation through the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. The sacraments, the Mass, and the feasts of the saints all nourish this divine life, which began in Baptism and is ordered to glory.

Thus, the Time after Pentecost is not simply the Church’s “green season,” but her most fruitful and missionary phase — a time of living in the Spirit, bearing His fruits, and hastening toward the return of the King. 🔝

---

The Liturgy of the Ninth Sunday Post Pentecost

Missa “Ecce, Deus”
The Ninth Sunday after Pentecost continues the Church’s gradual unfolding of the mysteries of divine judgment and mercy throughout the Time after Pentecost. In the traditional Roman Rite, this Sunday’s liturgy is particularly grave in tone, foreshadowing the punishments that befall those who reject God’s grace and forget His presence in their midst.

The Liturgy of the Day
The Introit (Ps. 53:3–4) opens with a plea for divine help: “Behold, God is my helper, and the Lord is the protector of my soul. Turn back the evils upon my enemies, and cut them off in Thy truth, O Lord my protector.” This sets the tone for a Mass that alternates between urgent supplication and solemn warning.

The Collect begs the Lord to keep His Church in continual piety and protection: “Let Thy merciful ears, O Lord, be open to the prayers of Thy suppliant people: and that Thou mayest grant their desire, make them to ask such things as please Thee.” This prayer teaches the faithful not only to pray, but to pray rightly — with hearts conformed to the will of God.

The Epistle (1 Corinthians 10:6–13) is drawn from St. Paul’s warning to the Corinthians, in which he recounts the sins of the Israelites in the desert — idolatry, fornication, murmuring — and the punishments they incurred. Paul’s message is as relevant today as it was in his time: “Wherefore, he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall.” This passage serves as a stark reminder of how even those who have received divine favor — as the Israelites had — may fall away if they do not persevere in grace.

Dom Prosper Guéranger, in his Liturgical Year, notes that this passage is a direct appeal to Christian souls in every age. He writes: “The Apostle of the Gentiles points out to us the sad history of the Hebrews in the desert, and bids us learn from their fall to be prudent and humble. We, too, are journeying through a desert — this life of exile — and the same dangers that proved so fatal to them surround us.”¹

The Gradual (Ps. 8:2) and Alleluia verse (Ps. 58:2) reflect themes of humility and dependence on God, recalling the childlike praise that overcomes the adversary and the plea for deliverance from enemies.

But the liturgy reaches its most somber moment in the Gospel (Luke 19:41–47), where Our Lord weeps over Jerusalem: “If thou also hadst known, and that in this thy day, the things that are to thy peace: but now they are hidden from thy eyes.” He foretells the destruction of the city because it “knew not the time of its visitation.” Then, entering the Temple, He drives out the sellers and buyers, declaring: “My house is the house of prayer. But you have made it a den of thieves.”

Guéranger remarks on this passage with particular gravity: “Jerusalem has filled up the measure of her iniquities. The day of her ruin is at hand. Jesus sheds tears over her, and by that act of loving justice He reveals to us how divine mercy delays the hour of vengeance even when all seems hopeless.”²

The Offertory (Ps. 18:9–12) and Secret continue the themes of justice and divine order: the law of the Lord is just and pure, enlightening the eyes and rejoicing the heart. The faithful are reminded that the law is not a burden but a path to true peace and joy — if only it is obeyed.

The Communion Antiphon (John 6:57) returns to the Eucharistic theme: “He that eateth My Flesh and drinketh My Blood, abideth in Me, and I in him, saith the Lord.” This verse, nestled within such a stern liturgy, is a glimpse of consolation and a reminder that God’s justice is always paired with mercy — for those who remain in Christ.

The Postcommunion prays that the reception of the sacraments may not bring judgment but protection and healing.

Liturgical Commentary and Patristic Echoes
The tone of this Sunday’s liturgy is penitential and prophetic. Fr. Martin von Cochem, in his Explanation of the Epistles and Gospels, comments that the Lord’s weeping over Jerusalem should lead the faithful to consider the spiritual blindness and worldliness that often infect their own souls: “Let us examine whether our hearts have become dens of thieves through the sins we commit. If our Saviour wept over Jerusalem, how much more should we weep over the state of our own souls?”³

The early Church Fathers often saw the cleansing of the Temple as a type of the purification of the soul. St. Ambrose writes that the soul is a temple of God, and Christ must enter it to cast out all that defiles. Likewise, St. Augustine sees the Lord’s tears as divine sorrow over the obstinacy of man’s free will.

The Ninth Sunday after Pentecost thus teaches that grace rejected becomes judgment incurred. It is a call to repentance, vigilance, and fidelity. As Guéranger concludes: “The Christian who heeds not the lessons given him by God’s Church will one day hear words similar to those uttered over the guilty city: ‘Thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee… and shall not leave in thee a stone upon a stone.’ But today is still the acceptable time. Let us not make the Lord weep over us. Let us return to Him while He is still near.”⁴

1. Guéranger, op. cit.
2. Guéranger, Dom Prosper. The Liturgical Year, vol. 10: Time after Pentecost, Ninth Sunday.
3. Ibid.
4. Cochem, Fr. Martin von. Explanation of the Epistles and Gospels for the Sundays and Feast Days of the Entire Year, Ninth Sunday after Pentecost.

Missalettes (Sunday IX Post Pentecost)

Latin/English

Latin/Español

Latin/Tagalog

The Tridentine Liturgy of the Assumption: Missa “Gaudeamus omnes”

The feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary on August 15 is one of the most ancient and beloved solemnities of the Church, commemorating the bodily assumption of the Mother of God into heavenly glory. In the Tridentine Rite, prior to the reforms of Pius XII and later Paul VI, this feast was celebrated with the Missa “Gaudeamus omnes in Domino”—a Mass that exemplifies the joyful exaltation of Our Lady’s glorification and the unbroken tradition of Marian devotion in the Latin Church.

Structure and Themes of the Tridentine Mass: “Gaudeamus omnes”
The Mass begins with the Introit “Gaudeamus omnes in Domino”, borrowed from the Common of Virgins, but long associated with the Assumption. Its jubilant tone (“Let us all rejoice in the Lord”) invites the faithful to celebrate the triumph of the Blessed Virgin, who was assumed body and soul into heaven and crowned as Queen.

• Collect: The Collect prays that we may be made worthy to be partakers of the glory of Our Lady, whose Assumption we commemorate.
• Epistle: Ecclesiasticus 24:11-20 (“In all these I sought rest, and I shall abide in the inheritance of the Lord”) portrays Wisdom as dwelling in Zion—interpreted as a type of the Blessed Virgin, the Seat of Wisdom.
• Gradual: Audi filia from Psalm 44 (45), followed by the Alleluia: Assumpta est Maria in caelum—“Mary has been assumed into heaven, the Angels rejoice”—a strikingly ancient acclamation that forms the core of the feast’s theological joy.
• Gospel: Luke 10:38-42—the story of Martha and Mary. In the traditional understanding, Mary (of Bethany) is a figure of the contemplative soul, and the Church applies her virtues allegorically to the Blessed Virgin, who “has chosen the better part.”
• Offertory and Communion: The antiphons continue the theme of exaltation—Assumpta est Maria in caelum: gaudent Angeli—and the Communion verse Beatam me dicent omnes generationes reflects the prophetic Magnificat.

The Preface is of the Blessed Virgin Mary and lacks the specific mention of the Assumption that would later be inserted in the 1950s. Yet the whole liturgical context, together with the Office and traditional sermons, made clear the celebration of her bodily assumption into heaven.

Theological and Liturgical Character
This Mass is not narrowly focused on the dogmatic definition of 1950, but represents a broader and older tradition. It draws from Scripture and the liturgical poetry of the early Middle Ages to exalt the glory of Mary as the pure, incorrupt Virgin who has been exalted above the choirs of angels. It reflects the ancient sense that the Assumption is a mystery of joy, of divine favour, and of the dignity of the Mother of God as the New Eve and Queen of Heaven.

The Pian Reform: New Mass and Office under Pius XII
In 1950, Pope Pius XII defined the dogma of the Assumption in the Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus. Four years later, he imposed a new proper Mass for the feast, titled Missa “Signum magnum”, along with a new Divine Office, replacing the ancient liturgical texts that had developed organically over centuries. This change was implemented in the 1955 reforms of the Roman calendar and began a trajectory of liturgical revision that would culminate in the Novus Ordo of 1970.

The new Mass began with the Introit “Signum magnum apparuit in caelo”—from Apocalypse 12, the Woman clothed with the sun, which became the central image of the new formulary. The Collect and other propers were rewritten to reflect more directly the defined dogma of the bodily Assumption. The Gospel was changed to Luke 1:41-50, the Visitation and Magnificat, and the Epistle to Judith 13:22-25, interpreting Judith as a type of Mary.

While these are rich and scriptural choices, the effect of the change was to shift the theological emphasis toward a tightly dogmatic and typologically specific reading of the mystery. What was lost was the liturgical poetry and broader traditional Marian symbolism of the old Mass. The previous Gospel, for instance, subtly extolled Mary’s contemplative soul; the earlier Epistle linked her to divine Wisdom.

The Loss of the “Gaudeamus” Tone
The traditional Missa “Gaudeamus” exudes the calm triumph of centuries of Marian devotion, where joy, mystery, and poetic typology flow together. The newer formulary, by contrast, subordinates the liturgy to a recent doctrinal development, and despite its beauty, it exemplifies a growing tendency in mid-20th-century liturgical reform to impose top-down innovation, often at the expense of organic continuity.

Even as Traditional Catholics gratefully affirm the dogma of the Assumption, there remains a strong sense that the older Mass better preserves the lex orandi of the Church—offering a richer contemplative Marian theology, one which speaks not just to the head but to the heart and imagination of the faithful.

Conclusion
The Tridentine Mass of the Assumption, with its “Gaudeamus omnes” introit and deep poetic resonances, offers a vision of Mary as the radiant Queen of Heaven, model of contemplation, and channel of divine grace. It is a jewel of the Roman Rite, formed over a millennium of tradition. The liturgical changes under Pius XII, though well-intentioned and theologically orthodox, represent a rupture in tone and structure that many now recognise as a prelude to the more aggressive reforms that followed, and an early example of the loss of liturgical continuity so lamented in our time.

For these reasons, traditional communities like the Old Roman Apostolate continue to cherish and preserve the older Assumption Mass as a living inheritance of the Church’s Marian devotion, and as a more perfect liturgical mirror of Our Lady’s own Magnificat: “My soul doth magnify the Lord.”

Missalettes (The Assumption: Gaudeamus)

Latin/English

Latin/Spanish

Latin/Tagalog

---

Spiritual Reflection: for the Ninth Sunday after Pentecost

“If thou also hadst known… the things that are to thy peace!” (Luke 19:42)

On this Sunday, Holy Mother Church places before us the image of Christ weeping over Jerusalem. These are not theatrical tears, but divine tears — the sorrow of the God-Man gazing upon a city destined for destruction because it did not know “the time of its visitation.”

It is one of the most human and most haunting moments in the Gospels: Jesus, full of mercy and truth, looking upon a people who had every opportunity to repent, to believe, and to follow — and who chose instead to remain blind, proud, and obstinate. They had the Temple, the Law, the Prophets, and now the very Son of God in their midst — yet they rejected Him. And still He weeps for them.

This Gospel must pierce our hearts. Not because it is about them, but because it is about us. Every soul is a Jerusalem. We too have been visited by grace — in Baptism, in the whisper of conscience, in the trials that call us back to God, in the Holy Eucharist. And how often have we failed to recognise the moment of that visitation?

God’s judgments are not arbitrary punishments. They are the inevitable result of rejected grace. He comes to give peace — but if we resist Him, we inherit ruin. He offers His presence — but if we profane His temple, even that presence becomes a judgment.

This is not cause for despair, but for holy fear and repentance. The God who weeps is the same God who waits. Even now, He stands at the door and knocks (Apoc. 3:20). He has not ceased to visit His people. He has not stopped calling to our hearts.

The message of this Sunday is twofold: first, wake up, and second, cleanse the temple. Like Jerusalem, our souls may have become busy marketplaces, distracted, noisy, filled with compromises, filled with idols. But Christ comes to cleanse, not to condemn. He comes with a scourge — yes — but that scourge is mercy, and it clears a space for grace to dwell.

“If thou also hadst known…” There is still time. We can know. We can repent. And if we do, His tears will become our joy, and His house — our soul — will truly be a house of prayer once again.

Let us ask today for the grace to recognise the time of our visitation. Let us not delay our conversion. The Lord is near — in Word, in Sacrament, in every prompting toward holiness. May He not weep over us, but rejoice to find us waiting for Him with lamps lit and hearts prepared.

---

A sermon for Sunday

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

St. Laurence/Ninth Sunday after Pentecost

Today we celebrate the feast of St. Laurence, as well as commemorating the Ninth Sunday after Pentecost. St. Laurence was one of the most notable martyrs in the early Church. Little is known about his life save that he was the archdeacon of Rome who was martyred in the persecution under the Emperor Valerian a few days after the Bishop of Rome, Sixtus II. The traditional account of his martyrdom is read in the Breviary during the Octave of this feast. It tells of how when Pope Sixtus II was being led to execution, he told his archdeacon Laurence that he would follow him in three days. During this interval Laurence sought out the poor who were supported by the Church from all over the city and then went to the prefect and invited him to see the treasures of the Church. St. Laurence then told the prefect that the poor were the treasures of the Church. The prefect then had Laurence martyred on a gridiron on this day in 258.

It is important to emphasise that the persecution of the Church was sporadic rather than systematic. Ever since the time of Nero Christians had been viewed as suspect and were constantly in danger of persecution and martyrdom. They were disliked for their refusal to participate in the cult of the Emperor, which was seen as a sign of their disloyalty. Despite this, the Roman Emperors were on the whole content not to force the issue, unless there was a need for a scapegoat to blame for some other problem. Though the Church was gradually expanding throughout the second century it was on the whole still too small and insignificant to trouble the powers that be too much.

All that changed by the middle of the third century as the Empire began to be increasingly threatened by external dangers, and the Church had consolidated into a minority substantial enough to be a serious threat to the stability of the Empire. The Emperor Decius sought to enforce the imperial cult on all his subjects to ensure their loyalty and to isolate and discredit elements deemed subversive. It does not appear that he aimed to target the Church as such, but it inevitably suffered greatly, for though many apostasised under pressure, countless others held firm and added their names to the roll call of martyrs. In 257 the Emperor Valerian renewed this persecution. He especially targeted the leaders of the early Church. It seems that he was aware that the structure of the Church provided an alternative leadership to rival the Empire and believed that the best way to weaken the Church was to force the leadership into either outward conformity or death.

Sixtus II and his archdeacon Laurence were two of the most prominent figures who refused to compromise and were martyred. But by this time the Church was already too numerous to be destroyed and the Emperor Gallienus returned to a policy of unofficial toleration that lasted for the rest of the century. There would be a final great persecution under Diocletian in the early fourth century before the Empire finally admitted defeat and gave the Church official recognition, first as the most favoured and then by the end of the fourth century the exclusive religion of the
Empire.

The martyrdom of St. Laurence also shows the importance of the role of the diaconate in the early Church. The deacons formed a permanent order in their own right in this period and were not simply a stepping stone to the presbyterate (as they often became in later ages). Whereas the presbyters formed a council around the bishop to advise him, the deacons were the eye of the bishop. They were to assist him in the liturgy and also in seeking out the sick who needed to be visited and the poor who relied on the Church for alms. The archdeacon was the chief deacon and was second only to the bishop himself in importance. When a bishop died his archdeacon was often his natural successor. This helps us to understand why St. Laurence was also martyred only a few days after his bishop Sixtus II.

It was also during this period that the minor orders were developed, doorkeepers, exorcists, readers, acolytes and subdeacons. At the time of the persecution under Decius it was said that the Church of Rome had forty six presbyters, seven deacons, seven subdeacons, forty two acolytes, fifty two exorcists, readers and doorkeepers, as well as about fitfteen hundred widows and persons in distress, all of whom were supported by the Church. It formed a primitive equivalent of the modern welfare State, in an age before the Government concerned itself with such matters. In the following century even the pagan emperor Julian noted that the Christians cared not only for their own poor, but for those of the pagans as well. The involvement of the Church in such major projects of social welfare helps explain why the faith spread and was eventually able to establish itself as the religion of the Empire.

The early Church was faithful to the teaching and example of St. Paul, who had devoted a great deal of time and energy to raising funds from the churches that he had founded to support the mother Church in Jerusalem. We hear his exhortation to the Corinthians to contribute to the needs of their fellow Christians in today’s epistle. It was this role that came to be among the special responsibilities of the deacons like St. Laurence, who referred to the poor as the true treasures of the Church.

The principle of dying to live was set out by Jesus himself in today’s Gospel from St. John. If a grain of wheat falls to the ground it remains alone, but if it dies it bears much fruit. The man who loves his life will lose it, but he who hates his life in this world will keep it to eternal life. This was the path to be followed not only by Jesus himself in his sacrificial death for the sins of the human race, but also by his followers. For, as the great second century apologist Tertullian put, the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.

On this day in which we celebrate the martyrdom of St. Laurence, let us pray for grace to strengthen us to be faithful in our witness to the faith and in our charity towards others in our own time and place.

Ninth Sunday after Pentecost

Now all these things happened to them in figure, and they are written for our correction, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall. Let no temptation take hold of you, but such as is human: and God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able; but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it.

In today’s epistle St. Paul warns the Corinthians not to squander the opportunities that they had been given. The Corinthians had been baptised into Christ, had been made children of God and heirs of the promises of God to Abraham. But many of them had fallen away into sin and idolatry. St. Paul therefore set before them what had happened to the children of Israel. They had been redeemed from the house of bondage in Egypt and passed through the Red Sea, but they had then fallen away in the wilderness, and most of them had failed to reach the promised land. Their passage through the sea had been their baptism and their feeding upon the manna, the bread from heaven in the wilderness, had been their holy communion, the food of man wayfaring. Whereas the spiritual food and drink given to the Israelites had been types and shadows, the newer rite was now available to them in the regenerating waters of baptism and the bread of life in the Eucharist. It was now upon them that the end of the age had come and they needed to rise to their birthright and not harden their hearts like their forefathers in the wilderness.

It is important to note that, though most of his Corinthian converts were Gentiles rather than Jews, St. Paul still refers to the children of Israel as “our fathers”. Since all who were baptised into Christ, whether they were Jews or Gentiles, were now members of the new covenant people of God, the Body of Christ, the history of the children of Israel under the old covenant was now their history too. That is why in the great Paschal vigil on Holy Saturday the prayer refers to “the night in which thou didst lead our forefathers, the children of Israel” and the Canon of the Mass refers to “our forefather Abraham”. All who are baptised into Christ are now members of the new covenant and heirs of the promises of God to Abraham. Hence, they can all speak of the children of Israel as our forefathers.

While St. Paul himself and our liturgy take this point for granted, in the second century a heresy arose under the leadership of Marcion which denied this fundamental truth. Marcion claimed to a be a true disciple of St. Paul’s teaching that all are justified by faith in Christ, rather than the Law of Moses. However, he replaced St. Paul’s contrast between the ages of the old and the new covenant with the belief that there were in fact two different deities. According to Marcion the God of the old covenant was the creator of the world and a God of judgement, and of wrath and anger. By contrast, the God of Jesus was a God of love who had come to rescue people from the false God of the Jews. Needless to say this teaching could not be reconciled with St. Paul’s epistles as they stood, so Marcion produced his own version of them in which all references to the purposes of God in salvation history were removed. Against Marcion, the Church strongly insisted that it was impossible to separate the message of Jesus from the message of salvation as recorded in the old testament. The heresy of Marcion wrongly undermined the Jewish roots of the Christian faith and was a denial of the doctrine of creation. Jesus did not come to save the world from the false creator god, but was himself the Word made flesh and thus both the redeemer and the creator.

But, we might say, is it really necessary to make such an issue of this point today? On the contrary, it is a point that cannot be emphasised enough. There is much evidence of Marcionism in modern Christianity. People say that the Christian faith is about love and not about judgement and that the new testament represents a completely different religion from the old. We need not concern ourselves, it is said, with the old testament, but only need to follow the precepts of the new testament. But this is precisely to fall into the same mistake that Marcion made. It is not possible to understand the new testament without recourse to the old testament. If we try to do this we will have to reject much of the new testament as well (which is precisely what Marcion had to do). The result of this error has been aptly summarised as “a God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgement through the ministration of Christ without a Cross.”

Let us pray that we will take heed to the solemn warnings in today’s epistle and not fall away into sin and idolatry, but rather rise to our birthright and be faithful to our calling in our own time and place.

Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Today we celebrate the Feast of the Assumption 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 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 into 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 and her Dormition or Assumption.

Today’s feast, the Dormition or Assumption, celebrates the doctrine that at the end of her earthly life, Mary underwent physical death, but that her body was taken up or assumed into heaven, and her grave was found to be empty. She has passed beyond death and lives already in the age to come, becoming the prototype of the risen and glorified humanity that we all aspire to share in on the last day. The purpose of this doctrine is not to separate her from the rest of humanity, but to show her as the supreme example of one who became by grace what Christ is by nature, which is the ultimate vocation of all humanity.

Speculation about what happened at the end of Mary’s earthly life arose in the early centuries of the Church and the doctrine of her Assumption has been the generally received teaching of the Church in both East and West since at least the sixth century. In 1950, it was made an official dogma of the Western Church by Pope Pius XII. Unfortunately, after the promulgation of this dogma, the traditional Mass for the Assumption was replaced by a new Mass which was designed to teach more explicitly than the traditional Mass for this feast the doctrine of the Bodily Assumption of Mary. A similar situation had already developed in the nineteenth century when the promulgation of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary in 1854 had led to the replacement of the traditional Mass for the Conception of Mary with a new Mass designed to teach more explicitly the new dogma of the Immaculate Conception that Pope Pius IX had proclaimed.

It is important to emphasise this point at the present time. Attention has rightly been given to the renewed attempt to suppress the traditional Roman Rite, and how this cannot be reconciled with the traditional view of the role of the Bishop of Rome to be the guardian of the deposit of faith, rather than an innovator. It is less commonly realised that the root cause of the present crisis lies in the triumph of Ultramontanism in the nineteenth century under Pope Pius IX at the First Vatican Council in 1870. This replaced the older conception of the Bishop of Rome as the guardian of the deposit of faith with a new conception of his role as an innovator who could make new dogmas and innovate in matters of liturgy. This unfortunately led to the replacement of the traditional rites for both the respective feasts of the Conception (in 1854) and the Assumption of Mary (in 1950). This was a foretaste of what was to come after the Second Vatican Council, when the traditional Roman rite was replaced by a new Mass less securely rooted in the tradition of the Church than the traditional Roman rite, which it had previously been the role of the Bishops of Rome to safeguard. It is especially important at the present time that we hold fast to the traditional Roman rite and the older teaching of the Bishop of Rome as a safeguard of the deposit of faith, rather than an innovator.

It is above all from the traditional liturgies of the Church that we learn the Church’s teaching about Mary. As the great Russian theologian Vladimir Lossky put it: “It is hard to speak and not less hard to think about the mysteries which the Church keeps in the hidden depths of  her inner consciousness… The Mother of God was never a theme of the public preaching of the Apostles; while Christ was preached on the housetops, and proclaimed for all to know in an initiatory teaching addressed to the whole world, the mystery of his mother was revealed only to those who were within the Church…. It is not so much an object of faith as a foundation of our hope, fruit of faith, ripened in tradition. Let us therefore keep silence, and let us not try to dogmatise about the supreme glory of the Mother of God.”

We honour Mary, as higher than the cherubim and more glorious than the seraphim, because she above all, in giving birth to the Word made flesh, and being at the foot of the Cross in his passion, sought first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness.

Praise O Mary. Praise the Father
Praise thy Saviour and thy Son
Praise the Everlasting Spirit
Who hath made thee Ark and Throne
O’er all creatures high exalted
Lowly praise the Three in One
Hail Mary! Hail Mary! Hail Mary! Full of grace.

---

This week’s Feasts

August 11 – Ss. Tiburtius and Susanna, Virgin Martyrs

The Church venerates today the holy martyr Tiburtius, a Roman nobleman converted by St. Sebastian, and St. Susanna, a virgin of noble blood whose chastity and courage in the face of imperial pressure shine forth as a light in the pagan darkness of imperial Rome. Their feast is a dual witness to both the power of Christian conversion and the radiant strength of consecrated virginity.

St. Tiburtius, though young, bore intense torments with supernatural joy, standing barefoot on burning coals while confessing Christ. His sufferings remind us that the flames of love for Christ can make even fire seem cool.

St. Susanna, meanwhile, refused the Emperor Diocletian’s command to marry a pagan prince, choosing death rather than betray her mystical union with Christ. In her, we see the Church’s bridal glory reflected: pure, steadfast, and triumphant in the face of worldly force.

These martyrs show us that sanctity often calls for holy defiance—a refusal to compromise with the spirit of the age, and a serene embrace of suffering for the sake of Christ.

August 12 – St. Clare of Assisi, Virgin

The spiritual daughter of St. Francis and foundress of the Poor Clares, St. Clare shines as a mirror of Christ’s poverty and a beacon of contemplative love. In a world of noise, Clare withdrew to silence; in a world of excess, she embraced radical simplicity. Yet in her poverty, she possessed everything, for she had Christ.

Clare’s love of the Eucharist was no mere devotion—it was her life. When the Saracens attacked Assisi, she held up the Blessed Sacrament and repelled the invaders without a sword. Her purity and faith were her shield; her strength came from adoration.

This radiant virgin reminds us that those who abandon all for God lack nothing. In her cloistered life, she accomplished more than many in the courts of power, for hers was the might of hidden sanctity.

August 13 – Ss. Hippolytus and Cassian, Martyrs

Two martyrs, vastly different in life, but united in death. Hippolytus, once an enemy of the Church, a schismatic, perhaps even an antipope, was eventually reconciled and gave his life for Christ, dragged by wild horses. His death is a monument to divine mercy—that no sinner is beyond redemption.

Cassian, by contrast, was a teacher, condemned to death for his Christian faith. His torment was peculiar and excruciating: his own pagan students were ordered to stab him with their styluses. This cruel irony—the innocent shepherd slain by his own flock—points to Christ Himself, betrayed by those He taught and loved.

These martyrs show the range of the Church’s witness: the penitent and the pure, the philosopher and the teacher, all drawn into the one sacrifice of Christ. Their blood waters the Church still.

August 14 – Vigil of the Assumption & St. Eusebius, Confessor

The Vigil of the Assumption prepares us for the Church’s most sublime Marian feast, calling the faithful to prayer, fasting, and purity of heart. As the Mother of God was taken up into heavenly glory, so are we invited to lift our hearts from earthly things. The vigil places before us the question: Are we ready to ascend with Mary, or do we still cling to the earth?

St. Eusebius, a priest of Rome and courageous confessor during the Arian crisis, stands beside Our Lady as a model of pastoral fidelity and doctrinal clarity. When heresy threatened the Church’s foundations, Eusebius stood firm, enduring imprisonment for proclaiming Christ’s true divinity. His very home became a sanctuary for the truth, a domestic church against imperial error.

Together, Mary assumed into Heaven and Eusebius standing firm on earth, invite us to hold fast to the truth with heavenly hope.

August 15 – The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary

“Assumpta est Maria in caelum: gaudent Angeli.” “Mary has been assumed into heaven; the angels rejoice.” The Church today bursts into jubilation at the triumph of the Queen of Heaven.

In this mystery, we behold not merely the glorification of Mary, but the glorification of human nature itself. The body that bore Christ, the womb sanctified by the Incarnation, the heart pierced by the sword of sorrow—this same body is now crowned with eternal light.

Mary’s Assumption is the pledge of our own resurrection. She is the first to receive in fullness what Christ has promised to the faithful. In her, the Church already sees her future perfected. Her feast is a call to detachment from this world, a summons to look toward Heaven where the Virgin reigns beside her Son.

Let every Catholic soul rejoice today: for where Mary has gone, we too may follow—if we love as she loved, believe as she believed, and suffer with Christ as she suffered.

August 16 – St. Hyacinth, Confessor

St. Hyacinth, the “Apostle of the North,” was a Dominican friar whose tireless missionary zeal spread the Gospel from Poland through Russia, Lithuania, and beyond. His miracles were many, but none so moving as the tale of his escape during a Mongol raid, when he carried both the Blessed Sacrament and a heavy statue of Our Lady from a burning church, crossing the river on foot.

In this, Hyacinth shows us that missionary work is not merely about words, but about carrying Christ and His Mother into every trial, every land, every soul. His life is one of apostolic adventure, prayerful daring, and devotion to the Eucharist and Mary.

For a world grown weary and apathetic, Hyacinth is a clarion call to action—to risk everything for the sake of souls, to preach Christ crucified without fear, and to trust that Our Lady and her Son will strengthen every true apostle.

---

Forgotten Rubrics: The Silent Recitation of the Lord’s Prayer by the People

The Lord’s Prayer, taught by Christ Himself, has always held a central place in Christian worship. But in the traditional Roman Rite, it was never intended to be recited aloud by the faithful at Mass. Instead, the Pater Noster was traditionally said aloud by the priest alone—often in a subdued tone—while the people listened silently, inwardly uniting their own petitions with the priest’s. This practice, though now forgotten in most parishes, reveals a profound truth about the structure and theology of the Mass—one that has been obscured by modern trends in liturgical participation.

The Roman Canon, from its earliest form, preserves the Pater Noster as a priestly prayer immediately following the Canon proper and preceding the Fraction. In the Tridentine Missal, the priest recites the Lord’s Prayer standing upright, hands extended, without the usual introduction (“Oremus”) and without turning to the people. It is offered not as a congregational devotion, but as an intercessory prayer uttered by the alter Christus, preparing to receive the Precious Body and Blood. The embolism which follows (“Libera nos…”) further emphasises the sacerdotal nature of the moment.

As Dom Prosper Guéranger explains: “The Church reserves to the Priest the recitation of the Pater noster during the Mass. It is the Father of the family who addresses himself to the common Father for the whole assembly.”¹

The faithful, for their part, were encouraged to pray the Pater Noster silently with the priest, uniting their intentions interiorly with his—but not to vocalise it. The unity was spiritual and hierarchical, not performative. This maintained the sacrificial character of the Mass, in which the ordained minister prays in persona Christi capitis on behalf of the Mystical Body.

The shift toward audible communal recitation came with the 20th-century liturgical movement, especially in the 1958 Instruction on Sacred Music and Liturgy (De Musica Sacra), which for the first time permitted the people to recite the Pater Noster aloud at High Mass “together with the celebrant.”² While framed as a concession, it marked a significant theological shift: from an interior participation anchored in the mystery of the priestly action, to an exterior, verbal participation rooted in communal expression.

This change anticipated the broader revolution of Sacrosanctum Concilium (1963), which popularised the phrase “actuosa participatio” and redefined participation in terms of visibility and activity.³ In the Novus Ordo Missae, the people are not only invited to say the Lord’s Prayer aloud with the priest, but the text itself is now introduced to the congregation (“At the Saviour’s command and formed by divine teaching, we dare to say…”)—as though the faithful were not already formed by centuries of Catholic liturgical discipline and catechesis.

Such changes reflect a flattening of sacred hierarchy and a reconfiguration of the Mass from a propitiatory sacrifice offered by the priest to a communal meal shared by all. The silent recitation of the Pater Noster was not a sign of lay exclusion, but of reverence and theological order: the prayer of the Son to the Father, uttered by the priest in persona Christi, with the people united through him in faith.

As we recover the forgotten rubrics of the Roman Rite, let us not lose sight of what they safeguarded: the mystery of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the uniqueness of the ordained priesthood, and the profound humility of true participation—silent, reverent, interior. This is not merely a memory, but a living reality: in the missions and parishes of the Old Roman Apostolate, the Pater Noster remains rightly reserved to the priest, with the faithful joining silently in spirit, as the Church has always intended.

¹ Dom Guéranger, The Holy Mass: Explained by the Saints, trans. and ed. Dom Benedict, OSB (Loreto Publications, 2009), p. 99.
² Instruction on Sacred Music and Liturgy, De Musica Sacra, §32b, September 3, 1958.
³ Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, §14.

---

---

Veritatem Praedicare: To Preach the Truth

Veritatem Praedicare — To Preach the Truth — is more than a motto. It is a summons, a watchword for those who recognise that silence in the face of error is itself a form of complicity. In an age when ambiguity is mistaken for charity, and compromise is confused with mercy, the Church’s perennial duty remains unchanged: to proclaim the truth of Jesus Christ, “yesterday, today, and the same forever” (Heb 13:8), without fear, without favour, and without faltering.

To preach the truth is not simply to engage in polemic, but to make known the splendour of reality as God has revealed it. It is to unmask the lies that deform human dignity and defile the image of God in man. It is to speak with clarity in a world drowning in euphemism, where sin is rebranded as freedom, and rebellion against nature as compassion. Truth, rightly preached, wounds in order to heal — like a surgeon’s scalpel, it cuts away infection and decay, that life might flourish.

Veritatem Praedicare thus calls the Church not to innovate, but to remember; not to speculate, but to witness. The apostolic charge to “preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine” (2 Tim 4:2) is no less binding now than it was in the days of the Apostles. In fact, it is more urgent—because the darkness is deeper, and the confusion more total.

This motto also reflects the spirit of Nuntiatoria 10.08.25: a project not interested in chasing relevance, but in restoring reverence; not invested in pleasing the world, but in confronting it with the Gospel; not obsessed with platforms or popularity, but compelled by fidelity. Here, the truth is not a brand, a slogan, or a personal interpretation. It is the Word made flesh, the deposit of faith, the voice of the Shepherd that His sheep still recognise.

To preach the truth, then, is to follow Christ to the Cross — for truth, in this world, is costly. But it is also to rise with Him, for truth alone leads to life. Veritatem Praedicare is the motto of those who love souls enough to speak what the world forbids, and who love Christ enough to stand when others fall silent.

---

The Five Precepts of the Church: When You Cannot Attend Mass

An Article Series for Catechists and Confessors: Fr. Paolo Miguel R. Cobangbang CDC

Keeping Holy the Sunday in Times of Moral Impossibility
The Church, in her maternal wisdom, obliges the faithful to sanctify Sundays and Holy Days above all by participating in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Yet she also recognizes that positive moral impossibility—such as illness, caregiving duties, dangerous travel, or grave pastoral scarcity (e.g., lack of access to the traditional Mass)—can exempt a person from the fulfillment of the obligation, sine culpa, without sin.

I. On the Cessation of the Obligation
The Catechism of the Council of Trent states: “The faithful are to be admonished to attend Mass, unless legitimately hindered by sickness or some other necessary cause.” (Part III, The Third Commandment)

Similarly, St. Alphonsus Liguori teaches: “A person is excused from the obligation of hearing Mass when there is a real obstacle that renders it morally impossible—such as illness, the care of infants, or a long distance to travel without grave inconvenience.” (Theologia Moralis, Lib. III, Tract. III, n. 207)

Moral impossibility is not mere inconvenience. As defined in classical moral theology (e.g., Tanquerey, Jone), it refers to situations where fulfilling the obligation would cause serious harm, sin, or disproportionate burden.

This principle is enshrined in the 1917 Code of Canon Law: “A person is excused from hearing Mass if there is a grave reason, such as illness, or if it is morally or physically impossible.” (1917 CIC, c. 1248 §2)

Thus, the faithful who cannot attend the traditional Latin Mass due to its unavailability, or those who are infirm, caretakers, or travelers in remote areas, do not sin in omitting the precept, provided they strive to sanctify the Lord’s Day by other devout means.

---

II. Sanctifying the Lord’s Day without Mass
The Baltimore Catechism (No. 3, Q. 1334) teaches: “When it is impossible to hear Mass, we should read the Mass prayers in a missal, say the rosary, or engage in other devotions.”

Below are some time-tested practices:

1. Spiritual Communion and Missal Prayers
Reading through the texts of the day’s Mass in a hand missal—especially the Epistle, Gospel, and Offertory—and offering a spiritual communion can unite the soul to the altar even in absence. As St. Thomas Aquinas says: “A spiritual communion can produce the same effects as sacramental Communion, according to the fervor of devotion.” (ST III, q. 80, a.1 ad 3)

2. Recitation of the Holy Rosary
St. Louis de Montfort and many saints recommend the Rosary as a substitute devotion when one cannot attend Mass. The Rosary, especially prayed with meditations on the life of Christ, becomes a “little Mass” in its own way.

3. “Mass of St. John” Devotion
This devotional recitation imitates the structure of the Mass and includes prayers attributed to St. John the Evangelist. It has long been used by missionaries, the sick, and those under persecution.

It is said to be spiritually efficacious when said with devotion, acting as a kind of prayerful attendance to the invisible Mass celebrated daily across the world. Full text here:

4. Lectio Divina and Spiritual Reading
Reading from Scripture (especially the Gospels) or from approved catechisms (e.g., Baltimore Catechism, Catechism of Trent) reinforces the sanctity of the day and strengthens the soul’s union with the Church’s life of worship.

5. Hours of the Divine Office or the Little Office
Those able may recite portions of the Divine Office (e.g., Lauds or Vespers) or the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which forms a rich liturgical rhythm for the sanctification of time.

---

III. A Note for Confessors and Catechists
The faithful are not bound by what they cannot fulfill. As St. Alphonsus teaches, “God does not bind impossibilities.” It is pastoral cruelty—not zeal—to suggest that persons in moral impossibility sin gravely by absence from Mass.

Let us instead strengthen them with practical ways of sanctifying Sunday—so they may grow in love of the Holy Sacrifice, even when unable to attend.

---

CURRENT AFFAIRS

---

Pope Leo XIV Faces Criticism Over Role Given to Convicted Clerical Offender

Pope Leo XIV is facing mounting criticism over revelations that a convicted priest, previously found guilty of child pornography offences, is now working within the Vatican’s Secretariat of State. The case concerns Reverend Carlo Alberto Capella, an Italian cleric and former Vatican diplomat whose 2018 conviction drew international attention and condemnation.

Capella was arrested in 2017 while serving at the Holy See’s diplomatic mission in Washington, D.C. U.S. authorities uncovered a significant cache of child sexual abuse images in his possession, leading the Vatican to recall him to Rome. Despite repeated requests from the U.S. State Department to waive his diplomatic immunity so he could be prosecuted under American law, the Vatican refused. Instead, Capella was tried by a Vatican tribunal and sentenced to five years in a Vatican prison.

Reports indicate that after serving less than four years of his sentence, Capella was quietly released in 2022 and returned to work in an administrative capacity at the Secretariat of State. The decision, apparently made under Pope Francis but retained under Pope Leo XIV, has drawn fierce backlash from survivors’ groups and Catholic commentators.

Peter Isely, a founding member of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP), told the Washington Post: “Why not give him a job scrubbing floors, or bathrooms, at the Vatican? Why is he still an official member of the State Department? It’s wrong on every level.”

Capella’s attorney, Roberto Borgogno, claimed the decision was based on “good behaviour” and insisted the priest is not in contact with the public. Nonetheless, critics argue that any official role in the Vatican bureaucracy—especially one linked to diplomacy or statecraft—sends the wrong message, undermining the credibility of recent papal efforts to restore trust in the Church’s handling of clerical abuse.

Under Pope Francis, reforms were introduced to hold bishops accountable, increase transparency, and ensure justice for victims. Pope Leo XIV, elected earlier this year, has so far indicated he will continue these reforms. However, Capella’s reappointment casts doubt on that commitment for some observers.

Catholic bloggers have begun raising questions about the decision-making process, the standards applied to reinstated clergy, and whether genuine contrition and justice are compatible with bureaucratic reintegration. Critics argue that this is a test case for Pope Leo XIV’s resolve in confronting the clerical culture that historically prioritised rehabilitation over accountability.

The Vatican has not yet issued an official statement in response to the controversy.

---

Cardinal Koch Urges Reopening of the Latin Mass Under Pope Leo XIV

Cardinal Kurt Koch has openly stated that it would be “desirable” for Pope Leo XIV to reverse the stringent restrictions placed on the Traditional Latin Mass by Pope Francis, describing Benedict XVI’s more permissive approach as the correct path.

In an interview with kath.net, the Swiss cardinal expressed hope that Pope Leo, though silent so far on liturgical reform, might yet re-open the door to what had been widely accessible under Summorum Pontificum. “Pope Benedict XVI has shown a helpful way by believing that something that has been practiced for centuries cannot simply be banned,” Koch said. “That convinced me.” By contrast, he called Pope Francis’ approach “very restrictive.”

Echoes of Benedict XVI and Ecclesial Unity
Koch, who has led the Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity since 2010, is one of the few remaining senior Vatican officials still strongly identified with the liturgical and ecclesiological sensibilities of Benedict XVI. He was directly involved in the consultations that led to the 2007 promulgation of Summorum Pontificum, which granted broader permissions for the celebration of the usus antiquior. That decree, which treated the pre-1970 Roman Rite as “never abrogated,” was gutted by Francis’ 2021 Traditionis Custodes and a string of increasingly prohibitive clarifications from Cardinal Arthur Roche, head of the Dicastery for Divine Worship.

The result has been a state of continued suppression, especially in dioceses across the United States and Europe. In some jurisdictions, permissions have been revoked even for long-established communities. Yet, as Koch’s comments make clear, even prelates not personally attached to the traditional rite are now willing to speak out—an indicator of the growing unease with the legacy of Francis’ liturgical restrictions.

The Quiet of Leo and the Murmuring of Hope
To date, Pope Leo XIV has issued no public directive or document on the Traditional Latin Mass. However, remarks made during his early days in office praising the symbolic depth of Eastern liturgies were taken by some, including Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, as a sign of his respect for liturgical tradition. Kwasniewski observed that Leo “shows that he is sensitive to the language of symbolism and beauty, and especially to the normative value of tradition.” Yet Leo’s quiet, non-confrontational style has kept many guessing as to whether change will come.

Some hope is found in the fact that Cardinal Raymond Burke has already spoken directly to Leo about the future of the Latin Mass, urging a return to the liberties granted under Benedict. Burke famously called Traditionis Custodes a “severe and revolutionary action,” and continues to serve as a vocal defender of traditional liturgy in the face of institutional hostility.

Koch’s Controversial Vision and Its Critics
Cardinal Koch has previously perplexed traditionalists by suggesting that a “reconciliation of the two forms” might lead to a future synthesis of the Novus Ordo and the Tridentine Mass. This suggestion was sharply critiqued by Dr. Joseph Shaw, chairman of the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales, who reminded Koch that the Roman Rite is not the only liturgical form in the Catholic Church. “There are far more than two liturgical forms,” Shaw noted, warning that “imposing liturgical uniformity on the Church would be an ecumenical disaster.”

While Koch’s own solution may be seen as impractical, his criticism of Francis’ restrictions nonetheless adds to mounting pressure on Pope Leo to act. His comments reflect not only theological reasoning but also a pastoral realism about the limits of top-down reform in matters of worship.

The Path Forward?
The expectation now is that Pope Leo XIV will address the liturgy more directly in the autumn, perhaps in tandem with curial appointments or a wider doctrinal statement. In the meantime, the status quo remains uncertain—liberal bishops continue to suppress, while traditional Mass communities seek refuge in canonically ambiguous arrangements.

Yet Koch’s intervention is significant. It signals a widening consensus that the Francis-era liturgical war was not only imprudent but ultimately untenable. With pressure mounting from voices both inside and outside the traditionalist world, the future of the Latin Mass may again become a defining issue for the pontificate of Leo XIV.

¹ Interview with Cardinal Kurt Koch via kath.net, August 2025.
² Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict XVI, 7 July 2007.
³ Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis, 16 July 2021.
⁴ Cardinal Raymond Burke, public response to Traditionis Custodes, July 2021.
⁵ Interview with Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, LifeSiteNews, March 2025.
⁶ Dr. Joseph Shaw, commentary on Cardinal Koch’s synthesis proposal, Latin Mass Society, July 2020.

---

Pope Leo XIV Accused of Mishandling Abuse Allegations in Peru: Woman Contradicts Diocesan Account

At a press conference organized by the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) on July 31 in Chicago, Ana María Quispe Díaz publicly accused Pope Leo XIV, formerly Bishop Robert Prevost of Chiclayo, of failing to investigate sexual abuse allegations she and her two sisters brought to him in 2022. Her account stands in direct contradiction to repeated denials issued by the Peruvian Diocese of Chiclayo.

Quispe, now a mother, said she was motivated to speak out following Leo’s papal election. She alleged that Fr. Ricardo Yesquén Paiva kissed her on the mouth and touched her inappropriately when she was just nine years old, and that Fr. Eleuterio Vásquez Gonzáles fondled her and shared a bed with her during a diocesan trip while she was a minor.

Diocesan Response and Disputed Timeline
The Chiclayo Diocese insists that Prevost did initiate a preliminary investigation and submitted findings to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) on July 21, 2022. A second submission, including results from a local prosecutor’s probe, was reportedly sent on April 3, 2023. The civil investigation concluded there was insufficient corroboration and that the alleged abuse fell outside the statute of limitations. The DDF subsequently closed the case.

Quispe, however, flatly denied that Prevost offered any pastoral or psychological support, stating: “Prevost never investigated, Prevost never offered us psychological support.” She further claims that in a meeting with Prevost in April 2022, he encouraged the women to go to civil authorities because “in the Church there was no form to investigate.” She now asserts that this was a lie designed to deflect responsibility.

Inconsistencies in Public Ministry Ban
Despite assurances that Fr. Vásquez had been prohibited from exercising ministry publicly, social media posts documented his presence concelebrating Mass with then-Bishop Prevost in March 2023 and leading a Eucharistic procession with children in June. This appears to undermine the diocese’s claim of having taken prompt and effective action.

In December 2023, the case was reportedly reopened by then-apostolic administrator Bishop Guillermo Cornejo Monzón, and Vásquez was once more asked to refrain from public ministry. A diocesan letter dated July 1, 2025, states that Vásquez has now requested laicization and is suspended from priestly functions pending completion of the process, expected to take 6–7 months. Quispe and the other complainants view this as a maneuver to preempt a full canonical trial.

Yesquén’s Case and the Sodalitium Precedent
The diocese said no canonical case was pursued against Fr. Yesquén due to his “degenerative psychiatric illness,” rendering him unable to respond. He had reportedly not ministered for years.

Quispe’s accusations have prompted comparisons with Pope Leo’s earlier involvement in the exposure and condemnation of the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae (SCV), a lay movement riddled with abuse scandals. As bishop, Prevost was commended for advocating on behalf of SCV victims and helping trigger the Vatican’s investigation that led to the group’s suppression. Quispe alluded to this irony in her remarks, stating that Prevost’s reputation for accountability in that case did not align with his handling of her own.

Vatican Reaction and Parolin’s Ambiguity
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, has said in general terms that reports of abuse received by bishops now heading Vatican departments were “handled according to applicable norms” and referred to competent dicasteries. However, he stopped short of naming Leo XIV or clarifying the exact scope of his involvement in specific investigations.

SNAP submitted a formal complaint against then-Cardinal Prevost in March 2025 to multiple Vatican departments, alleging intentional obstruction or evasion of a proper canonical investigation in Chiclayo.

Ongoing Questions
This case raises fresh concerns about episcopal transparency and accountability—especially given that the current pope stands accused of neglecting victims in a diocese he once led. The overlap between public assurances of adherence to canonical norms and visual evidence suggesting otherwise will likely intensify scrutiny of Pope Leo XIV’s broader commitment to reform.

Nuntiatoria is continuing to examine the Chiclayo timeline, including correspondence between the diocese and Quispe, and the involvement of civil prosecutors and canonical authorities. Further investigation is required to clarify how and when each priest’s faculties were limited and whether canonical due process was in fact observed.

¹ SNAP, Press Conference, July 31, 2025, Chicago – video transcript reviewed by NCR
² Diocese of Chiclayo, official statements, July 2022 – July 2025
³ Facebook post by Ana María Quispe, November 2023
⁴ OSV News/Reuters photo of Fr. Vásquez concelebrating Mass, March 2023
⁵ Letter from Diocese of Chiclayo to Quispe, July 1, 2025, via SNAP
⁶ Cardinal Parolin, post-conclave interview, May 2025 (NCR summary)
⁷ Vatican Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, procedural norms on clergy abuse cases
⁸ Suppression of the Sodalitium Christianae Vitae by Pope Francis, January 2025

---

German Bishops Deeply Divided Over Same-Sex Blessings: A Crisis of Doctrine and Unity

The German episcopate is facing open internal division over the implementation of same-sex blessing guidelines, three months after the release of Segen gibt der Liebe Kraft (“Blessings Give Strength to Love”) — a pastoral handout jointly issued by the German Bishops’ Conference and the lay-led Central Committee of German Catholics (ZdK). A comprehensive survey by katholisch.de has revealed stark fault lines among Germany’s 27 dioceses, raising questions about episcopal unity, fidelity to Vatican directives, and the future direction of Catholic sexual ethics in Germany.

Doctrinal Fidelity vs. Pastoral Innovation
Five dioceses — Cologne, Augsburg, Eichstätt, Passau, and Regensburg — have publicly rejected the handout, citing Fiducia Supplicans, the Vatican’s December 2023 declaration on blessings, as the authoritative norm. These dioceses argue that the German document strays significantly from the Vatican’s criteria by encouraging ritualized blessings that risk resembling marriage ceremonies, a move explicitly forbidden by Fiducia Supplicans.

Bishop Bertram Meier of Augsburg issued one of the most theologically precise rebuttals, emphasizing that while the Vatican document permits spontaneous, non-liturgical pastoral gestures to individuals, the German guidelines speak of “aesthetically appealing” planned blessing services — complete with music, ceremony, and liturgical form. This, Meier warns, undermines the “spirit and letter” of the Roman directive and risks legitimizing objectively sinful lifestyles contrary to Catholic moral teaching.

Resistance from the Faithful: ‘New Beginnings’ Speaks Out
The lay-led Catholic initiative Neuer Anfang (“New Beginnings”) has joined episcopal critics, accusing the German hierarchy of using Fiducia Supplicans as a veneer for radical doctrinal change. In statements to CNA Deutsch, the group asserts that the German bishops’ conference has betrayed both the intention and the limitations of the Vatican’s declaration, instead promoting what amounts to a redefinition of Catholic teaching on sexuality through pastoral means.

Cardinal Müller: A ‘Pious Fraud’ and Echoes of Luther
Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued a blistering critique in Die Tagespost, comparing the blessing handout to the selling of indulgences in the Middle Ages — a corruption that triggered the Protestant Reformation. Müller condemned the German bishops’ actions as “a pious fraud,” declaring such blessings “ineffective before God” and theologically incoherent. He reiterated that, according to Sacred Scripture and the constant teaching of the Church, marriage is by nature a covenant between one man and one woman. To bless sexual unions outside this norm, he warned, is to deceive souls and compromise the Church’s witness to the truth.

Proponents Push Forward Despite Warnings
Despite these strong condemnations, 11 dioceses have embraced or are actively implementing the guidelines. The Diocese of Würzburg has taken the unprecedented step of promoting same-sex “blessing services” at wedding exhibitions. In Trier, Limburg, and Osnabrück, the diocesan bulletins now officially feature the handout.

Bishop Georg Bätzing of Limburg — also president of the German Bishops’ Conference — has publicly defended the move as an expression of pastoral care: “We want to strengthen people who live together in love and responsibility.” Similarly, Bishop Peter Kohlgraf of Mainz encouraged diocesan staff to follow the handout in practice. The Diocese of Fulda called it “an important step toward a Church that is oriented to people’s life realities and respects love in all its expressions.”

A Fractured Future
Eleven other dioceses remain ambiguous, either deferring to pastoral discretion or withholding implementation while maintaining cautious language. This middle ground illustrates the tensions that Fiducia Supplicans has unleashed worldwide — tensions which, in Germany, have now erupted into formal division.

The German case highlights a growing doctrinal crisis within the postconciliar Church: whether pastoral practice can contradict doctrinal truth, and whether unity can be preserved when local episcopates choose divergent interpretations of Vatican documents. With episcopal conferences no longer speaking with one voice, and the Vatican issuing ambivalent signals, the universal Church now watches Germany closely — not as a model of renewal, but as a harbinger of fragmentation.

¹ Fiducia Supplicans: On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings, Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, 18 December 2023.
² CNA Deutsch, “Neuer Anfang kritisiert Segensleitfaden scharf,” July 2025.
³ Die Tagespost, Guest Contribution by Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, 18 July 2025.
⁴ katholisch.de, “Erhebung zu Umsetzung des Segenshandouts,” July 2025.
⁵ German Bishops’ Conference and ZdK, Segen gibt der Liebe Kraft, April 2025.
⁶ CNA Deutsch, “Würzburg promotes blessing services at wedding exhibitions,” August 2025.
⁷ Statements from Bishops Bätzing, Kohlgraf, and Fulda Diocese via official diocesan channels, July–August 2025.

---

Selective Outrage and Inconvenient Truths: Unpacking the Vatican’s Accusations Against Israel

Multiple investigations have now cast serious doubt on high-level Catholic claims that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Jewish settlers have deliberately targeted Christian churches and communities in Gaza and Samaria. Despite verifiable inconsistencies in the narrative, Pope Leo XIV and other senior prelates have continued to accuse Israel of aggression while remaining conspicuously silent on the ongoing Islamic persecution of Christians throughout the Middle East and Africa.

Papal Condemnation Amid Conflicting Evidence
On July 20, Pope Leo condemned what he described as an Israeli military attack on the Church of the Holy Family in Gaza, lamenting the deaths of three Christians and stating: “Sadly, this act adds to the continuous military attacks against the civilian population and places of worship in Gaza.”¹ On social media the same day, he posted several messages reinforcing this claim, declaring that a “military attack” on the church had resulted in “the loss of life and injury.”²

The IDF acknowledged that a shell had struck the church compound on July 17 during an operation targeting Hamas infrastructure in Gaza City, but described it as the result of “unintentional deviation of munitions.” “The IDF directs its military strikes solely at military targets and works to mitigate harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure,” a spokesman said. “The IDF regrets any harm caused to civilians.”³

Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, subsequently celebrated Mass in the same church, which remained structurally intact, thus contradicting media reports that had implied its near destruction.⁴ While initially expressing skepticism toward the IDF’s explanation, Pizzaballa refrained from apportioning blame in his formal statement, instead denouncing the war itself as “morally unacceptable and unjustifiable.”⁵

Parolin Escalates Diplomatic Rhetoric
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, later intensified the Holy See’s rhetoric. Speaking to reporters on July 24, he sharply criticized Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, saying: “The damage to sacred sites and the killing of civilians cannot be justified under the pretext of defense. It is our duty to speak out when churches become targets.”⁶ He stopped short of directly accusing the IDF of intentionality but implied negligence at best and moral culpability at worst.

Parolin also rejected the possibility that the Vatican’s statements reflected a political bias, insisting: “The Holy See speaks out for justice wherever it is violated, whether in Gaza, Ukraine, or the Sahel.”⁷ However, critics were quick to note that Parolin, like Pope Leo, did not name Hamas as the ruling authority in Gaza or as the aggressor responsible for embedding weapons in civilian areas—including schools, hospitals, and churches.

Taybeh Arson Claims Undermined
More controversial still were the accusations concerning Taybeh, the last all-Christian town in Palestinian Authority-controlled territory. On July 17, Cardinal Pizzaballa and Greek Orthodox Patriarch Theophilos III led an international delegation to Taybeh and claimed that “radical Israelis from nearby settlements” had set fires near the cemetery and Church of Saint George. They warned that such actions were “part of the systematic attacks against Christians that we see unfolding throughout the region.”⁸

However, the Press Service of Israel (PSI) and other independent outlets quickly exposed significant discrepancies in the narrative. Time-stamped video evidence shows young Jewish farmers running toward the fires with extinguishing equipment.⁹ Earlier that same week, several of those same farmers had filed formal complaints with Israeli police alleging that unknown individuals were lighting fires near their grazing land adjacent to the church compound.¹⁰

Despite claims that the cemetery and church were attacked, police investigators found no damage to the ancient church ruins in Taybeh. U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee publicly refuted the charges: “Investigation reveals no damage to the ancient church in Taybeh & investigation of the origin of fire continues. I have NOT attributed the cause of fire to any person or group as we don’t know for sure.”¹¹

Christian Leaders as Political Instruments
Yet the narrative of Israeli aggression—already contradicted by on-the-ground documentation—has continued to be amplified by Church figures and activists. Palestinian Christian Ihab Hassan, for instance, circulated unverified social media claims of settler gunfire and arson in Taybeh, which were repeated by Catholic outlets without corroboration or police records.¹²

Amit Barak, former project manager of the Christian Empowerment Council, warned that many Church leaders are being used as pawns in political propaganda: “Instead of being leaders of truth, these church leaders have become players controlled on the board. They are pawns. In the past, people blamed the Jews. Today, they blame ‘the settler.’”¹³

Dr. Andrew J. Nolte of Regent University agreed, stating: “The story that can’t be told is what happens to Arab Christians under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.” Nolte cited cases of expropriation, harassment, and intimidation targeting Christians in Bethlehem, Taybeh, and Gaza.¹⁴ “Under Hamas, I’ve been told stories of torture, degradation, and execution without trial for the ‘crime’ of sharing the Gospel,” he added.¹⁵

The Silence on Islamist Persecution
As Catholic leaders escalate their condemnations of Israel, many continue to avoid naming Islamic perpetrators of anti-Christian violence. In Nigeria and Syria, hundreds of Christians have been slaughtered in recent months, often by jihadist militias. Pope Leo has referred vaguely to “armed groups” and “militias,” without identifying the Islamist nature of the attacks.¹⁶

Andrew Doran, a senior fellow with the Philos Project, observed in First Things that many prelates fear speaking honestly about Islamist violence. “Palestinian Christians are dhimmi—people subjugated by Islamic conquest,” he wrote. “Those who remain are instrumentalised in a global ideological campaign whose target is not Israel but the entire West.”¹⁷

“Where Church leaders find themselves unable to speak with moral clarity and candour, or suspect they are the pawns of malicious actors, they should consider whether silence would do less harm,” he concluded.¹⁸

A Disproportionate Reality
According to Rescuers Without Borders, the IDF recorded 663 instances of Jewish violence against Palestinians in Judea and Samaria in 2024. In contrast, over 6,300 attacks were perpetrated by Palestinians against Jews in the same year, including the murder of 27 Israeli civilians and the wounding of more than 300 others.¹⁹

Yet Church leaders continue to speak as though the greater threat to Christians in the Holy Land comes from Jews, not from the region’s dominant Islamist regimes and ideologies. The result is a warped moral compass that turns the Church into a mouthpiece for propaganda rather than a witness to truth.

1. Vatican News, Angelus Address of Pope Leo XIV, 20 July 2025.
2. Pope Leo XIV, Official X (Twitter) Posts, 17–20 July 2025.
3. Israel Defense Forces, Official Statement, 18 July 2025.
4. Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, “Patriarch Pizzaballa Celebrates Mass in Gaza Church,” 20 July 2025.
5. Statement from the Patriarchs after Gaza Visit, 22 July 2025.
6. Catholic News Agency, “Cardinal Parolin Criticizes Israeli Actions in Gaza,” 24 July 2025.
7. Reuters, “Vatican Secretary of State Responds to Gaza Criticism,” 25 July 2025.
8. Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, “Joint Christian Leadership Statement on Taybeh,” 17 July 2025.
9. Press Service of Israel (PSI), Investigation Report on Taybeh Fires, 23 July 2025.
10. Israeli Police, Fire Complaint Log, July 7–11, 2025.
11. Mike Huckabee, X (Twitter) post, 23 July 2025.
12. Ihab Hassan, X (Twitter) posts, 21–22 July 2025.
13. Amit Barak, quoted in PSI Interview, July 2025.
14. Dr. Andrew J. Nolte, Interview with The Stream, July 2025.
15. Testimonies compiled by Christian Empowerment Council, 2023–2025.
16. L’Osservatore Romano, Summary of Papal Remarks on Syria and Nigeria, June–July 2025.
17. Andrew Doran, “The Other Victims,” First Things, July 2025.
18. Ibid.
19. Rescuers Without Borders, Annual Violence Report: Judea and Samaria, 2024.

---

---

In Other News…

---

Jumilla Council Bans Muslim Festivals from Public Spaces, Prompting Outcry Over Religious Freedom

In a move that has ignited national debate and international concern, the municipal council of Jumilla, a town in southeastern Spain’s Murcia region, voted on August 6, 2025, to ban Muslim religious festivals from public spaces, including civic centres and municipal gyms. The ban specifically targets events such as Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, and applies unless the event is organized directly by the local authorities themselves¹.

The council, dominated by members of the Partido Popular (People’s Party), adopted the measure with support from or abstention by councillors from the far-right Vox party. Vox immediately praised the motion online, declaring: “Spain is and will be forever the land of Christian people”².

The official justification for the ban framed it as a defence of local identity. The motion text described religious events like Eid celebrations as “activities alien to our identity,” suggesting that such uses of public space were inconsistent with the town’s “traditions and customs”³.

This rationale was met with fierce opposition from religious leaders, civil rights advocates, and national politicians. Mounir Benjelloun Andaloussi Azhari, president of the Spanish Federation of Islamic Religious Entities (FEERI), condemned the decision as an act of institutionalised Islamophobia: “They’re not going after other religions, they’re going after ours. This is the first time in 30 years I’ve felt afraid”⁴.

Former Jumilla mayor Juana Guardiola, of the Socialist Party (PSOE), questioned the ideological premise of the motion, pointing out that Jumilla’s heritage includes centuries of Muslim influence, particularly from the medieval period⁵. Francisco Lucas, PSOE spokesperson in the regional assembly, denounced the decision as unconstitutional, warning it undermines social cohesion and contradicts Spain’s commitment to religious liberty⁶.

Legal scholars and human rights groups have pointed to Article 16 of the Spanish Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion and prohibits any religion from having a state character. Restrictions on religious practice are only permissible when necessary to preserve public order⁷. Critics argue that the Jumilla ban fails this test and opens the door to broader discrimination under the guise of cultural preservation.

Spain’s Ministry of Inclusion, Social Security and Migration has announced it is reviewing the legality of the council’s decision and may investigate whether it incites or legitimises hate speech against Muslim communities⁸.

The controversy arises amid broader tensions over immigration and identity in Spain. In July 2025, Vox mobilised protests against migrant settlements in nearby regions, and some municipalities have adopted increasingly exclusionary rhetoric. While no other local authorities have passed similar bans thus far, Jumilla’s decision could set a dangerous precedent, potentially emboldening other councils to adopt policies that restrict religious expression under cultural nationalist pretexts.

For Catholic observers, this incident reflects a paradox in the modern secular state: the selective invocation of “identity” to exclude public expressions of faith—even as the Christian heritage of Spain is itself under siege. A faithful Catholic response must not mirror secularist intolerance under another name, but uphold religious liberty within the framework of truth. As Pope Leo XIII warned in Immortale Dei, civil authority must recognise religion’s rightful place in public life—not suppress it for political expediency⁹.

If the state may silence Islam today, it may silence Christianity tomorrow.

1. The Guardian, Outrage as Spanish town bans Muslim religious festivals from public spaces, August 6, 2025.
2. Vox España, official X (Twitter) account, post dated August 6, 2025.
3. Times of India, ‘Activities alien to our identity’: Spanish town bans Muslim festivities in public spaces, August 7, 2025.
4. The Guardian, ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Constitución Española, Article 16: “Se garantiza la libertad ideológica, religiosa y de culto de los individuos y las comunidades sin más limitación… que la necesaria para el mantenimiento del orden público protegido por la ley.”
8. Times of India, ibid.
9. Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei (1885), §§3–6: “It is the duty of the civil power to regulate life in the city according to the rules of the Christian religion and to take care that religion and the Church receive the protection and support of the laws.”

---

A New Primate for a Fractured Church: Cherry Vann Elected Archbishop of Wales

On 30 July 2025, the Church in Wales elected Bishop Cherry Vann of Monmouth as its fifteenth Archbishop—marking not only a personal milestone for the 66-year-old cleric, but a wider shift within Anglicanism across the United Kingdom and beyond. Her election, which required a two-thirds majority from the Church in Wales’ Electoral College meeting at Chepstow, was subsequently confirmed by the Bench of Bishops and announced publicly the following day¹.

Bishop Vann, who has served as Bishop of Monmouth since 2020, succeeds Archbishop Andy John of Bangor, whose resignation earlier this year followed widespread criticism of the Church’s handling of safeguarding complaints and administrative failures, particularly in the Diocese of Bangor. Vann’s appointment thus comes at a time of institutional fragility, both moral and organisational, for the six-diocese province of the Anglican Communion.

The new Archbishop will continue to serve concurrently as Bishop of Monmouth. Her enthronement as Archbishop is expected later this year at Newport Cathedral, the seat of her episcopal see².

Historic Firsts and Personal Testimony
Vann’s election is historic for several reasons. She becomes the first woman to hold the office of Archbishop in the United Kingdom, and the first person in a same-sex civil partnership to lead an Anglican province anywhere in the world³. Her appointment was welcomed by progressive factions within the Anglican Communion as a sign of inclusion and cultural relevance, particularly in the wake of debates surrounding women’s ordination, same-sex unions, and gender identity.

In interviews following the announcement, Vann was frank about her personal journey, including the years she spent concealing her sexual orientation while serving in the Diocese of Manchester. “There’s more to me than being a woman and a lesbian in a civil partnership,” she told Church Times, adding that she hoped her election would help “rebuild trust” in an institution shaken by scandal⁴. Her vision for the Church includes healing, reconciliation, and a more outward-facing witness—though what theological or moral compass will guide that witness remains unclear.

Reactions: Celebration and Separation
Reactions to Vann’s election have been sharply divided along theological lines. Progressive media outlets heralded her rise as a breakthrough for inclusivity in Church leadership, echoing similar sentiments expressed at the time of her original episcopal appointment in 2020. Conversely, conservative Anglican provinces expressed profound concern. The Church of Nigeria, one of the largest provinces in the Anglican Communion, announced on 5 August 2025 that it was severing all formal ties with the Church in Wales, stating that Vann’s election represented a “departure from biblical Christianity and apostolic faith”⁵.

The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) issued a similar statement, reaffirming its support for dioceses and congregations seeking alternative oversight in light of “false shepherds and doctrinal compromise.” These responses signal the increasing fragmentation of global Anglicanism, in which once-shared bonds of Communion are now strained—if not broken—by diverging views on moral doctrine, ecclesial authority, and Scripture.

A Mirror of the Times
Vann’s election is emblematic of the Church in Wales’ trajectory in recent decades—a provincial Church struggling with steep numerical decline, internal crisis, and growing reliance on the language of modern activism to maintain public relevance. Whether her tenure will stabilise or accelerate these trends remains to be seen.

For faithful Christians observing from within or without Anglican structures, the appointment raises unavoidable questions: Is the office of bishop now primarily symbolic—an agent of institutional branding rather than apostolic guardianship? Can a Church which increasingly conforms to the zeitgeist maintain its claim to divine mission? And at what point does inclusion become indistinguishable from doctrinal indifference?

Such questions are not only ecclesiological—they are theological, pastoral, and eschatological. They demand more than slogans; they require repentance, fidelity, and a return to the perennial faith, “once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3).

1. “New Archbishop of Wales elected,” Diocese of St Asaph, 30 July 2025.
2. Ibid.
3. “Cherry Vann: UK’s first female archbishop tells of how she hid her sexuality,” The Guardian, 3 August 2025.
4. “There is more to me than being a woman and a lesbian,” Church Times, 2 August 2025.
5. “Nigerian Anglican Church cuts ties with Church in Wales over lesbian archbishop,” Punch Nigeria, 5 August 2025.

---

Ireland at a Crossroads: Trans Activists Demand ‘Affirming’ Healthcare as Cass Review Rejected

Activists in the Republic of Ireland are intensifying pressure on the Government to overhaul transgender healthcare, rejecting the findings of the 2024 Cass Review and calling instead for the creation of a National Transgender Healthcare Taskforce. The campaign coincides with the tenth anniversary of the Gender Recognition Act (GRA) 2015, which introduced self‑declaration for legal gender changes.

The grassroots group Gender Rebels has launched a petition and open letter addressed to Health Minister Jennifer Carroll MacNeill, stating, “The promise of dignity and recognition for transgender people in Ireland remains profoundly unfulfilled,” and asserting that “the legal right to one’s gender has not been matched by the fundamental human right to the healthcare necessary to live in that gender.” The petition also describes the National Gender Service (NGS) as having “effectively collapsed,” with waiting lists extending beyond ten years⁽¹⁾.

Rejecting the Cass Review as “poorly supported,” the activists instead cite a 2013 survey by the Transgender Equality Network of Ireland (TENI), the largest of its kind in Ireland, which found that nearly 80 percent of respondents had considered suicide, and half of those had attempted it⁽²⁾.

The campaign’s prescription is bold: establish a National Transgender Healthcare Taskforce co-designed with the trans community, implementing a decentralised, community-based system founded on informed consent, as aligned with World Health Organization standards⁽³⁾.

The Cass Review and Its Reception
Commissioned by NHS England and chaired by Dr Hilary Cass, the Cass Review is viewed as the most comprehensive assessment to date of youth gender identity services. It concluded that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones were being prescribed with insufficient evidence and raised serious concerns about long-term effects and lack of clinical oversight⁽⁴⁾.

A Crisis of Clarity
This conflict frames a wider debate between ideologically driven calls for autonomy and the dispatch of clinical scrutiny. Accepting the activist agenda would mean sidelining the most authoritative evaluation of gender services in favor of a consent-based, community-led model. If that occurs, public healthcare may prioritize affirmation over scientific accountability—a dangerous path in which the claim to autonomy threatens to eclipse the responsibility of medicine to heal with prudence.

1. Gender Rebels petition, stating the promise of recognition remains unfulfilled, healthcare access unmet, and that NGS has collapsed with wait times beyond a decade. GCN+1lgbt.ie+3The Atlantic Philanthropies+3ResearchGate+3genderrebels.ie
2. Speaking from the Margins: Trans Mental Health and Well‑being in Ireland (TENI, 2013): largest Irish study of trans mental health; nearly 80% had considered suicide, and half of those had made an attempt. lgbt.ie+3The Atlantic Philanthropies+3ResearchGate+3
3. Petition calls for a Taskforce “co-designed with the trans community” advocating informed-consent, decentralized model aligned with WHO. GCN+2ResearchGate+2
4. Cass Review (2024): concluded that gender services were not evidence-based and lacked clinical rigor. Wikipedia+1GCN

---

“A Risk to Children”: The Church of England’s Silencing of Rev Dr Bernard Randall

Six years after preaching a sermon defending the Church of England’s own teachings on marriage and tolerance, Rev Dr Bernard Randall remains barred from public ministry. Despite being cleared by every statutory authority to which he was referred, Dr Randall is still classified by the Diocese of Derby as “a safeguarding risk”—not for any act of abuse or misconduct, but for preaching a sermon that reflected Christian orthodoxy.

This case, now widely cited as emblematic of the collapse of ecclesial integrity and the weaponisation of safeguarding procedures, continues to expose the contradictions at the heart of the contemporary Church of England.

A Sermon in Defence of Doctrine
In 2019, Dr Randall served as chaplain at Trent College, a Church of England-affiliated independent school in Derbyshire. During that year, the school invited Educate & Celebrate (E&C), an LGBT training organisation, to conduct inclusivity sessions for staff. E&C encouraged teachers to chant “smash heteronormativity”—a phrase whose ideological weight was never contextualised within the school’s Christian identity¹.

Following these sessions, a concerned pupil asked Dr Randall why, in a Christian school, students were being required to embrace ideas contrary to traditional Christian doctrine. In response, Dr Randall delivered a chapel sermon affirming that while all people should be treated with dignity, students were not obligated to accept LGBT ideology uncritically. “You should no more be told you have to accept LGBT ideology than you should be told you must be in favour of Brexit, or must be Muslim,” he said².

Punished for Preaching
For this sermon—delivered in a Church of England chapel, in a Church of England school, expressing Church of England teaching—Dr Randall was reported to Prevent (the UK’s anti-terrorism programme), the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA), and the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO). All four statutory bodies cleared him without raising any concerns³.

Nevertheless, the Diocese of Derby determined that he posed a safeguarding risk and revoked his Permission to Officiate (PTO), effectively banning him from public preaching⁴. In 2022, the Church formally labelled him “a risk to children,” citing only his sermon as the basis⁵. No allegation of abuse, no complainant, and no identified victim have ever been presented.

A Flawed and Discriminatory Process
Amid public outcry and legal pressure, then-Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby ordered a review. In 2023, an independent legal assessment by Gregory Jones KC and Dame Sarah Asplin, then President of Tribunals, concluded that the Diocese’s safeguarding process was “egregious,” “flawed,” and “highly unsatisfactory.” The review found that statutory safeguarding guidelines had not been followed and suggested that Dr Randall was targeted due to his “theology”⁶.

Yet despite these findings, the Diocese refused to restart the process from scratch, instead stepping back just one procedural stage and resuming without any fresh evidence⁷. In June 2025, Dr Randall was finally granted a safeguarding meeting with CofE adviser Lee Elliot and the Bishop of Repton, Rt Revd Malcolm Macnaughton. During that meeting, Dr Randall was again declared a risk—not for anything he had done, but for what he might say in future sermons. When asked to identify a victim, Elliot replied: “There is no named victim… the school has not supplied that”⁸.

Psychological and Spiritual Toll
The human cost of this ordeal has been devastating. Dr Randall has stated that the prolonged exclusion has led to “six years of silence, shame, and spiritual exile.” In a recent interview, he revealed that he had contemplated suicide—including a plan to self-immolate in protest at the General Synod—before ultimately rejecting the idea out of spiritual conviction⁹.

His appeal to the Employment Tribunal, previously dismissed, has now been reinstated after Judge James Tayler ruled in March 2025 that the original judgment was “unsafe” due to apparent anti-Christian bias¹⁰.

The Wider Crisis
Commentators and clergy alike have condemned the Church’s continued treatment of Dr Randall. Journalist Julian Mann called it “ecclesiastical evil,” noting that the CofE has “weaponised safeguarding to suppress faithful ministry”¹¹. Andrea Williams, Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said the case reveals “an institutional hostility to orthodox Christianity within the structures of the Church of England”¹².

In response to Synod questions about whether teaching the Church’s doctrine on marriage now constitutes a safeguarding risk, Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell replied only that “the House of Bishops has not considered the case”¹³.

The CofE’s refusal to reinstate Dr Randall—or even to acknowledge the theological implications of his treatment—exposes a Church in deep crisis. It claims to stand for inclusion, yet marginalises those who affirm its own doctrines. It preaches justice, but punishes orthodoxy. It promises care, but delivers coercion.

If Bernard Randall remains barred from ministry, the Church of England must answer a difficult question: is it still the same Church whose doctrine he preached?

¹ “Chaplain reveals how he was blacklisted as ‘risk to children’ by Church of England,” Anglican Ink, 6 September 2022.
² Randall, B., “Sermon transcript,” published in full by Christian Concern, 2021.
³ “All four statutory bodies cleared him,” Christian Legal Centre, case files, 2020–21.
⁴ “Rev Dr Bernard Randall still barred from ministry,” Free Speech Union, 30 July 2025.
⁵ Ibid.
⁶ “Legal Review of Dr Randall’s complaint,” Gregory Jones KC and Dame Sarah Asplin, 2023; summary reported by Free Speech Union, 2025.
⁷ “Church continues process without fresh evidence,” Christian Today, 30 July 2025.
⁸ “Transcript of safeguarding meeting,” Free Speech Union, June 2025; verified with Christian Legal Centre.
⁹ “Sacked chaplain Bernard Randall says he contemplated suicide,” Christian Today, 29 July 2025.
¹⁰ “Bernard Randall wins permission to appeal,” Anglican Ink, 4 March 2025.
¹¹ “Church of England’s treatment of Bernard Randall is evil,” Christian Today, 30 July 2025.
¹² Andrea Williams, statement to Christian Legal Centre, 2025.
¹³ “Church of England refuses to clarify whether its own doctrine is now a safeguarding risk,” Anglican Ink, 27 July 2025.

---

The Illiberal Ban: Labour’s Conversion Therapy Legislation Threatens Free Speech and Belief

The Labour government’s renewed push to legislate against so-called “conversion practices” may be dressed in the language of safeguarding, but it represents a dangerous intrusion into private conscience, parental rights, pastoral care, and legitimate professional dialogue. Far from protecting vulnerable people, the proposed bill—promised in the 2024 Labour manifesto and reiterated in the 2025 King’s Speech—risks becoming one of the most censorious pieces of legislation in modern British history¹.

Not What It Seems
The phrase “conversion therapy” evokes dark and outdated images of coercion, electroshock treatments, and forced institutionalisation—abuses rightly condemned by all reasonable people. But this legislation is not aimed at banning such extremes, which are already unlawful. Instead, the proposed bill criminalises even consensual conversations, therapeutic approaches, and religious counsel that deviate from contemporary orthodoxies on sex and gender identity².

This goes far beyond outlawing abuse. Labour’s draft policy is expected to explicitly include gender identity and gender expression, meaning that basic statements—such as affirming that sex is immutable or discouraging a child from medical transition—may be treated as criminal acts, even if the person receiving the advice consents³.

An Attack on Free Speech and Belief
Under the banner of inclusion, the legislation threatens foundational freedoms:

• Parents may be prosecuted for guiding their children toward their biological reality.
• Pastors and priests could face legal jeopardy for preaching Christian doctrine on the nature of man and woman.
• Therapists could be barred from exploring underlying trauma if the patient’s declared identity is trans.
• Friends and family who offer gentle persuasion or warn against irreversible hormone or surgical interventions may be reported under the law’s broad scope.

The government is reportedly refusing to include exemptions for consensual conversation, despite repeated warnings from lawyers, doctors, religious leaders, and civil liberties advocates that doing so undermines Article 9 (freedom of religion) and Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention on Human Rights⁴.

No Safeguard Against Ideological Abuse
The most egregious omission from Labour’s plan is its silence on the inverse problem: the aggressive affirmation and medicalisation of children experiencing same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. In today’s climate, it is often young people with same-sex attractions who are guided toward transgender identification by schools, therapists, and online influencers.

This phenomenon—described by detransitioners and whistleblowers alike—is, in effect, a form of gay conversion therapy by another name. But it will not be addressed by the new law. Instead, such practices will be legally enshrined as “affirming care,” even when they result in irreversible harm⁵.

Thus, a law claiming to protect LGBTQ+ people may do the exact opposite: leaving vulnerable youth unprotected against institutional ideologies while criminalising those who urge caution, fidelity to the body, or psychological exploration.

A Chilling Message
The broader consequence of this bill is the redefinition of harm as disagreement. To say “I believe you are not the other sex” or “I believe your identity may not align with your best interest” becomes not simply an opinion but a punishable act. The line between safeguarding and silencing is erased.

If Labour proceeds with this legislation without strong protections for free speech, religious freedom, parental rights, and therapeutic integrity, it will criminalise dissent, not protect dignity.

Conclusion
A just society must distinguish between coercion and persuasion, between abuse and belief. To conflate them is to adopt an ideological regime under the guise of compassion. Britain must not follow the example of countries where Christian teaching is censored, therapy is politicised, and parental guidance is rebranded as violence.

What is needed is not an ideological crackdown, but honest, open, and humane dialogue. A truly inclusive law would protect children from being medicalised for ideological ends and allow families, professionals, and religious ministers to speak the truth in love.

If Labour is serious about rights, it must reject this authoritarian impulse—and remember that true care requires freedom.

1. The King’s Speech (July 17, 2025) – outlined Labour’s intent to ban all “conversion practices,” including trans-related ones. See [Hansard HC Deb 17 July 2025].
2. NHS England and BACP already prohibit coercive or abusive therapies. See: [NHS Guidance on Gender Identity Development Services].
3. Guardian, “Stonewall to fight to ban all LGBT conversion practices,” March 28, 2025.
4. See legal analysis by the Free Speech Union and Human Rights Watch on proposed bans’ incompatibility with ECHR Articles 9 and 10.
5. Tavistock whistleblower David Bell’s testimony and NHS Trust’s own review (2022) described such affirmation-led practices as “experimental” and “unquestioning.” See: Bell Report Summary, NHS England, 2022.

---

---

COMMENT

---

A New Kind of Mission? The Vatican’s Embrace of Influencer Clergy Sparks Evangelical and Ethical Debate

In late July 2025, more than a thousand Catholic digital creators gathered in Rome for an unprecedented summit: the Jubilee for Digital Missionaries and Catholic Influencers. It was a historic moment—one in which the Church formally recognised the digital sphere as a genuine field of evangelisation. The Vatican’s Dicastery for Communication, in collaboration with the Dicastery for Evangelisation, invited priests, nuns, and lay influencers from around the world to explore how social media might serve the cause of the Gospel.

Yet it was not the theological tone of the workshops that made global headlines, but rather the prominence of a new archetype: the influencer priest. Or, in the language of popular media, the “hot priest.”

Leading this digital vanguard are men such as Fr Ambrogio Mazzai, a guitar-playing, mountain-biking cleric with over 460,000 followers on Instagram and TikTok, and Fr Giuseppe Fusari, a muscle-bound art historian known as “the bodybuilder priest,” who has amassed over 60,000 followers. Their followers praise not only their homilies but their physiques. “You are very beautiful and very elegant,” one user wrote under a photo of Fr Mazzai in clerical attire on a hilltop. Another commented, “What a beautiful guy our Father is!”

Fr Cosimo Schena, from the parish of San Francesco in Brindisi, reports that since joining TikTok and Facebook, Mass attendance at his parish has doubled. Known for his gentle poetic reflections and animal-rescue advocacy, he blends faith, affection, and lifestyle content to draw in the disaffected and unchurched.

The Digital Mission and Its Challenges
Church officials, including Paolo Ruffini, prefect of the Dicastery for Communication, have affirmed the legitimacy of such outreach. “The Church is a network of people, not of algorithms,” Ruffini said in his July 28 address. He warned digital missionaries not to become slaves to metrics: “You are not influencers, but witnesses. You are not here to sell a product, but to communicate a life—Christ’s life.”

Pope Leo XIV, who addressed the group in St. Peter’s Square on July 29, echoed this concern. “The culture of Christian humanism must permeate your digital presence,” he said. “Not content that divides or inflames, but presence that brings peace.”

But the juxtaposition of clerical ministry with lifestyle influencer aesthetics—especially those which accentuate youth, beauty, and physical form—has sparked debate within Catholic circles.

Evangelisation or Exhibition?
Critics point to a risk of reducing the sacred identity of the priesthood to a form of personal branding. When priests post shirtless gym selfies or pose in designer clericals for the algorithm, the line between sacred witness and self-promotion becomes blurred.

Fr Fusari, responding to a follower who cited Leviticus in objection to tattoos, replied: “There’s no dogma, I’m sorry… the Church has never spoken out against tattoos.” While his answer may be technically correct, it sidesteps centuries of Catholic caution regarding bodily adornment, especially when such markings stem from vanity or rebellion. The moral law encompasses more than the magisterium’s declarations. Prudence, modesty, and the virtue of temperance apply.

The Catechism reminds the faithful that “life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God” (§2288), but it also warns that “if morality requires respect for the life of the body, it does not make it an absolute value” (§2289). When the medium of evangelisation becomes preoccupied with the body, it may obscure the One who was “despised and rejected of men”—Christ crucified (Isaiah 53:3).

From Mass to the Masses
Yet the fruits, at least numerically, are hard to ignore. Fr Schena claims increased attendance. Fr Mazzai reaches young Italians otherwise absent from the pews. And Pope Leo XIV himself boasts 14 million followers on Instagram and over 52 million on his @Pontifex account across nine languages.

Francis X. Rocca, Vatican editor at EWTN News, put it bluntly: “It’s not going to be the Vatican office of communications or some diocese that generates the most innovation. It’s going to be these young people. They are the vanguard.”

The Vatican’s decision to host the Jubilee was not merely to affirm these content creators, but to catechise them. The event included workshops on ethics, digital discernment, and theological depth, aiming to orient this movement toward fidelity rather than fame.

A Theological Crossroads
There is a tension at the heart of the Church’s digital mission. On one hand, the digital continent is real—a place of encounter, conversion, and dialogue. As St. Paul entered the Areopagus, so must today’s apostles enter the comment box and video stream.

But evangelisation cannot imitate the world’s methods without risking the loss of its message. Beauty, charisma, and creativity are gifts—but they must serve the Cross, not eclipse it.

As one Benedictine commentator observed: “The devil does not fear the Cross posted on social media. He fears the Cross embraced in silence.”

The Church must discern carefully: are these “hot priests” kindling faith—or simply turning up the temperature of worldly admiration? Time—and the fruits—will tell.

¹ Josephine McKenna, “Vatican turns to ‘hot priests’ to spread faith,” The Telegraph, 26 July 2025.
² Vatican News, “Catholic Influencers Gather in Rome for Jubilee Mission,” 29 July 2025.
³ Pope Leo XIV, Address to Digital Missionaries, Vatican.va, 29 July 2025.
⁴ Paolo Ruffini, Speech at Digital Jubilee, VaticanNews.va, 28 July 2025.
⁵ Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§2288–2289.
⁶ Francis X. Rocca, quoted in The Telegraph, 26 July 2025.

---

The Church in Wales Chooses Ideology Over Apostolic Integrity

The election of Cherry Vann as Archbishop of Wales is being celebrated by secular media and progressive factions within Anglicanism as a watershed moment: the first woman, and the first partnered homosexual, to lead an Anglican province in the United Kingdom. To faithful Christians, however, her election is less a cause for celebration than a symptom of the institutional collapse now engulfing the Anglican Communion.

Vann’s election on 30 July 2025, confirmed by the Bench of Bishops and scheduled to be formalised at a future enthronement at Newport Cathedral, comes amid ongoing disintegration of doctrine and discipline within the Church in Wales. Her predecessor, Archbishop Andy John, resigned in the wake of safeguarding failures and administrative breakdowns, especially in the Diocese of Bangor. That Vann now assumes leadership not by recommitting to reform or doctrinal clarity, but by doubling down on the self-image of inclusion and novelty, says much about the priorities of the modern Anglican establishment.

The editorial board of Nuntiatoria views this appointment not merely as controversial, but as an unambiguous rupture with apostolic Christianity.

From Apostolicity to Activism
Bishop Vann’s public persona is rooted less in theological depth or ecclesial continuity than in personal biography. Her media coverage, carefully curated in outlets such as The Guardian and Church Times, foregrounds her gender, her sexuality, and her civil partnership—details which she herself has placed at the heart of her narrative. Indeed, in her own words: “There is more to me than being a woman and a lesbian in a civil partnership”¹—yet these descriptors have dominated every headline and press release since her election. This is not incidental; it is the core appeal of her candidacy.

Such identity politics, drawn from the secular progressive playbook, have replaced theological discernment in ecclesial appointments. The archbishop-elect’s longstanding advocacy for same-sex blessings, gender ideology, and a revisionist moral theology all point to a church in open rebellion against Scripture, tradition, and reason.

The Church in Wales—already functionally unmoored from Catholic order by its acceptance of female clergy, sacramental innovation, and liturgical experimentation—now places itself entirely outside the boundaries of historic Christianity by enthroning a non-celibate lesbian bishop as primate.

Global Anglican Schism Deepens
The response from the Global South was swift. The Church of Nigeria, representing over 20 million Anglicans, severed all communion with the Church in Wales within days of the election². The GAFCON movement reaffirmed its position that those who abandon biblical teaching on sexuality and marriage forfeit any claim to apostolic authority or spiritual oversight. Whether one agrees with GAFCON’s ecclesiology or not, its clarity on moral doctrine stands in stark contrast to the performative tolerance of liberal Anglican provinces.

Cherry Vann’s election thus accelerates a process already well underway: the fragmentation of global Anglicanism into incompatible communions. The illusion of a unified Anglican identity has been exposed as nothing more than institutional nostalgia. What remains is a theological free-for-all in which orthodoxy is optional, and the Church is reimagined as a platform for progressive visibility.

The Anglican Eclipse and the Need for Catholic Clarity
For Catholic observers, the situation presents a cautionary tale. The collapse of Anglican identity is not a distant curiosity; it is the natural endpoint of a model of Christianity divorced from magisterial authority. Once the deposit of faith becomes subject to “discernment,” consensus, or cultural accommodation, the Gospel ceases to be a divine mandate and becomes instead a human project.

Traditional Catholics should not gloat over Anglicanism’s confusion. Rather, we must grieve for the souls misled by these false shepherds, and redouble our own fidelity to the truth. As Pope Leo XIII warned in Satis Cognitum, “the Church is visible because it is a body; and it is a body because it is united in one faith, under one head, with one mission.” Where such unity is absent, so too is the mark of the true Church.

That unity cannot be built on personal narratives, political slogans, or ideological quotas. It is rooted in the unchanging faith of the Apostles, the witness of the martyrs, and the sacraments instituted by Christ. Without these, no matter how many cathedrals remain standing or how many media outlets applaud, the Church is already in eclipse.

1. “There is more to me than being a woman and a lesbian in a civil partnership,” Church Times, 2 August 2025.
2. “Nigerian Anglican Church cuts ties with Church in Wales over lesbian archbishop,” Punch Nigeria, 5 August 2025.

---

Britain Joins the Censorship Bloc: The Online Safety Act and the End of Lawful Speech

The People’s Republic of China. The Islamic Republic of Iran. And now—tragically—the United Kingdom.

What do these governments have in common? All exercise state-sanctioned control over the flow of information online. And in the UK, it is no longer speculation. It is law.

Since the enforcement of the Online Safety Act, a sweeping censorship regime has been rolled out by the Labour government, enabling the state—via Ofcom and cooperative tech giants—to restrict, block, and erase lawful content under the guise of “safety”¹.

Despite repeated assurances that the Act targets only “harmful” or “illegal” content, early enforcement demonstrates otherwise. In just the first fortnight of implementation, the mask has slipped.

A Pattern of Censorship Emerges

• A speech by Conservative MP Katie Lam, in which she denounced government inaction on grooming gangs and called for transparency in local inquiries, has been scrubbed from public access online. This was a speech given in Parliament—a place that once prided itself on the protection of free debate².
• Posts in support of single-sex spaces—a lawful and widely supported position in defence of women’s rights and safety—have been removed from UK users’ feeds on X³.
• Footage of a peaceful protest questioning the government’s approach to illegal Channel crossings has been made unavailable online in the UK⁴.
• A video featuring Labour’s own Neil O’Brien, expressing concern over Britain’s plummeting birth rate and the financial burden facing young families, has been blocked without explanation⁵.
• And in a chilling twist of irony, a thread by Free Speech Union spokesman Benjamin Jones—which documented these very acts of censorship—has itself been censored⁶.

A Legal Framework Built to Suppress
These are not isolated mistakes. They are the logical outcome of a legal regime that grants the state and its ideological allies the power to determine what the public may know, debate, and believe.

The Online Safety Act, which received Royal Assent in October 2023, imposes sweeping “duties of care” on tech companies to prevent the spread of “harmful” content—even when that content is entirely lawful⁷. Enforcement began in stages in early 2025, with the most far-reaching provisions, including content takedowns and platform fines, taking effect from March and July 2025⁸.

Already, platforms such as Reddit, Spotify, X, Grindr, Discord, and Bluesky are subject to age-verification rules, user monitoring requirements, and possible criminal liability for failing to block content deemed “harmful to children” or “legal but harmful” to adults⁹. Sites unable or unwilling to comply have either implemented draconian gatekeeping measures or shut down access to UK users altogether¹⁰.

Ofcom’s Expanding Powers
The Act empowers Ofcom, the state regulator, to enforce these rules. Investigations have already been launched into content-sharing services and adult sites, while social media platforms are under pressure to suppress “harmful” speech through automated moderation¹¹. This includes lawful political content critical of the government, its immigration policy, or its progressive social agenda¹².

Even internal government critics are being silenced. Labour-affiliated platform managers have flagged the birth-rate warning by Shadow Minister Neil O’Brien as “unbalanced” and “problematic”—not for inaccuracy, but for defying the official narrative¹³.

A Crisis for Christians and Conservatives
The implications for Christians and conservatives are immediate. Any articulation of Biblical teaching on sexuality, critique of gender ideology, or moral concerns over abortion and family policy may now be algorithmically suppressed or legally removed.

Churches that refuse to affirm the ideological framework enshrined in the Equality Act may find their sermons, catechetical materials, or social media output penalised under these new “safety” standards.

Even Scriptural citations, such as Romans 1 or 1 Corinthians 6, are at risk of being labelled “hate speech” or “offensive religious content”—despite remaining doctrinally foundational and legally protected¹⁴.

Britain Is Not Alone—But It Should Know Better
Such legislation would be expected in Beijing or Tehran. That it has been passed and enforced in the UK—the cradle of common law, the homeland of Magna Carta, and the constitutional monarchy built on free speech and religious liberty—is both shocking and tragic.

And it sends a message to the world: that Britain no longer trusts its people to govern their own consciences or discuss their own affairs.

Time to Resist
This is not just a policy failure. It is a betrayal of Britain’s heritage and a declaration of war against conscience, speech, and truth. Silence cannot be the answer.

Churches, civil society organisations, and concerned individuals must urgently organise legal challenges, call for repeal, and speak truth while they still can.

Because the question now is not whether Christian and conservative voices will be silenced—but whether they will resist being silenced at all.

¹ “Online Safety Act 2023,” UK Government, gov.uk.
² Open Rights Group, “Online Safety Act: A Censor’s Charter,” openrightsgroup.org.
³ The Times, “Elon Musk’s X Faces Online Safety Clampdown,” The Times, July 2025.
⁴ The Guardian, “Concerns over Palestine Action Ban and Free Speech,” August 2, 2025.
⁵ Personal observation, based on blocked metadata and reports compiled by the Free Speech Union.
⁶ Benjamin Jones, Free Speech Union, X thread (since censored), July 2025.
⁷ Kennedy’s Law, “Complying with Illegal Harms Provisions of the Online Safety Act,” March 2025.
⁸ Forbes Solicitors, “Online Safety Act in Action,” July 2025.
⁹ Ars Technica, “Reddit Begins Age Verification for UK Users,” July 2025.
¹⁰ GamesRadar, “Rule 34 Site Blocks UK Traffic,” July 2025.
¹¹ Ofcom, “Enforcing the Online Safety Act,” ofcom.org.uk.
¹² The Guardian, “Palestinian Advocacy & Political Censorship,” August 2025.
¹³ The Free Speech Union, reports and internal flags regarding Neil O’Brien’s birth-rate statement, July 2025.
¹⁴ Article 9, European Convention on Human Rights; Equality Act 2010 (with limited protections for religion and belief).

---

---

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)

---