The Church's Naughty Children
You very much for joining me. This is the Catholic Adventurer. Tonight, I'm talking a little bit thank you. Talking a little bit about the church and her naughty children. And in the in the course of it, I'm going to invite you, in fact, encourage you, in fact, threaten you to check the link in my bio and subscribe to me on, Substack because I do most of my everything I do, I do on Substack.
Speaker 1:And in particular, how where most broadcasters, their thing is YouTube. Like, I do everything I do on YouTube. YouTube is is my thing. Every time I go live, it's on YouTube. For me, that's Substack.
Speaker 1:Okay? I do a lot of lives on Substack. The long form podcast is done live on Substack. My blogs and articles, Substack, chat sessions, Substack. So I encourage you to check the link in my bio and, check me out over at Substack.
Speaker 1:And if you just wanna check it out and see what's up there, you don't have to subscribe. When you're invited to subscribe, just click, no thanks. Let me in, and you can look at everything that I have there. Okay. Moving on.
Speaker 1:So this is gonna be a rather short one. This is not a long long form podcast. It's gonna be quick. I'm talking about the church and her naughty children. Based on something I saw here on Instagram that has me a little irritated because I'm so damn over it.
Speaker 1:I am over the church's naughty children. Why? Because I do not see this as a boys club or a girls club. I do not see this as, the Cub Scouts or the Boy Scouts or a social club or a political party. This thing we we call Catholic, I see it as the military.
Speaker 1:And what I see throughout the forces of this military is a lot of lack of discipline, a lot of disloyalty, a lot of disunity, and a lot of naughty marines. I don't know how it is in the army or any of the other any of the other services, but anyone who's a marine will tell you disloyalty, disunity, or naughtiness, not tolerated. Zero tolerance. Zero. Now this isn't actually the Marine Corps.
Speaker 1:I'm aware of that. So I try to exercise patience and tolerance within the the context of of the church community, the family, my brethren, right, my brother and sister Catholics, of course, because it's not the Marine Corps, but it's not
Speaker 2:far from it. It's really not far from it.
Speaker 1:This was I'm gonna show it to you real quick just to give you some context, but we're not gonna I'm not gonna start talking about it just yet, but this is it. It was posted by. I cannot pronounce that name. I cannot pronounce his real name. I see him all over the place.
Speaker 1:He's an Indian Catholic influencer from India. I'm from India. From Australia. Well, he's Indian, but he lives in Australia. So he's an Australian, but he's Indian.
Speaker 1:I say that because you might recognize who I'm talking about. Anyway, what Matt Fred said. If a drastically new form of the mass were introduced today, one that differed from the novus ordo as much as the novus ordo differs from the Okay. Okay. Okay.
Speaker 1:Okay. I'll stop. If a drastically new form of the mass were introduced today, one that differed from the Novus Ordo as much as the Novus Ordo differs from the traditional Latin mass, many Catholics would feel would likely feel disoriented, even betrayed. And yet, those same Catholics often dismiss TLM attendees as rigid or overly sensitive for feeling the exact same way about the changes imposed on them after Vatican II. My brothers and sisters, if you don't have a flurry of possible responses going through your head already, you are sleeping.
Speaker 1:You are sleeping. I mean that literally and metaphorically. You are sleeping. And it is time to wake up because things are real
Speaker 2:right now with with where things are in the church. There's a lot
Speaker 1:to say there, and it should be screaming
Speaker 2:at you. If it isn't, wake up and smell the coffee.
Speaker 1:My first thing let me cover this. Let me cover Matt Fred. Okay? Because most of you have never seen or heard
Speaker 2:of me. You don't know where
Speaker 1:I stand on most things. So I'm gonna make that real clear for you right now. I actually like Matt Frad. I've been familiar with him for a number of years. I like him.
Speaker 1:Nice guy. Very talented. Very, very talented broadcaster. He very talented interviewer. Asks great questions.
Speaker 1:He's funny. He's just great to watch. But what gets under my skin about him is that he gets on this woe is me, woe is me, woe is me train, and I'm putting me in quotes. It's not just himself. This woe is me train about mass dysfunction, mass hysteria, and by that, I mean the Catholic mass.
Speaker 1:He, he's a faithful guy. Don't get me wrong. I'm not calling him a heretic. I'm not saying he's an apostate. Nothing.
Speaker 1:Okay? I have I do not question his quality as a Catholic at all. But this whole crying about the mass thing, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I am not making time for it.
Speaker 1:You can literally be at my doorstep crying your eyes out, and I am not going to make time for the mass tears. Do you wanna know why? Because I know it sounds insensitive. I do. I do know that.
Speaker 1:Let me tell you why.
Speaker 2:About thirty years ago, I
Speaker 1:was nearly a radical traditionalist. I was nearly a sedi vakantist. Very, very nearly. This this this nearly a sedi vakantist. And I heard all of the anti novus ordo arguments.
Speaker 1:I've heard arguments, folks, you've never even heard of before. I heard them all from sedevacantis priests, sedevacantis laypeople, sedevacantis bishop, a sedevacantis bishop. I heard every argument, and they threw every argument at me because I'm a very inquisitive person. I'm always asking the why and wherefores and hows. And I was never satisfied with the answers I was given.
Speaker 1:So the laypeople bumped me up to the priest. The priest bumped me over to another priest. That priest bumped me
Speaker 2:up to the, quote, unquote, bishop. And consistently, I was dissatisfied with the answers I was given from the
Speaker 1:the Seti Picantists. Do you know why that comes to bear? Because modern day radical traditionalism and folks, I understand there's different kinds of traditionalists. Modern day radical traditionalism is sedevacantism, except they believe that there's a pope in Rome. And sedevacantists do not.
Speaker 1:That detail aside, modern day radical traditionalism is sedevacantism. I can say that with authority because I ran deep into the sedevacantist circles. I continued to go to a a real mass. Okay? Because I wasn't convinced yet, and I didn't wanna be the guy that was missing mass.
Speaker 1:So I was still going to mass and all that. But I was about 95% on board with the sedative contests, so I know their arguments well. And when I hear them from radical traditionalists, they sound super, super familiar. Let me say a word about traditionalism in general. I do not like the label because Catholics do not need a label.
Speaker 1:You are Catholic or you are not. And if you're Catholic, then you are traditional. That comes with that comes with the territory, So you don't need to put traditional in there. Once we start throwing traditional in there, even if you have good reasons for it, which I understand, even if you have good reasons for it, you're opening up you're opening yourself up to a world of disaster. Because once you have a once you carry a label, you begin to walk the talk associated with the label, whether you know it or not.
Speaker 1:It just happens naturally. The way a baby starts to walk, it just happens. One step here, then a tumble. Two steps. Then the baby's walking to daddy.
Speaker 1:He's getting halfway there, and then he falls. You get the idea. Labels are very, very dangerous. You're Catholic or you're not. There's no need to put
Speaker 2:a label in there. You think
Speaker 1:the modernists are saying I'm a modernist Catholic? And I I'll tell you this. The progressives do not call themselves progressive Catholics. They just call themselves Catholics who are progressive. And that's only if you press them.
Speaker 1:Then they'll finally throw the progressive part in there. But they don't say I'm a progressive Catholic. Back in the day, into the nineties easily, you won't as a normal Catholic, as a as a as a an Orthodox Catholic, you almost had to say I'm a traditional Catholic because that's what you were saying. By saying I'm a traditional Catholic, you were just making very clear I'm Orthodox. I'm not one of the crazies that came from like the 1970 catechesis.
Speaker 1:I'm orthodox. I'm normal. I'm real. That's what traditional meant back then. That is not what it means now.
Speaker 1:Because now there are normal traditionalists who are just conservative leaning, and then there are progressions of more and more there are progressions of of traditionalism that are more and more rigid until you gradually get to radical traditionalism, which is just a sneeze away from sedevacantism, which is apostasy. And again, that walk, that crawl becomes a walk, becomes a jog, becomes a run very naturally, very gradually, you don't even realize it's happening, as soon as you start putting a label in front of Catholic. So be warned. I understand some I understand there's there are traditionalists who are just normal Catholics. I get that.
Speaker 1:Still drop the label. Because, if you're a normal Catholic who calls themselves traditional, right, because you're more you're you're more conservative in your Catholicism as I am, okay, And so on and so on. So you call yourself traditional. Let me tell you something. Sedivacantists call themselves traditionalist Catholics too.
Speaker 1:Well, why do you have the same label if one of you is orthodox and the other is an apostate? Radical traditionalists call themselves traditionalists. Why? Because their disposition is very different from yours. If you're just a normal Catholic who calls themselves traditional, their disposition is very different from yours, but you have the
Speaker 2:same label. You don't think that's disconcerting? Take it from me. Take it from
Speaker 1:me because I've I've been in that dirt, and I can tell you it it is disconcerting. So just be aware of that. So that's where I stand. Because of my past rolling with the SETIs, I felt very, angry that I very nearly left the church because of these people. And why didn't I leave the church?
Speaker 1:Because I wasn't I didn't like the answers I was getting. What does Vatican two say? Why does it say that? How could the Holy Spirit abandon the church? Well, the Holy Spirit didn't abandon the church.
Speaker 1:The Holy Spirit is still with the church. No. No. No. No.
Speaker 1:Wait. Wait. Wait. You're saying the pope is invalid. You're saying the the chair of Peter is empty.
Speaker 1:Why? How could the Holy Spirit let that happen? That doesn't compute. How could the how could Vatican II be an illegitimate council? That does not compute.
Speaker 1:So the Holy Spirit was not with the council fathers? No. Then when did the Holy Spirit stop showing up for work?
Speaker 2:At Vatican 1? At Trent? Because if we don't know when the Holy Spirit stops showing up, then we can't take any of
Speaker 1:the councils seriously. And if we can't take any of the councils seriously, then Jesus lied to us.
Speaker 2:And if Jesus lied to us, then he can't be God. And if he can't
Speaker 1:be God, what are we going
Speaker 2:to mass for anyway? It's a house
Speaker 1:of cards that comes tumbling down. And no one, from the most educated layperson to two priests to their bishop, quote unquote bishop. No one could give me an answer that was logical and survived logical examination. And it was at that point that I stopped in my tracks and I said, I better look for these answers myself. With the understanding that the were probably correct.
Speaker 1:I was looking for answers with the understanding that the SETIs are probably correct. They just suck at making their own arguments. So I will make them for them. Didn't work out that way. I slowly discovered that the sedevacantists were very skilled and crafty liars, and they were sucky at making their own arguments.
Speaker 1:They were distorting the facts. They were telling the story they wanted to be told. I started reading the the Vatican Council, the Second Vatican Council myself, and so on and so on and so on. The research set me free.
Speaker 2:And so I know their arguments very well. I researched their arguments very thoroughly over time.
Speaker 1:And so we're gonna talk about the word betrayal here in a second, but I felt very betrayed, and I felt like a fool. And I never again, never again would I tolerate anything that sounded like a sedevacantist argument because I know it for the poison that it is. And some people who fall for it, they are fooled, as I had had very nearly been fooled. They're just they're innocent victims. They're fooled.
Speaker 1:Some of them know that it's poison, and they swallow it because they want to. And I'm sorry. I am a loyal son of the church, and you will not attack my mother, and you will not take a lash to the back of the mystical body of Jesus Christ. Not on my watch, my friend.
Speaker 2:Nope. Been defending the
Speaker 1:faith since I was 13 years old. Defending it against heresy, defending it against paganism, defending it against disloyalty, defending
Speaker 2:it against Protestants. And now I stand ready to defend it against her children too. Not on my watch.
Speaker 1:And it's not for my sake. It's for the sake of my brothers and sisters. And that's that's the only reason I started getting into evangelization and and apologetics is because I wanted to defend my brothers and sisters who were being lied to by Protestants, by pagans, by Muslims. Literal pagans, by the way. I'm not being figurative.
Speaker 1:Literal pagans. Wanted to defend my brothers
Speaker 2:and sisters. And that's what I'm doing now. Let's talk about the church and her naughty children. Let's
Speaker 1:go back to this comment. I wanna thank you, those of you who are latecomers, joining me. God bless you. God be with you. This is the Catholic Adventurer coming at you like a runaway freight train, and I'm very sorry.
Speaker 1:Let's get to it. I'm gonna take this statement by statement. I'm gonna go pretty quickly. If you have any questions, comments, concerns, gripes, complaints, drop a comment. Well, I mean, drop obviously a comment in the live session here, and I'll get to it.
Speaker 1:If you're catching this on demand, drop a comment, or DM me, but you can only DM me if you're following me, so you're gonna have
Speaker 2:to follow first. Let's get to it. If a drastically new form of
Speaker 1:the mass were introduced today, one that differed from the novusordae As much as the novisordae differs from the traditional Latin mass, many Catholics would likely feel disoriented, even betrayed. Let me start there because that one really pisses me off. I want to be as soon as I get this off the screen, I wanna be very clear.
Speaker 2:The church does not betray. The church is our mother. And where our mother goes, we go.
Speaker 1:And that's it. There's no questions asked. Where our mother goes, we go. Period. We are the ones who betray.
Speaker 1:The church does not betray. The church is not our servant, and the church is not our child. This is some some stuff that I said in my comment to that post. The church is not our servant. The church is
Speaker 2:not our child. The church can't betray. The church is not beneath us. The church is not at our disposal. The institutional church.
Speaker 2:I'm not talking about the shepherds of the church.
Speaker 1:Obviously, the shepherds serve the people. I'm talking about the institution because that's what he's talking about. Let's be clear. Let's be real, real clear. The church does not betray drastically new form of the mass.
Speaker 1:Listen. This drastically new form of the mass there
Speaker 2:were many liturgies with many forms throughout
Speaker 1:the first few hundred years of of Christendom. What matters in the liturgy is the substance of the lit is the liturgical substance. That's what matters in the liturgy is the liturgical substance. What matters is there's a liturgy of the of the word, a liturgy of
Speaker 2:the Eucharist, the prayers of institution, the consecration, and so forth. Obviously, there's
Speaker 1:more to the liturgy than that. But those are the substantial components of
Speaker 2:the liturgy. Okay? The confession of sin,
Speaker 1:I confess to almighty God that I have gravely sinned, and so on. All that stuff. That's the substance of the liturgy. And that is the substance of the Novus Ordo Mass is identical to the substance of the traditional Latin Mass, even though the form is different. And the
Speaker 2:form isn't even that dramatically different. It's not different in a way that matters.
Speaker 1:Now, taking this at a at face value, it's a drastically new form of the mass. Well, to a Catholic, that sounds horrifying. Drastically new form? But this is an unchanging church. I know this because I heard these arguments from the SETIs.
Speaker 1:This is supposed to be an unchanging church. But here we have a drastically new form of the mass. It's nonsense. It's nonsense. Because it's someone saying drastically new form as if it has value.
Speaker 1:It is statement that has no value unless all you care about is the the mass. If all you care about is the mass, if the and I'm not saying this applies to MedFred, and I'm not saying it applies to all traditionalists. I'm just saying, if all you care about the mass and if the mass is is your god, then I can understand why that would rub you raw. But that would make you a pagan who believes in Jesus and goes to church. And I'm sorry to be so flippant and maybe even rude as
Speaker 2:I say that because that's not what is in my heart. I'm doing this to protect the people who have not been fooled yet and hopefully to knock a little sense in the ones who have. Not for my glory, but because I care about you and I love you.
Speaker 1:One that differed from the novas ordo no no sorter. As much as the novas ordo differs from the traditional Latin mass, many Catholics would likely be disoriented. Is that right? Is is that so? Because
Speaker 2:I wouldn't be disoriented. I wouldn't care if we had to
Speaker 1:go to church standing on our heads during the entire mass and we had to spin around or do cartwheels when we go up to receive communion? I don't care. You wanna change you wanna change the language of the mass from the vernacular to Swahili? I don't care. But you better teach me a little Swahili so I can do the responses.
Speaker 1:Oh, you don't want me to respond either? Okay. I don't care. I don't care. Are the readings still being read?
Speaker 1:Yes. Is the Eucharist still being consecrated? Yes.
Speaker 2:Then I don't care about the rest. I don't care. Change whatever you want. I don't care.
Speaker 1:I understand some people do care about that. Hey. In general, I'm not a guy who likes change.
Speaker 2:I hate change. I don't like cha
Speaker 1:I don't like something being moved from there to there. I don't like going from a my wife just recently did this. I don't like going from a nice wood floor to a carpet being on the floor. I don't like change. I'm a very, very, very traditional minded guy, and I like things to stay the same.
Speaker 1:But when it comes to the mass, hey, it's not furniture. This is how we worship God. And the church has total authority, total competence in in regulating that or in or in advancing that and protecting that, and the church is the only, the chief and sole custodian of the liturgy. My friends, if you want traditional Catholicism, I just laid it out for you.
Speaker 2:Competence, authority, and it is the sole custodian of the liturgy. That's traditional Catholicism, my friends. The church wants to change the form of the mass tomorrow? Okay. I don't care.
Speaker 1:I understand, though, that some people would feel disoriented, as Matt Fred said here. Some people will feel disoriented. Okay.
Speaker 2:You know what? They'll get over it. They'll get
Speaker 1:over it. Because let me tell
Speaker 2:you something. When I tell first communicants,
Speaker 1:you will not receive communion in your hands the first time you receive communion. In this class, you are receiving on your tongue. I'm going to teach you how to receive communion in your hands because the church does not say it's wrong. Therefore, I will not
Speaker 2:say it's wrong, and I don't. But in this class,
Speaker 1:this is how you'll do it for the first time.
Speaker 2:You'll receive on your tongue. Don't you
Speaker 1:think those poor children are going to feel disoriented? When they grow up, seeing everyone receiving in
Speaker 2:their hands, they might feel
Speaker 1:a little disoriented. Tough. Because this is the way it is. You know what? Kitties, after you
Speaker 2:do it two, three, four times, you're not gonna
Speaker 1:feel disoriented. You'll feel like you're doing
Speaker 2:it right and everyone else is doing it wrong. You'll get over it. Real fast, you're gonna get over that. Disoriented? Why?
Speaker 2:Where the church goes, you go. There's no disorientation.
Speaker 1:The church is not getting lost. As long as you're following the church, you won't get lost either. So why would you feel disoriented?
Speaker 2:Come on. So that part of
Speaker 1:the statement really, really bugged me. Like, who the hell are you? You're steering the ship? You're driving the bus? Why should you worry about feeling disoriented if you're just a passenger on this journey, on this pilgrimage, with the church, our mother on Earth?
Speaker 2:They would feel disoriented, even betrayed. That betrayed part is telling. That betrayed part is telling. If you believe the church is at
Speaker 1:your service, then yes, I can see how you might feel betrayed. If you believe the church is your mother and you go where your mother goes, there's no there's no forum for betrayal. It just doesn't exist in that world. So that one really got under my skin because it's really very telling. Betrayed?
Speaker 1:I'm sorry. No. No. No. No.
Speaker 1:And I'm gonna draw the come to a conclusion with all this. This is not just spitting out a bunch of words, by the way. I'm gonna I'm gonna tie this into a nice little bow in just a second. The statement continues, and yet those same Catholics are often often dismissed TLM attendees as rigid or overly sensitive. Can we all agree that traditional Latin mass attendees are overly sensitive?
Speaker 1:You can't even ask them a question without them drawing out the knives and pitchforks, trying to cut your throat, trying to poke your eyes. You can't even ask them a question about their unique expression of the Catholic faith. It's it's unique does not mean it's crazy town. I understand their expression of it, but it is unique because it's extraordinary, unfortunately. It's unfortunately extraordinary these days to do things like devotions.
Speaker 1:That's extraordinary these days, and that is unfortunate. But you can't even ask them questions. Why do you attend a traditional Latin mass? You can't even ask them that question without them getting ready to punch you in the face. Well, I always felt I just always felt weird, like people were staring at me whenever I received communion on the tongue and kneeling down.
Speaker 1:You felt weird? Wait a second. You felt weird that people were staring at you? And so you had to go to a traditional Latin mass to be surrounded by people who are also kneel? My friend, I've been kneeling for communion for twenty five years.
Speaker 1:And I'm gonna be very, very frank with you. Do you think I give a shit if anyone's staring at me? And twenty five years ago, I was rather a youngling, someone who cared about people's opinions, sort of. I didn't really, but, you know, I didn't care if people were looking at me funny. Hopefully, they were learning something from me.
Speaker 1:I didn't care. Why should you? Who cares if they're staring? My god. You're Catholic in a pagan world.
Speaker 1:You're a Catholic in a pagan world. You're already a weirdo. By being Catholic in a pagan world, you're already a weirdo. Who cares if other Catholics are staring at you for kneeling to receive communion? No matter how gently I would say that, I would get a very hostile response from the person I was having this conversation with.
Speaker 1:And I've had this with this conversation with many such persons. Very, very sensitive. Very super, super, super sensitive. And frankly,
Speaker 2:I just don't get it. And I'm
Speaker 1:I'm naturally a sensitive guy myself, but sensitivity does have its limits. Danny in the chat room says, we always took the 1962 missile reverently, but the source and summit is the Eucharist no matter what. Bingo. Period. The source and summit is is the Eucharist.
Speaker 1:Is the is the is the is the, consecration valid? Then I'm good. I'm good. You can say the math in English, Latin, Swahili, Greek, Spanish, pig Latin. I don't care.
Speaker 1:You can do the you can celebrate at Orientum or facing the people.
Speaker 2:I don't care. I really don't care.
Speaker 1:And my friends, I don't wanna speak for God, but I don't think God cares as much as you do. I think he cares that the the look. Worship is oriented toward God. Of course, he cares about it. But the liturgy is composed and forwarded by his by his church.
Speaker 1:He accepts it. It's licit. He accepts it. Okay? He's not turning his nose up at it because the priest is facing the people.
Speaker 1:Guys, come on. I can almost guarantee you he's not up there going, no. Not having it. I can
Speaker 2:almost guarantee you that's not happening. Come on.
Speaker 1:Well, the mass has to be very reverent. Well, I'm I'm all for reverent, but I don't like how traditionalists and some others throw that term around. Who are you that you're gonna make the mass more reverent than the consecration of the Eucharist on the altar? You're gonna make it
Speaker 2:more reverent than that? Who who are you? Because I would love to get to know you. You're saying you have
Speaker 1:a way of making the mass more reverent than the sacrifice of the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, the sacrifice of the lamb of God on that altar. You're saying you have a way
Speaker 2:of making it more reverent than Jesus Christ? Please DM me because we need to be friends.
Speaker 1:I'm very traditional minded. I like old school music, except these days, I kind of don't care even about old school. I don't care. It can be like the oldest old school music. I
Speaker 2:okay. That's great. I value it, but I don't need it.
Speaker 1:I receive communion on on my knees and on my tongue, obviously. You know, I I love reverence, but reverence has its place. And we also need to ask ourselves, what do we
Speaker 2:mean by reverence? Reverence according to who? According to you? Tell me, who are you? And why does your standard best the standard of God?
Speaker 2:Because you know what
Speaker 1:a a reverent sacrifice was biblically? Throwing together an altar made of stones and rocks and a slab, offering the altar to God. Now it's consecrated. Right? Now it's like his altar.
Speaker 1:Right? And then making a sacrifice on that altar, and that was reverent. Can you do better than that? Because now we have a properly
Speaker 2:ceremonially consecrated altar.
Speaker 1:So the consecration is real. It's not symbolic like it was, for instance, in the Old Testament. It's a it's a real consecration. And then the the Eucharist is is offered as as the eternal sacrifice of Jesus Christ. It's the most reverent mass or liturgy sacrifice that we can offer.
Speaker 1:I mean, it's the son of God on the altar. Can you do better than that? Anyway, babbling on. For leading the Catholic okay. Catholics often dismiss TLM attendees as rigid or overly sensitive for feeling the exact same way about the changes
Speaker 2:imposed imposed imposed on them after Vatican two. My friends, the church is not yours, and the mass is not yours. So that when
Speaker 1:a church says this is gonna be different now, that's not
Speaker 2:an imposition. That's the church doing. That's the church being what
Speaker 1:it was supposed to be. That's the church acting in accord with its nature as the institution of faith with the authority of the apostles, given to it by Jesus Christ. That's the church being the church. And therefore, that's not an imposition. That's just the church being the church.
Speaker 1:And we follow, or we say, I will not serve, and we do our own thing. There is no imposition. The church is our mother. She's leading us in this pilgrimage on earth. That's not an imposition.
Speaker 1:That's the church saying, come children, we're going this way now, and we just follow. And that's that. So I understand where Matt Fred is coming from. I'm not anti Matt Fred. I think he's a good guy, good family man.
Speaker 2:I think he's he's very super talented. Good guy. Good Catholic. Good Catholic. But the crying about the mass, I'm not
Speaker 1:gonna I'm I'm not going to indulge you for a second. I can't. I was nearly bamboozled by sedevacantis. Sedevacantism has infected the modern church. It has infected the modern church.
Speaker 1:Most radical traditionalists, not all traditionalists, I'm talking about the radical kind, Most radical traditionalists that I haven't have that I've had conversations with, they're sedevacantists. They just don't know it. Everything they say is sedevacantism. That poison is starting to work its way into, let's say, normal traditionalism. Because I'm hearing sedevacantist ideas, thought, theology, thought processes, distortions and disfigurements of facts that are the the hallmark of sedevacantism.
Speaker 1:I'm starting to hear that from normal traditionalists too. And so thirty years of this, my friends, I've heard every argument against the mass. I've heard every possible argument against Vatican two, and I I just won't make time for it
Speaker 2:anymore. It's inexcusable as far as I'm concerned. It's just inexcusable. Because the church is our mother.
Speaker 1:The church is not our daughter. Church is not our child. Church is our mother. Where the church goes, we follow, and that's that. Where the church leads, we go, and that's that.
Speaker 1:The church has competency, authority, and the church is the sole custodian of the liturgy. That's traditional Catholicism, brothers and sisters. And it is true or it is not. And if it is not, then Jesus is a liar. If Jesus is a liar, he can't be God.
Speaker 1:And if he's not God, then there is no God. And if there is no God, then why are
Speaker 2:we going to mass? It's a logical house of cards that comes tumbling down.
Speaker 1:In conclusion, do I think traditionalists are naughty children? Some of them, many of them are, if I'm being honest. I really want to be charitable. I really do because I love you and I care about you. But but many of
Speaker 2:them are. And some are not naughty. Some are not.
Speaker 1:That doesn't mean that they're evil. Just means and there's naughtiness everywhere in the church. Right? There's naughtiness. God.
Speaker 1:Folks, we don't have to state the obvious. We know there's naughtiness on the left too. Right? I mean, that's obvious. We all know that.
Speaker 2:Right? Progressivism and whatnot.
Speaker 1:You want you want you want you wanna really see how I
Speaker 2:can freak you right out? The progressivism that we saw in the seventies sounds conservative compared to the progressivism that's taking root today. You're not seeing it yet. You're gonna see it.
Speaker 1:You're gonna start to hear it. It's going to be better hidden.
Speaker 2:But if you look, if you poke and prod, you'll see it. They'll admit it. But I'm not
Speaker 1:worried about that because God wins. The church always wins. The holy spirit's on this. I am not worried about modernism. And besides, modernism isn't Catholicism anyway.
Speaker 1:That's a heresy. But progressivism that isn't modernist, it's just very, very left leaning. I'm not worried about that either. I'm really not. I'm really not.
Speaker 1:I don't think we're going to have another heyday of modernism that we saw, like, in the seventies or late sixties going into the eighties. I don't think we're gonna see that again. I I do not see any hint of that happening. I think that time has passed, and there's just some people what we're seeing today is the last dying breath of modernism in the church. That I do believe.
Speaker 2:And I know that's a huge statement, and I say it with confidence. I say it
Speaker 1:with confidence with a very informed perspective. So, yes, there's naughtiness on the left, and there's naughtiness on the right.
Speaker 2:And it's important that we acknowledge that and say to ourselves, you know what?
Speaker 1:It's true. The church is not the Boy Scouts. The church is not a political party. The church is the military. And if a military is only as strong as its unity, then we have a problem with the military and the church because we're not united.
Speaker 1:We're factioning. We're dividing ourselves. We're planting our feet in the camps that we choose and prefer, and we're calling that home. And so effectively, those camps become a church within a church. There was a term for that because this even happened in the early church too, this sort of thing.
Speaker 1:At the time, like, what we call as what we call, like, traditionalists radicals. Traditionalists and, modernists. At the time, it was laxists and rigorous. See, there ain't nothing new under the sun. And I think it was the church in France when France was still, like, the the crown jewel of, Christian Europe.
Speaker 1:The French term for it was like, little church, what I call a church within a church. That's what we're seeing forming is churches within the church. You know what happens to
Speaker 2:a military where the troops are factioning, divided, and encamped amongst themselves in groups.
Speaker 1:You know what happens to that army? It loses. But the church can't lose. This a church who does things that by that, I mean, lowercase c church to people. The church cannot lose.
Speaker 1:So what what is going to happen is God is going to do something. Could be an an infusion of grace. It could be, I don't know, miraculous conversion. God is going to do something to snap the people out of their hypnosis because the church this divided loses. Well, the church can't lose the final battle between good and evil.
Speaker 1:That's just not going to happen. So how do we reconcile the church's destiny with the church's current condition? Well, God is going to work that out. And I believe he's already started. I strongly believe he's already started.
Speaker 1:We're not going to have another heyday of modernism in the church. Things are going to get very, very good again. You just wait and see. You just wait and see. Danny in the chat room says, we all look a little bit out of place being Catholic.
Speaker 1:That's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying. You you bless yourself to say grace in the middle of a restaurant. You look like a weirdo. Everyone's gonna stare at you.
Speaker 1:Who cares? Let them stare. Who cares? People wanna stare at you for receiving communion, kneeling down. Who cares?
Speaker 1:So folks, that's gonna cover it. I wanna tell you, thank you for checking out this live. This was supposed to be quick. I always start out every broadcast saying this is gonna be quick, and then I talk for nine hours. I'm crazy.
Speaker 1:Check out the link in my bio because my Substack is in there. And if you like what's on this platform, if you like the stuff I put up, I'm telling you, it's shallow compared to where I go on Substack between the long form podcasts, the, the articles and essays and blogs I write and stuff like that. I go mad deep. So if you want the good stuff, if you want the rich stuff, if you wanna dive down deep, check out my Substack. The link is in the bio.
Speaker 1:You do not have to subscribe to see what I have there, but I hope you do subscribe because it's free and you get notified every time I publish something new. You don't have to trust the algorithm, rely on the algorithm. You don't have to worry if I get deplatformed, which I'm like that close to being deplatformed from TikTok. You don't have to worry about that. Because if you're subscribed to my Substack, I always have a way to reach out to you and let you know where I am next.
Speaker 1:I and every time I publish something, you get an email letting you know about it, and it's free. What do you care? If you're not following me here, I encourage you, please do, and please tap like. If you see something that I post that you even like a smidge, just tap like. It's not costing you anything.
Speaker 1:I say that because every like tells the in the algorithm this post is worthy of better distribution. Every like on a post tells the algorithm this account is worthy of better distribution. Do you understand? So it really it's not about ego for me. It's it's that every like helps to get this work spread further and further and further.
Speaker 1:Every like helps to spread the truth. That song is too short. God bless you, my friends. God be with you all. Please say hail Mary for me and my family.
Speaker 1:I really would appreciate that. And, I guess I'll see you on the rebound. Catholic Adventurer signing out of here. God be with you all. Bye bye.
