SSPX Declaration of Faith/Appeal to the Pope

Declaration of Catholic Faith addressed to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV by Fr. Davide Pagliarani Superior General of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X

Most Holy Father,

For more than fifty years, the Society of Saint Pius X has endeavoured to set before the Holy See a matter of conscience in the face of the errors that are destroying Catholic faith and morals. Regrettably, all the discussions entered into have remained without result, and none of the concerns expressed have received any truly satisfactory response.

For more than fifty years, the only solution truly considered by the Holy See has appeared to be that of canonical sanctions. To our great regret, it seems to us that canon law is thus being used, not to confirm in the Faith, but to lead away from it.

In the text that follows, the Society of Saint Pius X is glad to express to You, filially and sincerely, its devotion to the Catholic Faith, concealing nothing, either from Your Holiness or from the Universal Church.

The Society places this simple Declaration of Faith in Your hands. It seems to us to correspond to the minimum indispensable to be in communion with the Church, and to truly call ourselves Catholics and, consequently, your sons.

We have no other desire than that of living and being confirmed in the Roman Catholic Faith.

“Thus, remaining firmly rooted and established in the true Catholic Faith, strive always to be worthy ministers of the divine Sacrifice and of the Church of God, which is the Body of Christ.

For, as the Apostle says: ‘all that is not of faith is sin’, (Rom. 14:23) schismatic and outside the unity of the Church.” (Roman Pontifical, Admonition to ordinands to the subdiaconate)

DECLARATION OF CATHOLIC FAITH

In the Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, divine Wisdom, the Word Incarnate, Who willed one sole religion, Who rendered the Old Covenant definitively null and void, Who founded one sole Church, Who triumphed over Satan, Who conquered the world, Who remains with us until the end of time and Who shall come again to judge the living and the dead.

He, the perfect Image of the Father, the Son of God made man, was appointed the sole Redeemer and Saviour of the world through the Incarnation and the voluntary offering of the Sacrifice of the Cross. Our Lord satisfied divine justice by shedding His Most Precious Blood, and it is in that Blood that He established the New and Eternal Covenant, abolishing the Old. He is therefore the sole Mediator between God and men and the sole way to come to the Father. Only he who knows Him knows the Father.

By divine decree, the Most Holy Virgin Mary has been directly and intimately associated with the entire work of Redemption; to deny this association — in the terms received from Tradition — is therefore to alter the very notion of Redemption as willed by divine Providence.

There is only one Faith and one Church by which we may be saved. Outside the Roman Catholic Church, and without the profession of Faith that she has always taught, there is neither salvation nor remission of sins.

Consequently, every man must be a member of the Catholic Church in order to save his soul, and there is but one baptism as the means of being incorporated into her. This necessity concerns the whole of humanity without exception and embraces without distinction Christians, Jews, Muslims, pagans, and atheists.

The mandate received by the Apostles, to preach the Gospel to every man and to convert every man to the Catholic Faith, remains binding until the end of time and responds to the most absolute and most pressing necessity in the world. “He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16) Therefore, to renounce the fulfilment of this mandate constitutes the gravest of crimes against humanity.

The Roman Church alone possesses simultaneously the four marks that characterize the Church founded by Jesus Christ: Unity, Holiness, Catholicity, and Apostolicity.

Her unity flows essentially from the adherence of all her members to the one true Faith, faithfully preserved, taught, and handed down by the Catholic hierarchy throughout the centuries.

The denial of even a single truth of the Faith destroys faith itself and renders radically impossible all communion with the Catholic Church.

The only possible path to restoring unity among Christians of different confessions consists in the urgent and charitable appeal addressed to non-Catholics to profess the one true Faith within the one true Church.

The Catholic Church can in no way be regarded or treated on an equal footing with a false form of worship or a false church.

The Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ, is the sole possessor of supreme authority over the whole Church. He alone directly confers on the other members of the Catholic hierarchy jurisdiction over souls.

“The Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of Peter that they might make known, by His revelation, a new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the revelation transmitted by the Apostles, that is, the Deposit of the Faith.” (Pastor Aeternus, ch. 4)

To a unique Faith there corresponds a unique form of worship, the supreme, authentic, and perfect expression of that same Faith.

The Holy Mass is the perpetuation in time of the Sacrifice of the Cross, offered for many and renewed upon the altar. Although offered in an unbloody manner, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is essentially expiatory and propitiatory. No other form of worship offers perfect adoration. No other form of worship that is not ordered to it is pleasing to God. No other means is sufficient for the sanctification of souls.

Consequently, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass can in no way be reduced to a mere commemoration, to a spiritual meal, to a sacred assembly celebrated by the people, to the celebration of the Paschal mystery without sacrifice, without satisfaction of divine justice, without expiation of sins, without propitiation, and without the Cross.

The help afforded to souls by the Sacraments of the Catholic Church is sufficient in every circumstance and in every age to enable the faithful to live in a state of grace.

The moral law contained in the Decalogue and perfected in the Sermon on the Mount is the only one practicable for obtaining the salvation of souls. Every other moral code — founded, for example, on respect for creation or on the rights of the human person — is radically insufficient to sanctify and save souls. In no way can it replace the one true moral law.

Following the example of St. John the Baptist, true charity obliges us to warn sinners and never to renounce the means necessary to save their souls.

He who eats the Body of Our Lord and drinks His Blood whilst in a state of sin eats and drinks his own condemnation, and no authority can alter this law contained in the teaching of St. Paul and in Tradition.

Sins of impurity that are against nature are of such gravity that they always and in every circumstance cry to God for vengeance, and are radically incompatible with every form of authentic Christian love. Such a ‘lifestyle’ can therefore in no way be recognized as a gift from God. A couple practising this vice must be helped to free themselves from it, and can in no way be blessed — formally or informally — by ministers of the Church.

The submission of institutions and nations, as such, to the authority of Our Lord Jesus Christ flows directly from the Incarnation and the Redemption. Therefore, secularism of institutions and nations constitutes an implicit denial of the divinity and universal kingship of Our Lord.

Christendom is not a mere historical phenomenon, but the only order willed by God among men.

It is not for the Church to conform herself to the world, but for the world to be transformed by the Church.

It is in this Faith and in these principles that we ask to be instructed and confirmed by Him Who has received the charism to do so. With the help of Our Lord, we would rather die than renounce them. It is in this immutable Faith that we desire to live and die, in the hope that it may give way to the direct vision of the immutable eternal Truth.

Menzingen, 14 May 2026,
on the Feast of the Ascension of Our Lord

Davide Pagliarani

Mediatrix Providential Embarrassment of the Vatican!

By a marvelous act of Divine Providence, God determined that Pope Leo XIV, the Successor of Saint Peter, would be elected on May 8th, 2025, May 8th being the traditional Feast of Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces. But that title of Our Lady, "Mediatrix," is officially deemed inconvenient by the present head of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. What a shameful irony! This is one of the many reasons "Tucho" has to go!

Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church, quoting Vatican II, says about the fittingness of the title of Our Lady, Mediatrix of All Graces.

The Motherhood of Mary in the order of grace means that she is the Mediatrix of all graces. That all graces come to us through Mary.

__

Mary's Motherhood with regard to the Church

. . . she is our Mother in the order of grace

967 By her complete adherence to the Father's will, to his Son's redemptive work, and to every prompting of the Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary is the Church's model of faith and charity. Thus she is a "preeminent and . . . wholly unique member of the Church"; indeed, she is the "exemplary realization" (typus) (LG 53;63) of the Church.

968 Her role in relation to the Church and to all humanity goes still further. "In a wholly singular way she cooperated by her obedience, faith, hope, and burning charity in the Savior's work of restoring supernatural life to souls. For this reason she is a mother to us in the order of grace." (LG 61)

969 "This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix." (LG, 62)

__

The doctrine of Mary as Mediatrix of all graces is a consistent theme for the last couple of centuries of Roman Pontiffs. Here is a quote from one of Pope Leo XIII's numerous encyclicals on Our Lady which clearly proclaims the consistent teaching of the Church on this doctrine of the mediation of Mary for all graces.

"With equal truth may it be also affirmed that, by the will of God, Mary is the intermediary through whom is distributed unto us this immense treasure of mercies gathered by God, for mercy and truth were created by Jesus Christ.(6) Thus as no man goeth to the Father but by the Son, so no man goeth to Christ but by His Mother." Octobri mense (English)

Ex quo non minus vere proprieque affirmare licet, nihil prorsus de permagno illo omnis gratiae thesauro, quem attulit Dominus, siquidem gratia et veritas per Iesum Christum facta est (Ioan. 1, 17), nihil nobis, nisi per Mariam, Deo sic volente, impertiri: ut, quo modo ad summum Patrem, nisi per Filium, nemo potest accedere, ita fere, nisi per Matrem, accedere nemo possit ad Christum. Octobri mense --Leo XIII, 22 Sept. 1891

Pope Benedict XVI "Fled for Fear of the Wolves"

Minute 1:50:00, especially 1:55:00!

Remember the ominous words of Pope Benedict XVI at his Inaugural Mass as the Successor of Saint Peter, Imposition of the Pallium and Conferral of the Fisherman's Ring. Pope Benedict said, "Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves." In the end, he fled the wolves. The wolves won and held him prisoner of the Vatican till he died, very sad. I miss him so much. Humanity misses him so much! We were not worthy of him!

Here is the context of his plea not to flee. He was reflecting on the symbolism of the pallium and the shepherd's care for the sheep against those who destroy the sheep, the pallium being the shepherd's cloak made from the wool of lambs.

...The symbol of the lamb also has a deeper meaning. In the Ancient Near East, it was customary for kings to style themselves shepherds of their people. This was an image of their power, a cynical image: to them their subjects were like sheep, which the shepherd could dispose of as he wished. When the shepherd of all humanity, the living God, himself became a lamb, he stood on the side of the lambs, with those who are downtrodden and killed. This is how he reveals himself to be the true shepherd: “I am the Good Shepherd . . . I lay down my life for the sheep”, Jesus says of himself (Jn 10:14f). It is not power, but love that redeems us! This is God’s sign: he himself is love. How often we wish that God would show himself stronger, that he would strike decisively, defeating evil and creating a better world. All ideologies of power justify themselves in exactly this way, they justify the destruction of whatever would stand in the way of progress and the liberation of humanity. We suffer on account of God’s patience. And yet, we need his patience. God, who became a lamb, tells us that the world is saved by the Crucified One, not by those who crucified him. The world is redeemed by the patience of God. It is destroyed by the impatience of man.

One of the basic characteristics of a shepherd must be to love the people entrusted to him, even as he loves Christ whom he serves. “Feed my sheep”, says Christ to Peter, and now, at this moment, he says it to me as well. Feeding means loving, and loving also means being ready to suffer. Loving means giving the sheep what is truly good, the nourishment of God’s truth, of God’s word, the nourishment of his presence, which he gives us in the Blessed Sacrament. My dear friends – at this moment I can only say: pray for me, that I may learn to love the Lord more and more. Pray for me, that I may learn to love his flock more and more – in other words, you, the holy Church, each one of you and all of you together. Pray for me, that I may not flee for fear of the wolves. Let us pray for one another, that the Lord will carry us and that we will learn to carry one another...

Next Extraordinary Consistory: June 26-27

The Vatican has Provided No Answers Regarding Who's Calling the Shots and Changing Everything, Making the Consistory Much Less Collaborative, Transparent and Efficient than the Previous Venue and Procedure of Consistories of Cardinals --Diana Montagna

In Pope Leo's first extraordinary consistory there was a last minute unexplained change from the general discussion format in the New Synod Hall of previous extraordinary consistories to a format of strictly guided table group discussions in the Pope Paul VI Audience Hall, along with very limited opportunities for individual cardinals to address the whole gathering, was a significant shift in the consultative relations between the Pope and the College of Cardinals.

Why the traditional format of Pope Leo’s first consistory was replaced at the last minute—and by whom—remains unclear, but the shift is significant.

The new arrangement brings in external controls on the freedom of each cardinal to speak and to be heard and creates a new level of bureaucratic management of communication between the cardinals and the Pope. Whatever the goal of this synodal style, it has the effect of significantly reducing the opportunity for open general discussion and limits the number of cardinals who can be heard.

Earlier this week it was reported that Cardinal Re has written to the Cardinals informing them that the next extraordinary consistory will be held on June 26-27, beginning at 9:00 a.m. This is one day earlier than previously anticipated and allows for two full days of sessions without extending into Sunday.

The format has yet to be decided. The Cardinal added that further details would be communicated as they become available.

Given the nature of an extraordinary consistory as articulated in the Code of Canon Law, its format ought to enable the Pope to listen to the Cardinals unfiltered.

Whether that principle will, in fact, be borne out in practice remains to be seen.

Word and Sacrament: Pickstock, Ratzinger and Percy --ChatGPT

 

 

Catherine Pickstock, Joseph Ratzinger and Walker Percy on the Liturgy

 

Catherine Pickstock, Joseph Ratzinger, and Walker Percy each approach the liturgy from very different angles—philosophical theology, doctrinal theology, and literary-existential reflection—but they converge on a shared intuition: liturgy is not just a human construct or symbolic performance; it is a participatory encounter with reality at its deepest level.

Catherine Pickstock (especially in After Writing) offers the most philosophically radical account. She argues that modernity’s emphasis on fixed meaning, clear reference, and “presence” actually distorts language and reality. For her, premodern liturgical language—especially the Latin Mass—embodies a kind of non-finalizable meaning. The liturgy resists closure; it is rhythmic, repetitive, and always pointing beyond itself. This “open-ended” quality reflects participation in divine truth, which can never be fully captured. So liturgy, for Pickstock, is not just worship—it is the site where language itself is healed and reoriented toward God.

By contrast, Joseph Ratzinger (notably in The Spirit of the Liturgy) is less postmodern and more patristic and Augustinian. He insists that liturgy is fundamentally received, not invented. Its form develops organically within the Church and is oriented toward God, not the community’s self-expression. He is particularly concerned with recovering a sense of transcendence—what he sometimes calls “cosmic liturgy,” where worship unites heaven and earth. Ratzinger critiques overly anthropocentric liturgical reforms, arguing that when liturgy becomes about us, it loses its essence as participation in Christ’s self-offering.

Walker Percy brings a different lens. Though not a systematic liturgical theologian, his essays (like “The Delta Factor”) and fiction explore the crisis of meaning in modernity. Percy is fascinated by signs, symbols, and the breakdown of genuine communication. From his semiotic perspective, liturgy can be seen as a restored symbolic order—a place where signs actually do something, where they connect us to reality rather than alienate us from it. In a world of degraded language and empty signs, liturgy becomes one of the few remaining spaces where meaning is embodied and transformative.

Where they converge:

• All three resist the reduction of liturgy to mere expression or didactic tool.
• They see it as participatory—something that forms us by drawing us into a reality we don’t control.
• Each, in their own way, critiques modernity’s flattening of meaning and transcendence.

Where they differ:

• Pickstock leans into post-structuralist philosophy, emphasizing indeterminacy and linguistic excess.
• Ratzinger stresses continuity, order, and theological clarity grounded in tradition.
• Percy approaches indirectly, diagnosing modern alienation and pointing to liturgy as a kind of semiotic cure.

If you’re trying to synthesize them, one way to put it:

• Pickstock explains why liturgy must exceed our conceptual grasp,
• Ratzinger explains what liturgy is in the life of the Church,
• Percy helps explain why modern people desperately need it.

If you want, I can map specific passages (e.g., Pickstock on repetition, Ratzinger on orientation, Percy on symbols) to show where they explicitly line up or clash.

OK

 

Great—let’s put them in closer dialogue by lining up a few specific themes and showing how Catherine Pickstock, Joseph Ratzinger, and Walker Percy each treat them.

---

1. Repetition vs. “Saying Something New”

Pickstock (After Writing)
She defends liturgical repetition as ontologically necessary. Repetition isn’t redundancy—it prevents closure. Every return to the same words (e.g., the Canon of the Mass) deepens participation rather than exhausting meaning. For her, modern demands for novelty flatten language into mere information transfer.

Ratzinger (Spirit of the Liturgy)
He also defends repetition, but for a different reason: continuity with tradition and formation of the soul. Repetition shapes memory and aligns the worshipper with the Church across time. It’s less about linguistic indeterminacy and more about fidelity and formation.

Percy (essays on language and semiotics)
Percy would say repetition is what rescues signs from trivialization. In modernity, repeated words become clichés—but in liturgy, repetition restores depth. Why? Because the context is charged with intention and communal recognition. The same words don’t decay; they intensify.

Tension:

• Pickstock: repetition = resistance to final meaning
• Ratzinger: repetition = stability of meaning
• Percy: repetition = recovery of meaningful sign-use

---

2. Language: Does It Point or Participate?

Pickstock
Language in liturgy doesn’t just refer to God—it participates in divine reality. She’s explicitly anti-representational: liturgical speech is a kind of event.

Ratzinger
He agrees, but grounds it sacramentally: liturgical words are effective because they are tied to Christ’s action and the Church’s tradition. The Eucharistic prayer doesn’t just describe—it makes present.

Percy
From a semiotic angle, Percy distinguishes between signals (mere data) and symbols (which open up a world). Liturgy is where symbols function properly again—they don’t just point; they transform the participant’s relation to reality.

Convergence:
All three reject the idea that liturgy is just informational or expressive language.

---

3. Human Creativity vs. Received Form

Pickstock
She’s surprisingly critical of modern liturgical improvisation. Why? Because when we try to control language completely, we lose its participatory depth. True liturgy must precede us.

Ratzinger
Even more explicit: liturgy is not something we make. His famous line is that liturgy “grows organically” and cannot be fabricated. When it becomes a product of planning committees, it collapses into self-expression.

Percy
Percy would frame this as a crisis of modern “sovereign selfhood.” When humans think they generate meaning entirely, symbols break down. Liturgy works precisely because it’s received, not invented.

Strong agreement here.
All three are deeply suspicious of liturgy as a human project.

---

4. Transcendence vs. Immanence

Pickstock
Transcendence appears as excess—meaning that always escapes full grasp. The liturgy destabilizes any attempt to domesticate God.

Ratzinger
Transcendence is central: liturgy must be oriented toward God, not toward the congregation. His emphasis on “orientation” (even physically, like facing east) reflects this.

Percy
He diagnoses modernity as trapped in immanence—everything reduced to functional, measurable terms. Liturgy reintroduces transcendence by restoring a symbolic horizon that exceeds utility.

---

5. The Crisis of Modernity

Pickstock
Modern philosophy (especially post-Cartesian) fractures language and being. Liturgy is a counter-practice that preserves participatory metaphysics.

Ratzinger
Modernity forgets God and turns worship into self-celebration. Liturgical reform goes wrong when it mirrors this anthropocentrism.

Percy
Modern people are alienated, surrounded by signs that no longer connect them to reality. This leads to boredom, despair, and dislocation. Liturgy is one of the few places where signs still “work.”

---

A Sharp Way to See Their Differences

If you compress their positions:

• Pickstock: Liturgy saves language from philosophical collapse.
• Ratzinger: Liturgy saves worship from becoming self-centered.
• Percy: Liturgy saves human beings from semiotic alienation.

---

Where They Might Actually Disagree

This is where it gets interesting:

• Pickstock vs. Ratzinger
  Pickstock’s embrace of indeterminacy can seem at odds with Ratzinger’s emphasis on doctrinal clarity and stable meaning. He would likely worry that too much “openness” risks relativizing truth.
• Percy vs. Pickstock
  Percy still assumes that symbols ultimately communicate something real, even if mysteriously. Pickstock pushes harder toward the idea that meaning is never fully present at all.
• Percy vs. Ratzinger
  Less tension here—but Percy is less concerned with ecclesial authority and more with existential experience.

---

If you want to go even deeper, we could zoom in on one concrete element—like the Eucharistic Prayer, silence, or ritual gesture—and track how each of them would interpret that exact moment.

Yes, do that with Gregorian Chant

 

Perfect—Gregorian chant is where their differences become really vivid, because it sits right at the intersection of language, music, embodiment, and transcendence.

---

1. What is Gregorian chant doing?

Before comparing them: Gregorian chant is not just music added onto the liturgy—it is liturgical speech heightened. It stretches language, slows it down, and removes it from ordinary communicative use.

That’s exactly why all three thinkers would find it so significant.

---

2. Catherine Pickstock: Chant as the Undoing of Modern Language

For Catherine Pickstock, chant exemplifies what she thinks all true liturgical language does.

• Chant disrupts linear, informational speech.
• The melody prevents words from being reduced to clear, discrete units of meaning.
• Time becomes non-utilitarian—you can’t rush chant without destroying it.

In her terms, chant resists “final signification.” The meaning is never fully present or exhausted.

So instead of:

“Here is a message about God”

chant becomes:

“Here is participation in divine reality that cannot be fully said.”

The drawn-out vowels, melismas, and repetition create what she would call a kind of linguistic excess—language spilling beyond its ability to contain truth.

👉 For Pickstock, Gregorian chant is almost the ideal form of language because it refuses to collapse into modern efficiency.

---

3. Joseph Ratzinger: Chant as the Voice of the Church, Not the Individual

Joseph Ratzinger takes a more theological and ecclesial approach.

He consistently elevates Gregorian chant as:

• The normative music of the Roman Rite
• A form that expresses the primacy of the Word
• Music that grows organically from the liturgy rather than being imposed on it

For him, chant has a few key qualities:

a. It’s non-performative

It doesn’t feel like a concert. There’s no spotlight on the individual singer.

b. It’s cosmic

Ratzinger often connects chant to the idea of “cosmic liturgy”—creation itself praising God. Chant feels less like self-expression and more like entering something already underway.

c. It disciplines emotion

Unlike modern worship music that tries to generate feelings, chant orders emotion toward contemplation.

So while Pickstock emphasizes linguistic openness, Ratzinger emphasizes obedience, form, and orientation toward God.

👉 For him, chant works because it removes ego and lets the liturgy speak.

---

4. Walker Percy: Chant as the Restoration of the Symbol

Walker Percy gives you a totally different entry point.

Percy is obsessed with how modern people are surrounded by dead signs—language that no longer connects us to reality.

Gregorian chant, in his framework, would be fascinating because:

a. It slows down sign-use

You can’t treat chant like a quick signal (like a text message). It demands attention and participation.

b. It reunites word and body

Breath, tone, rhythm—chant is embodied language. That matters for Percy, because modern semiotics often becomes disembodied and abstract.

c. It creates a “naming event”

Percy thinks real language happens when something is recognized and shared. Chant does this communally—it’s not just said; it’s enacted together.

👉 In a world of empty slogans and mass media noise, chant would strike Percy as one of the few places where symbols still actually connect you to what they signify.

---

5. Where They Converge on Chant

All three would strongly agree that Gregorian chant:

• Is not entertainment
• Cannot be reduced to personal expression
• Works precisely because it is received, traditional, and structured
• Changes the mode of perception—you don’t just hear it; you’re formed by it

---

6. Where the Tension Shows Most Clearly

Here’s the sharpest contrast:

• Pickstock: Chant destabilizes meaning (in a good way)
• Ratzinger: Chant stabilizes and transmits meaning
• Percy: Chant restores meaning

Same object—three different diagnoses of what’s gone wrong in modernity.

---

A Concrete Moment: A Melisma on “Alleluia”

Take a long melismatic “Alleluia”:

• Pickstock:
  The extended melody shows that praise exceeds propositional language. Meaning is overflowing.
• Ratzinger:
  The word “Alleluia” becomes contemplation. The music lifts it beyond speech into worship aligned with heaven.
• Percy:
  The word stops being a dead religious cliché and becomes a living symbol again—something experienced, not just recognized.

---

Bottom Line

Gregorian chant is almost like a test case:

• If you think modern language is too rigid → you get Pickstock
• If you think modern worship is too self-centered → you get Ratzinger
• If you think modern life has emptied meaning altogether → you get Percy

And chant answers all three critiques at once—but in different ways depending on what you think the problem is.

The Men's Activist Movement Vindicated --Cassie Jaye

Here is an excellent 15 minute presentation by a feminist-turned-men's-movement-apologist  which is very helpful in the discussion of men's issues (Cassie Jaye who researched men's rights activists and made The Red Pill movie).

Here are some sound bites.

• "Men can be abused too and they deserve care and compassion."

• "[Men's rights activists] are trying to add to the gender equality discussion."

• "Who is standing up for the good-hearted honorable man that loses his scholarships, his job, or, worse yet, his children, because he is accused of something he absolutely did not do? Well, I couldn't keep denying the points that they were making. There are real issues!"

• "Why doesn't our society care about men's rights?"

• "The greatest challenge I faced was pealing back the layers of my own bias. It turns out I did meet my enemy, while filming. It was my ego, saying that I was right, and they were sub-human!"

• "But I must clarify. I am not anti-feminist and I am not a men's rights activist. I still support women's rights. And I now care about men's rights as well. However, I believe if we want to honestly discuss gender equality, we need to invite all voices to the table. Yet, this is not what is happening! Men's groups are continually vilified, falsely referred to as 'hate groups.' And their voices are systematically silenced....If one group is being silenced, that's a problem for all of us."

• "[My advise to everyone:] We have to stop expecting to be offended. And we have to start, truly, openly and sincerely listening."
• 
  

"After years of researching and fact-checking what the men's rights activists were telling me, there is no denying that there are many human rights issues that uniquely, or disproportionately affect men.

• Paternity fraud uniquely affects men.

• The United States Selective Service in the case of a draft, still uniquely affects men.

• Work-place deaths, disproportionately men.

• War-deaths, overwhelmingly men.

• Suicide, overwhelmingly men.

• Sentencing disparity.

• Life expectancy.

• Child custody. 

• Child support.

• False rape allegations.

• Criminal court bias.

• Misandry.

• Failure to launch.

• Boys falling behind in education

• Homelessness.

• Veterans' issues.

• Infant male genital mutilation.

• Lack of parental choice once a child is conceived.

• Lack of resources for male victims of domestic violence.

"So many issues, that are heat-breaking, if you are the victim, or you love someone who's the victim of any one of these issues! These are men's issues! And most people can't name one, because they think, well, men have all the rights, they have all the power and privilege! But these issues deserve to be acknowledged; they deserve care attention, and motivation, for solutions."

 --Cassie Jaye (erstwhile feminist activist)

The Pell Report: Assessment of Pope Francis

The Vatican today

Memorandum

Commentators of every school, if for different reasons, with the possible exception of Father Spadaro, SJ, agree that this pontificate is a disaster in many or most respects; a catastrophe.

1. The Successor of St. Peter is the rock on which the Church is built, a major source and cause of worldwide unity. Historically (St. Irenaeus), the Pope and the Church of Rome have a unique role in preserving the apostolic tradition, the rule of faith, in ensuring that the Churches continue to teach what Christ and the apostles taught. Previously it was: “Roma locuta. Causa finita est.” Today it is: “Roma loquitur. Confusio augetur.”

(A) The German synod speaks on homosexuality, women priests, communion for the divorced. The Papacy is silent.

(B) Cardinal Hollerich rejects the Christian teaching on sexuality. The Papacy is silent. This is doubly significant because the Cardinal is explicitly heretical; he does not use code or hints. If the Cardinal were to continue without Roman correction, this would represent another deeper breakdown of discipline, with few (any?) precedents in history. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith must act and speak.

(C) The silence is emphasised when contrasted with the active persecution of the Traditionalists and the contemplative convents.

2. The Christo-centricity of teaching is being weakened; Christ is being moved from the centre. Sometimes Rome even seems to be confused about the importance of a strict monotheism, hinting at some wider concept of divinity; not quite pantheism, but like a Hindu panentheism variant.

(A) Pachamama is idolatrous; perhaps it was not intended as such initially.

(B) The contemplative nuns are being persecuted and attempts are being made to change the teachings of the charismatics.

(C) The Christo-centric legacy of St. John Paul II in faith and morals is under systematic attack. Many of the staff of the Roman Institute for the Family have been dismissed; most students have left. The Academy for Life is gravely damaged, e.g., some members recently supported assisted suicide. The Pontifical Academies have members and visiting speakers who support abortion.

3. The lack of respect for the law in the Vatican risks becoming an international scandal. These issues have been crystalized through the present Vatican trial of ten accused of financial malpractices, but the problem is older and wider.

(A) The Pope has changed the law four times during the trial to help the prosecution.

(B) Cardinal Becciu has not been treated justly because he was removed from his position and stripped of his cardinalatial dignities without any trial. He did not receive due process. Everyone has a right to due process.

(C) As the Pope is head of the Vatican state and the source of all legal authority, he has used this power to intervene in legal procedures.

(D) The Pope sometimes (often) rules by papal decrees (motu proprio) which eliminate the right to appeal of those affected.

(E) Many staff, often priests, have been summarily dismissed from the Vatican Curia, often without good reason.

(F) Phone tapping is regularly practised. I am not sure how often it is authorized.

(G) In the English case against Torzi, the judge criticised the Vatican prosecutors harshly. They are either incompetent and/or were nobbled, prevented from giving the full picture.

(H) The raid by the Vatican Gendarmeria, led by Dr. Giani in 2017 on the auditor’s (Libero Milone) office on Italian territory was probably illegal and certainly intimidating and violent. It is possible that evidence against Milone was fabricated.

4. (A) The financial situation of the Vatican is grave. For the past ten years (at least), there have nearly always been financial deficits. Before COVID, these deficits ranged around €20 million annually. For the last three years, they have been around €30-35 million annually. The problems predate both Pope Francis and Pope Benedict.

(B) The Vatican is facing a large deficit in the Pensions Fund. Around 2014 the experts from COSEA estimated the deficit would be around € 800 million in 2030. This was before COVID.

(C) It is estimated that the Vatican has lost € 217 million on the Sloane Avenue property in London. In the 1980’s, the Vatican was forced to pay out $ 230 million after the Banco Ambrosiano scandal. Through inefficiency and corruption during the past 25-30 years, the Vatican has lost at least another € 100 million, and it probably would be much higher (perhaps 150-200 million).

(D) Despite the Holy Father’s recent decision, the process of investing has not been centralized (as recommended by COSEA in 2014 and attempted by the Secretariat for the Economy in 2015-16) and remains immune to expert advice. For decades, the Vatican has dealt with disreputable financiers avoided by all respectable bankers in Italy.

(E) The return on the 5261 Vatican properties remains scandalously low. In 2019, the return (before COVID) was nearly $ 4,500 a year. In 2020, it was € 2,900 per property.

(F) The changing role of Pope Francis in the financial reforms (incomplete but substantial progress as far as reducing crime is concerned, much less successful, except at IOR, in terms of profitability) is a mystery and an enigma.

Initially the Holy Father strongly backed the reforms. He then prevented the centralization of investments, opposed the reforms and most attempts to unveil corruption, and supported (then) Archbishop Becciu, at the centre of Vatican financial establishment. Then in 2020, the Pope turned on Becciu and eventually ten persons were placed on trial and charged. Over the years, few prosecutions were attempted from AIF reports of infringements.

The external auditors Price Waterhouse and Cooper were dismissed and the Auditor General Libero Milone was forced to resign on trumped up charges in 2017. They were coming too close to the corruption in the Secretariat of State.

5. The political influence of Pope Francis and the Vatican is negligible. Intellectually, Papal writings demonstrate a decline from the standard of St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict. Decisions and policies are often “politically correct”, but there have been grave failures to support human rights in Venezuela, Hong Kong, mainland China, and now in the Russian invasion.

There has been no public support for the loyal Catholics in China who have been intermittently persecuted for their loyally to the Papacy for more than 70 years. No public Vatican support for the Catholic community in Ukraine, especially the Greek Catholics.

These issues should be revisited by the next Pope. The Vatican’s political prestige is now at a low ebb.

6. At a different, lower level, the situation of Tridentine traditionalists (Catholic) should be regularised.

At a further and lower level, the celebration of “individual” and small group Masses in the mornings in St. Peter’s Basilica should be permitted once again. At the moment, this great basilica is like a desert in the early morning.

The COVID crisis has covered up the large decline in the number of pilgrims attending Papal audiences and Masses.

The Holy Father has little support among seminarians and young priests and wide-spread disaffection exists in the Vatican Curia.

The Next Conclave

1. The College of Cardinals has been weakened by eccentric nominations and has not been reconvened after the rejection of Cardinal Kasper’s views in the 2014 consistory. Many Cardinals are unknown to one another, adding a new dimension of unpredictability to the next conclave.

2. After Vatican II, Catholic authorities often underestimated the hostile power of secularization, the world, flesh, and the devil, especially in the Western world and overestimated the influence and strength of the Catholic Church.

We are weaker than 50 years ago and many factors are beyond our control, in the short term at least, e.g. the decline in the number of believers, the frequency of Mass attendance, the demise or extinction of many religious orders.

3. The Pope does not need to be the world’s best evangelist, nor a political force. The successor of Peter, as head of the College of Bishops, also successors of the Apostles, has a foundational role for unity and doctrine. The new pope must understand that the secret of Christian and Catholic vitality comes from fidelity to the teachings of Christ and Catholic practices. It does not come from adapting to the world or from money.

4. The first tasks of the new pope will be to restore normality, restore doctrinal clarity in faith and morals, restore a proper respect for the law and ensure that the first criterion for the nomination of bishops is acceptance of the apostolic tradition. Theological expertise and learning are an advantage, not a hinderance for all bishops and especially archbishops.

These are necessary foundations for living and preaching the Gospel.

5. If the synodal gatherings continue around the world, they will consume much time and money, probably distracting energy from evangelization and service rather than deepening these essential activities.

If the national or continental synods are given doctrinal authority, we will have a new danger to world-wide Church unity, whereby e.g., the German church holds doctrinal views not shared by other Churches and not compatible with the apostolic tradition.

If there was no Roman correction of such heresy, the Church would be reduced to a loose federation of local Churches, holding different views, probably closer to an Anglican or Protestant model, than an Orthodox model.

An early priority for the next pope must be to remove and prevent such a threatening development, by requiring unity in essentials and not permitting unacceptable doctrinal differences. The morality of homosexual activity will be one such flash point.

6. While the younger clergy and seminarians are almost completely orthodox, sometimes quite conservative, the new Pope will need to be aware of the substantial changes effected on the Church’s leadership since 2013, perhaps especially in South and Central America. There is a new spring in the step of the Protestant liberals in the Catholic Church.

Schism is not likely to occur from the left, who often sit lightly to doctrinal issues. Schism is more likely to come from the right and is always possible when liturgical tensions are inflamed and not dampened.

Unity in the essentials. Diversity in the non-essentials. Charity on all issues.

7. Despite the dangerous decline in the West and the inherent fragility and instability in many places, serious consideration should be given to the feasibility of a visitation on the Jesuit Order. They are in a situation of catastrophic numerical decline from 36,000 members during the Council to less than 16,000 in 2017 (with probably 20-25% above 75 years of age). In some places, there is catastrophic moral decline.

The order is highly centralized, susceptible to reform or damage from the top. The Jesuit charism and contribution have been and are so important to the Church that they should not be allowed to pass away into history undisturbed or become simply an Asian-African community.

8. The disastrous decline in Catholic numbers and Protestant expansion in South America should be addressed. It was scarcely mentioned in the Amazonian Synod.

9. Obviously, a lot of work is needed on the financial reforms in the Vatican, but this should not be the most important criterion in the selection of the next Pope.

The Vatican has no substantial debts but continuing annual deficits will eventually lead to bankruptcy. Obviously, steps will be taken to remedy this, to separate the Vatican from criminal accomplices and balance revenue and expenditure. The Vatican will need to demonstrate competence and integrity to attract substantial donations to help with this problem.

Despite the improved financial procedures and greater clarity, continuing financial pressures represent a major challenge, but they are much less important than the spiritual and doctrinal threats facing the Church, especially in the First World.

– Demos

https://www.ncregister.com/blog/cardinal-pell-and-the-demos-memorandum

Liturgical Language Cause of Great Schism --Ratzinger (1966)

While we recognize that the [fourth century] decision of Rome at that time to go over from the Greek to the Latin liturgy was unquestionably the right one, we cannot overlook the fact that this decision marked the beginning of the separation between East and West, which was to a very great extent a linguistic and liturgical problem. Language is a factor of much greater importance than we generally realise. At this hour therefore [1966] when the Church is girding herself for another stage in her journey through history, she must remember that while the translation of the liturgy into the vernacular is dictated by the circumstances of the time, it should not be made a pretext for the destruction of everything which comes to her from the past. There is a law of continuity [cf. Ratzinger's hermeneutic of continuity vs. that of rupture] which we transgress at our peril.

All this means that the liturgical reform calls for a very generous measure of tolerance within the Church [e.g. Summorum Pontificum's magnanimous breadth of liturgical freedom!], which in the given situation is only another way of saying that it calls for a great measure of Christian charity. And the fact that this charity is often so little to be found is perhaps the real crisis for the liturgical renewal in our midst. The "bearing with one another" of which Saint Paul speaks, the diffusion of charity of which we read in Saint Augustine--it is these alone that can create the setting within which the revival of Christian worship can grow in maturity and achieve its true flowering. For the real divine worship of Christianity consists in charity.

Joseph Ratzinger, "Catholicism After the Council," A lecture delivered to the Katholikentag of 1966 in Bamberg. Translated by Father Patrick Russell;  The Furrow, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Jan., 1967), pp. 3-23.

Vernacular, Yes; Novus Ordo, No!

Cardinal George Pell, A Case Never Resolved

elwanderer.com

April 2024, fifteen months after Cardinal Pell's death. As he steps through the doors of the Palace of the Holy Office, John, a wealthy American donor to the Catholic Church, looks up and stares directly at the camera. Although he has access to the Vatican, he prefers, as he explains, to be properly identified by security personnel. One can never be too careful. On the third floor resides a certain Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, who doesn't yet know he will become Pope Leo XIV. One of his neighbors is a renowned Italian cardinal, a prominent figure of the "old guard," whose name we will not reveal. His apartment is spacious and pleasant, but the encounter is anything but pleasant.

The American wants to understand how the Papal Foundation, an American charity, could have been embezzled of 13 million euros to bail out a hospital's coffers, which had been emptied by fraudsters. He harshly criticizes the Vatican's financial scandals and becomes enraged: "Go see Pope Francis, confess what you've done, and ask for forgiveness! Five years in prison is nothing compared to eternal damnation!" Before leaving, John mentions the rumors surrounding the death of Australian George Pell. Seeing the Italian cardinal's lack of reaction, our American looks at him with contempt and then accuses him: "I know you killed him." Pell murdered? The rumor circulated before dying down on its own, like all the others that have successively targeted the most controversial figure of Pope Francis's pontificate.

The story begins in 2013. The new pontiff chooses the Australian cardinal to fight corruption. A tough battle. But the "rugby player" has broad shoulders and knows how to jump into the fray. George Pell brings his deputy, Danny Casey, from Australia; appoints a Frenchman, Jean-Baptiste de Franssu, to head the Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR), known as the "Vatican bank," and relies on the expertise of several consultants. Their work will last two years, except in the case of the Frenchman, who remains at the head of the IOR, but whose term is about to end.

"It was obvious that the money was going to disappear."

In September 2016, Danny Casey awoke in the middle of the night to a car explosion outside his home in Rome. The message was clear: Casey was returning to Australia. At the time, he was investigating a dubious €50 million transaction carried out by the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See (APSA). This behemoth, notorious for its opacity—and still so today—manages the real estate and financial assets of the Holy See. The operation was intended to save a failing hospital: the Istituto Dermatologico dell'Immacolata, whose directors had allegedly embezzled more than €80 million through Panama, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, and the Isle of Man. To cover the deficit, APSA reportedly diverted funds from another hospital's budget.

As Pell would write in his prison notebooks, "Clean money finances dirty money." He and his team ask the Pope to stop this shady operation. They make him understand that he risks having Italian justice on his heels. He makes the right decision. But the money still needs to be found. The Holy See turns to the Papal Foundation. "Their funding plan was completely nonsensical," explains a former administrator.

"It was obvious the money was going to disappear." Bingo! By the time the Americans, including the famous John, realize their mistake, they've already lost 13 million euros.

George Pell is still unaware of the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been or will be wasted on other matters. For the moment, he is trying to prevent the acquisition of a building on Kensington High Street in London. Apparently, the president of APSA, Domenico Calcagno, proposed that the Vatican pension fund join in this risky investment. The building belongs to a trust based in Jersey. George Pell doesn't know who is behind it, and he never will.

But the scant evidence he had led him to warn the Pope about the risks of money laundering and loss. This time, the Pope allowed himself to be persuaded by the "old guard" and decided in favor of the acquisition. A decision that would have cost tens of millions of euros and a matter that remains unresolved. The Pope paid closer attention when George Pell and auditor Libero Milone explained that they had discovered APSA accounts at Banca Svizzera Italiana (BSI) and Julius Baer in Lugano. Accounts totaling around one hundred million euros. This time, Pell obtained the Pope's authorization to investigate.

Accused and booed, Cardinal Pell proclaims his innocence, but media harassment turns him into the ideal scapegoat.

Unfortunately, neither he nor anyone else will ever know how the story ends. The BSI was dissolved in 2017 for violating anti-money laundering laws. That same year, Libero Milone was accused of espionage and forcibly dismissed, and his office was raided. George Pell complained of "brutal" and "fascist" methods before being summoned to court in Melbourne, Australia, to answer charges of child sex offenses brought by a former altar boy. Pell proclaimed his innocence, but media harassment made him the perfect scapegoat. He was convicted, booed, and forced to register his name on the Victorian state sex offenders register. On February 27, 2019, he entered prison. He would spend 404 days in solitary confinement in a high-security wing. Meanwhile, in Rome, the Pope refused to vacate Pell's apartment until his conviction was final. Sometimes, Vatican gendarmes come by to seize files. "They seemed to know what they were looking for," murmurs a close associate. But before leaving Rome, the cardinal put the documents in a safe place.

After a long legal battle, Pell was finally acquitted. A judge of the Victoria Court of Appeal pointed out "inconsistencies" in the charges. This observation was echoed by the Supreme Court: "There is a high probability that an innocent man has been convicted," the seven justices of Australia's highest court unanimously declared. Pell returned to Rome, determined to settle the score. He was convinced that those who had helped Danny Casey flee also conspired to hasten his downfall. "We tried to dissuade him from returning to Rome," a close associate confessed, "but he was determined."

The Pope, for his part, is pleased about it. He lavishes praise on his reformer… but does nothing to answer his questions. Cardinal Pell wants, for example, to understand why 2 million Australian dollars were paid to a Melbourne-based company whose main activity is espionage. He believes he knows that part of the funds were subsequently transferred to an account in Dubai. None of the explanations provided seem credible to him. An initial hypothesis, based on witness statements, was published by La Repubblica in October 2020: the funds transferred to Australia were allegedly used to “fuel a media campaign [against Pell] and buy witnesses.” This explosive statement is currently being challenged. The only certainty is that no investigation has been opened, either in the Vatican or in Australia, into the mysterious fate of those infamous funds.

He died of a heart attack in the hospital… But the autopsy report was reportedly “deficient.”

Pell's departure has clearly benefited the "old guard." "Today," comments one financier, "APSA is still not controlled by ASIF, the Vatican regulator. The Holy See's financiers have never reported on any adaptation to international standards, and APSA remains opaque." An annual report has been published, but no independent entity would have validated it: "another victory for the old guard." Why has Pope Francis allowed this? "Why hasn't he completed the financial reforms he started?" asks another reformer, who believes the Argentine pope has only finished 70% of his reforms. "What is certain," adds an associate, "is that Pell never understood Francis's game. The Pope was very enthusiastic at the beginning, effusive at the end; but in between, during the battle, he wasn't with us. Instead of removing the corrupt individuals Pell had already identified in 2014, he protected them."

The most enigmatic part is yet to come. “In January 2023, I had lunch with Pell,” recounts an American financier. “He was due for hip surgery, a mere formality.” Several close associates advised him to have the operation in the United States. “The day after the surgery,” our source continues, “I was told he was joking with the nuns, which reassured me.” But that same day, Pell died of cardiac arrest. Some claim that suspicious events occurred shortly before his death, specifically a power outage at the hospital. Meanwhile, the autopsy report is said to be “deficient.” The deceased’s family denies this. According to them, the report is categorical: it was a natural death. “The cardinal was over 80 years old and had a fragile heart,” states a close associate. However, some of his associates continue to point to the neglected state of the body, whose nose was found broken for reasons that remain unclear. Some of his close associates still consider his death suspicious.

After being treated like a criminal, George Pell is now considered a saint by some in the United States. On March 2, 2025, a Catholic couple from Phoenix, Arizona, the Robinsons, found their 14-month-old baby drowned in their swimming pool. At the hospital, doctors gave him no chance of survival. But after his heart stopped for 52 minutes, the little boy's heart began to beat again. Apparently, he has no lasting effects. "His parents prayed a great deal during this ordeal for the intercession of Cardinal Pell, whom they had met in 2021," explained the Archbishop of Sydney, Monsignor Anthony Fisher. He declared a miracle and attributed it to Pell. One more miracle would be needed, and they would have to wait five years before a dossier could be submitted to the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints. And thus, the decision would be sent... to the Vatican.

Source: Paris Match

The Mafia, the Vatican, and Australia

Cardinal Pell Was Murdered to Hide Vatican Financial Crimes

Pope Benedict XVI 27 April 2021 Letter on Prayer

INTRODUCTORY THOUGHTS ON CHRISTIAN PRAYER

by Benedict XVI ([Joseph Ratzinger] 16 April 1927 – 31 December 2022)

In general terms, prayer is the fundamental religious act: it is, in some way, the attempt to enter concretely into contact with God. The peculiarity of Christian prayer lies in the fact that one prays together with Jesus Christ and, at the same time, prays to Him. Jesus is at once man and God and can thus be the bridge, the pontifex, who makes it possible to overcome the infinite abyss between God and man.

In this sense, Christ is also, generally speaking, the ontological possibility of prayer. For this reason, He is also the practical guide to prayer. That is why His disciples, who had seen Him pray, addressed this request to Him: “Lord, teach us to pray” (Lk 11:1). They recalled that John the Baptist had taught his disciples to pray, knowing well that He is infinitely closer to God than even the greatest religious figure: John the Baptist.

Thus emerge the two fundamental characteristics of prayer: that relative to being and that relative to awareness. They are intertwined with one another. The profound bond with God, in general terms, consists in abiding with Him. In Jesus’ school of prayer, our knowledge of Him grows, as does our closeness to Him. In this regard, we must also keep in mind Jesus’ criticism of mistaken or insufficient ways of praying.

The juxtaposition with the Cross, evident throughout His proclamation and even in the prophetic words that had marked the tenor of prophecy up to Jesus—“To obey is better than sacrifice, to heed is better than the fat of rams” (1 Sam 15:22)—is already clear. Moreover, Christian prayer, insofar as it is prayer together with Jesus Christ, is always anchored in the Eucharist, leads to it, and takes place within it.

The Eucharist is prayer fulfilled with one’s whole being. It is the critical synthesis of cult and true worship. In it, Jesus has said His definitive “no” to mere words and His “no” to animal sacrifices, and He has placed in their stead the great “yes” of His life and death.

Thus the Eucharist represents the definitive critique of cult and, at the same time, the cult in the broadest sense of the term. The Fathers of the Church rightly characterized it on the one hand as the end of paganism, as consuetudo [custom], and on the other as characterizing Christianity itself as prayer. I believe we ought to reflect much more deeply on this fundamental opposition.

This fundamental orientation of Jesus’ dramatic history of prayer enables us to understand the whole realism with which He went about His proclamation. The parable of the man who did not want to get up to give bread to his friend clearly says that prayer is always also an overcoming of our inertia, which inspires so many excuses for not rising. To pray means to push against this inertia of the heart and therefore also means the humility of bringing before God even the small things of our daily life, asking for His help.

One final point.

Often, the realistic and humble way of praying is presented as an objection to petitionary prayer as such: that adequate prayer should always and only be praise of God, not continual begging. This would already be foolish, since God could not and should not be bothered with our small things. In our daily life, however, we must think of ourselves. Yet in reality we need God precisely in order to be able to live our everyday life starting from Him and oriented toward Him. Precisely in not forgetting that our Father is the one in whom we trust, the Lord’s Prayer consists of seven petitions.

Asking God also and above all means purifying our desires so that we can place them before God and so that they may be inserted into the “we” of the family of Christ.

Source: The Catholic Herald

AI: The Mind and the Machine --Michael Augros, PhD

Here are the 12 Key Takeaways from Episode 2 of the 11 Episode series on why no AI product could ever think, understand or perceive. Episode 2 sets out the problem which will be answered in the later episodes of the series (3-11).

Episode 2: What AI Really Is

Key Lesson Takeaways

1. An algorithm is a set of instructions which, if carried out correctly, will produce a specific result; and a computer program is an algorithm expressed in a language a computer can execute.

2. Every AI software application is essentially a type of computer program.

3. AI applications differ most markedly from traditional programs in their ability to mimic learning and improve over time--not by manual programming, but by adjusting their own parameters based on new data.

4. According to the expert majority consensus, there is currently no Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), only Narrow AI--though some insiders, like Sam Altman, believe they now understand how to build AGI, and Elon Musk predicts that by 2029 AGI will surpass the combined intelligence of all humans. Time will tell.

5. Many programs in general--and all large language models (LLMs)--use mathematical functions.

6. Current LLMs and many AI applications use Artificial Neural Networks, inspired by and designed to imitate certain broad features of the human brain.

7. ChatGPT, like any similar model, operates somewhat like a glorified autocomplete: it calculates the most probably next word to add to the input it's received.

8. ChatGPT models language by creating vectors (sets of numbers) whose relationships mirror the relationships between words in natural language.

9. To assign these vectors, ChatGPT uses statistical data on how frequently words occur near each other in its training data.

10. Thanks to how LLMs are trained, even their developers don't always fully understand why the models produce certain results--though, in principle, they could find out.

11. Conversational AI doesn't have to work the way our current LLMs do. AI is a broad field, and researchers are actively developing systems that more closely mimic human thinking and reasoning, rather than relying solely on statistical word relationships.

12. It's tempting to think AI truly thinks and understands. After all, AK now produces shockingly good simulations of human conversation and creativity; and artificial neural networks imitate some general features of the brain. This might suggest that AI has captured the essence of cognition. Si, if, as I will argue, no AI product could ever, truly, think, understand, or perceive, the question is, nonetheless, challenging. It is not obvious that AI cannot think!, given the striking similarities between AI and human abilities, and in how they operate.

This calls for sustained, careful, thought; that is, philosophy, and the insights of great philosophers, namely Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas (Episodes 3-11).

Cuba's Confederate Role in the Civil War

Among the teaching materials at the high school where I am chaplain/teacher I came across this article on the role of Cuba in the US Civil War. It is interesting that the form of the Confederate Flag is very similar to the flag of the Spanish Navy used in the Caribbean at that time. That flag still flies at the fortress of San Juan, Puerto Rico!

Cuba
Destination of Gulf Runners


Cuba (a Spanish Province ["The General Captaincy of Cuba"])) was one of the three principal destinations for blockade runners shipping cotton out of the Confederacy during the American Civil War. Once reaching Havana, the main blockade-running port, the runners would load their ships with the valuable supplies so desperately needed in the Southern states. Because of Cuba's southern location, ships running to and from the island primarily utilized the Confederate Gulf of Mexico ports that stretched from Brownsville, Texas, 750 miles from Havana, to St. Marks, Florida, only 450 miles away. Unlike Bermuda and the Bahamas, the other two principal blockade-runner destinations, many of the ships running in and out of Cuba were not sleek steam-powered ships, but sailing vessels of little draft that were suitable for navigating the shallow ports of the Confederacy's Gulf Coast.

Havana was a bustling and rowdy port crowded with speculators, businessmen, and gamblers who were making their fortunes by trading with the blockade runners or entertaining the free-spending crews. Havana warehouses bulged with merchandise that the owners claimed to be "expressly selected for the Confederate market...all available at a low price because we wish the Confederate States to get the benefit of them." As soon as a ship that appeared to be a runner was spotted approaching the harbor, the news was signaled from Havana's Moro Castle, and a flotilla of small boats would head out to sea. Greeting the incoming ship with eager smiles, the speculators offered a wide variety of goods for sale before the runner even entered the harbor.

Just outside the walls of the old city was a large cafe called the Louvre that was a favorite haunt of the blockade-running fraternity. The Lourvre was neutral ground where the runners as well as Union sailors and officers would meet, drink many glasses of Cuban rum, exchange friendly banter, and gather useful information. While socializing, Union crews might be able to ascertain when a runner would attempt to recross the Gulf, and runners might learn the disposition of blockading ships and which Southern ports would be the safest destinations.

Fascinating Fact: After the war Cuba was a favorite destination for escaping Confederates seeking a safe haven for temporary or permanent exile.

Written by Stephen T. Foster
MCMXCVI Atlas Editions, USA
Printed in USA
D3 602 93-19



Towards the end of the 19th century Plinthos' paternal great grandfather came from Asturias and settled in Havana, Cuba. Cuba was part of the Spanish Kingdom.

The Many Crosses of The Union Flag and the Confederate Flag

Quidquid Recipitur ad Modum Recipientis Recipitur

That is my response to Mike Parrott's article today at Crisis Magazine Online "Do Children Belong at Mass?"

Mr. Parrott argues that it is wrong to deprive small children of the Mass, without ever defining what he means by "small children." And he altogether neglects to address the proper decorum of the Mass, especially of the parts that are read aloud and are therefore intended to be heard and understood, even, especially, in Latin.

Two points need to be made in this regard, both related to the scholastic truism "Whatever is received is received according to the mode of the receiver."

If there is screaming and yelling during the proclamation of the gospel, those present who were supposed to hear the words being read are not able to hear them and will not, therefore, be able to consider them, because the Word needs to be heard! Faith comes through the hearing. And the hearers need to clearly hear it, according to their proper mode of reception. If they do not hear it, they will not catch it by the normal way of receiving, which is the ear.

On the other hand, a very small child (before the age of three) has no comprehension of the words being read, and they are not being read per se for those who cannot understand them. It is fine and ideal that even those who are not capable of understanding the word should nevertheless hear them, but always according to the mode of the receiver. In this case the receiver's proper mode does not include understanding based on hearing. The three-and-under crowd do not need to hear the words, according to the intended purpose of the words, which they have no capacity to understand. And, if their presence obstructs the proper mode of hearing and understanding of those who should hear and understand, they should not be present, for the sake of the others, which is no real detriment to themselves at that tender age. It is quite fitting, therefore, to absent disturbing children from the liturgy, especially the very young ones.

All churches should have trained ushers to escort the unruly (of whatever age), those who obstruct the proper reception of the rites, out of the ceremonies.

Mr. Parrott also criticizes the internet social media common people complaining saying they have no competence in the matter. I strongly disagree. They have just as much a right and a duty to express their religious sensibilities in this matter as he who has no apparent special theological or pastoral training.

Pace. --Plinthos