Two spirited articles, against the call for self-silencing in ecclesial matters

Two spirited pieces for your perusal, one brief (but marvelously satirical), one long (and bracing), if you are getting demoralized yet again in this miserable pontificate by being berated and gaslit for standing up for tradition and, in short, Catholicism, in the face of contradictory, confusing, and really, abusive directives from the Vatican. 

First, the short one, from my husband, Phil Lawler:

Understanding the Vatican crusade against tradition

The Vatican “carried out a detailed consultation of the bishops in 2020” regarding the use of the traditional Latin Mass. Although we’ve never seen the results of that consultation, Pope Francis determined that “the wishes expressed by the episcopate” called for a crackdown on traditionalism. But the bishops who wanted that crackdown can’t be trusted to do it themselves.

 In a “synodal” Church, the Vatican listens carefully to all the faithful, and serves the needs of the diocesan bishops—in this case, by telling them what to do.

Second, the long one, by Sebastian Morello, reiterating all the things we've said for more than a decade at every step -- only, it all has to be said over and over, since new abuses are heaped upon us pretty much daily:

Yes, Francis is the Pope, and His Office Binds Him: A Reply

Recently, fellow writer for The European Conservative, Felix Miller, wrote a piece strongly criticising traditional Catholics who, in his view, have routinely been overly critical of Pope Francis. In the opening two paragraphs, three times Miller invokes the name of Satan to point his readers to the spirit he thinks is leading trad Catholics in their general attitude to current Church affairs.  

... Does Miller think that the faithful ought to just shut up and watch the Church they love, and the Faith that is Her gift to the world, be attacked by those who hold Her highest offices? Does Miller believe that Catholics shouldn’t criticise such abuses of ecclesiastical power, even though it’s their canonical right to voice their concerns (can. 212, sec. 3)? 

Trad Catholics like Kwasniewski have had recourse to this theory precisely to sustain their continuing recognition of Francis as pope whilst trying to show that the ongoing abuses of papal power during his pontificate may not possess the full authoritative force of his office. 

This latter point is especially strong for me, since my husband and I were dragged through the Catholic blogosphere five years ago for the same reason. I had posted on Facebook that Pope Francis is a bad pope precisely to make a distinction between myself and Phil and those who think Francis is not pope at all. This remark of mine provided the spark to set off the stake-burning of my husband for his book (which the main accuser, branding Phil a schismatic, of all the accompanying and merciful things, admitted he had not read), Lost Shepherd. 

We are merely on the tiresome, new go-round of this awful clown-house ride. But we must continue to offer all the reasons why we persist, because the alternative is the wrong one: simply subsiding and accepting that well, things are the way they are, and there's no reason to put up a fight -- our hierarchy deems it all so.

But, as Morello points out (and as I pointed out here and here and here), in the only really comparable cataclysm endured in the Church from within, the Arian heresy, resistance -- and especially resistance from the laity -- saved the day. 

Let me just say that it's beyond what anyone can endure to be taken to task for standing up, not even for oneself but for one's children and grandchildren, and for all those who, in Morello's words, 

have made enormous sacrifices and received astonishing mistreatment from their own bishops merely for worshiping as did their forebears in the Faith, and for protecting their children from the heresy preached or irreverence practiced at the local parish (sometimes necessitating travel over vast distances every Sunday). They’ve often undergone terrible bullying by the Church’s ministers precisely because, rather than deny that there’s a pope in Rome like the Sedevacantists or opt to be in a canonically irregular situation like the Lefebvrists, they chose to tough it out in submission to the Church’s law and Her hierarchy—undergoing frequent persecution as a consequence. Miller contributes to the bullying of these faithful Catholics and calls his hounding of them “a spiritual work of mercy.”

It was Fr. Mankowski who introduced me to the words of the poet Rabindranath Tagore, which I have quoted before and will continue to quote until the beatings stop, for they are more apt every day under this intolerable regime: 

“Power takes as ingratitude the writhing of its victims.”

Do read all of both articles for a good shot in the arm today, if you need to recover from all the scoldings!

By the way, as someone on Twitter pointed out (I'm sorry that I went by too quickly to credit), Bishop Robert Barron, a conservative Novus Ordo bishop not especially friendly to Trads if there ever was one, offered the SSPX the use of the chapel he has set aside in his diocese for worship in the usus antiquior. QED, the SSPX are not schismatic.