Diane Montagna Rehashes the Same Lies

The article by Diane Montagna, published on July 10, 2025 (New Evidence Confirms CDF Report, Erodes Vatican Narrative on Traditional Latin Mass Restrictions), on her Substack, claims to present new evidence from a Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) report that undermines the rationale for Pope Francis’ 2021 decree, Traditionis Custodes, which restricted the Extra Ordinary Form of the Mass. Montagna argues that the CDF’s 2020 survey of bishops showed widespread satisfaction with Pope Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum (2007), which allowed broader use of the Extraordinary Form, and that Traditionis Custodes misrepresented the survey’s findings by exaggerating issues with the Extraordinary Form. Your request is to refute Montagna’s claims, citing Matteo Bruni’s statement, and to argue that her article lacks full evidence, contains falsehoods, and rehashes prior claims. Why did she post the "evidence" now? Why not in the first article? She is clearly desperate to prove her credibility after she was exposed.

Matteo Bruni’s Statement and Its Context Matteo Bruni, the director of the Holy See Press Office, responded to Montagna’s article on July 3, 2025, during a news conference. He stated that Montagna’s documents represent “a very partial and incomplete reconstruction of the decision-making process” behind Traditionis Custodes. While Bruni did not explicitly confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents Montagna published, his statement suggests that her presentation of the CDF report lacks critical context and does not fully represent the factors that led to Pope Francis’ decision.[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) Refuting Montagna’s Claims Here are the key points to refute Montagna’s article, supported by evidence and reasoning: 1. Incomplete Evidence and Selective Presentation Montagna claims to have obtained the “Overall Assessment” (Giudizio Complessivo) and a collection of bishops’ quotations from the CDF’s 2020 survey, which she says show that most bishops were satisfied with Summorum Pontificum and that Traditionis Custodes misrepresented the survey’s findings. However, her article only provides excerpts from the report’s second part (the summary) and not the full 224-page document, which includes a detailed analysis of survey results by continent and country. [](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports) - Criticism: By presenting only selected portions, Montagna risks cherry-picking data that supports her narrative while omitting potentially contradictory findings. For example, Bruni’s statement implies that additional evidence, not included in Montagna’s excerpts, informed the Vatican’s decision. Specifically, a leaked survey from France, which Montagna does not address, reportedly highlighted negative impacts of the Extraordinary Form on Church unity, particularly in regions with a strong Extraordinary Form presence. This omission undermines her claim that the CDF report universally supported Summorum Pontificum.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Evidence: The French survey, referenced in commentary on Montagna’s article, indicated that the Extraordinary Form created divisions in some dioceses, which aligns with Pope Francis’ stated concerns in his 2021 letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes. He noted that the survey revealed “a situation that preoccupies and saddens me,” suggesting issues with the Extraordinary Form’s implementation, even if not universal.[](https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/)[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) 2. Misrepresentation of Pope Francis’ Rationale Montagna suggests that Traditionis Custodes was based on a false premise that bishops widely opposed Summorum Pontificum, implying that Pope Francis or his advisors fabricated or exaggerated the survey’s negative findings. However, this overstates the case. - Criticism: Pope Francis never claimed that a majority of bishops demanded the abrogation of Summorum Pontificum. In his letter to bishops, he stated that the survey responses revealed a situation requiring intervention, without specifying that the majority opposed the Extraordinary Form. Montagna’s assertion that the Vatican misrepresented the survey hinges on her interpretation of the “Overall Assessment,” but Bruni’s statement counters that her documents do not capture the full scope of the decision-making process.[](https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/)[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) - Evidence: The CDF report, as partially described by Montagna, acknowledges some positive outcomes of Summorum Pontificum (e.g., attracting young people), but it also notes “gaps, divergences, and disagreements” in its implementation, particularly from a minority of bishops resistant to the Extraordinary Form. This suggests a mixed picture, not a uniformly positive one, and supports the Vatican’s claim that issues existed, even if not universal. Furthermore, a critical analysis on akacatholic.com points out that the CDF’s Fourth Section, which compiled the report, was formerly the Pontifical Ecclesia Dei Commission, tasked with overseeing Summorum Pontificum. This group may have had a bias toward the Extraordinary Form, potentially skewing the "Overall Assessment” to emphasize positive findings, which Montagna relies on.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://akacatholic.com/diane-montagnas-empty-bombshell/) 3. Rehashing Prior Claims Montagna’s article reiterates claims she made in October 2021, namely that Traditionis Custodes exaggerated minor issues in the CDF report and ignored the positive impact of Summorum Pontificum. [](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report)[](https://nonvenipacem.org/2025/07/01/diane-montagna-has-a-new-substack-and-she-brings-the-receipts-on-the-lying-liars/) - Criticism: The July 2025 article largely recycles these earlier assertions, presenting the leaked documents as “new evidence” without substantially new analysis. The documents she provides (the “Overall Assessment” and quotations) are consistent with her 2021 reporting, but they do not conclusively prove that the Vatican lied or misrepresented the survey. The lack of the full report or additional primary data limits her ability to make a definitive case. Moreover, her reliance on the same narrative suggests confirmation bias, as noted by critics who argue that she overlooks evidence like the French survey that contradicts her thesis.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Evidence: A new book by Father Bux and Gaeta, released on July 2, 2025, contains additional sections of the CDF report, including continent-by-continent summaries. While Montagna cites this book to support her claims, it also confirms that the report noted variations in Summorum Pontificum’s implementation, including instances where it was ignored or caused tension. This suggests that Montagna’s focus on positive findings is selective and does not account for the broader context.[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports) 4. Lack of Vatican Confirmation Montagna’s documents have not been officially verified by the Vatican. Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press reported that a Vatican spokesman did not respond to requests for comment on their authenticity as of July 2, 2025. Bruni’s statement further casts doubt on their completeness. [](https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/)[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) - Criticism: Without Vatican confirmation, the authenticity and context of Montagna’s documents remain uncertain. Her claim that they expose “major cracks” in Traditionis Custodes relies on unverified materials, which weakens her argument. Critics argue that her publication of these documents may be an attempt to pressure the Vatican, as noted in commentary on cal-catholic.com, rather than a definitive exposé.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Evidence: The Vatican’s silence and Bruni’s dismissal of the documents as “incomplete” suggest that Montagna’s evidence may not fully represent the CDF’s findings or the rationale for Traditionis Custodes.[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) 5. Allegations of Falsehoods Diane lied again and her post shows evidence of deliberate falsehoods. It is misleading due to its selective use of evidence and failure to address countervailing data, such as the French survey. [](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) - Criticism: Montagna’s omission of negative findings (e.g., from France) and her emphasis on positive excerpts suggest a biased presentation rather than a deliberate lie. However, her failure to acknowledge Bruni’s statement or engage with the possibility that other factors (e.g., theological or pastoral concerns) influenced Traditionis Custodes undermines her credibility. Critics on akacatholic.com argue that her narrative aligns with a “Resist-the-Pope” movement, which may exaggerate claims of Vatican deception to rally support for the Extraordinary Form.[](https://akacatholic.com/diane-montagnas-empty-bombshell/) - Evidence: Bruni’s statement directly challenges the completeness of Montagna’s account, and the French survey’s findings, as noted in online commentary, provide a counterpoint to her claim that the CDF report was overwhelmingly positive.[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/)[](https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244) Diane Montagna’s article does not provide sufficient evidence to conclusively prove that Traditionis Custodes was based on a misrepresentation of the CDF’s 2020 survey. Her selective use of excerpts, omission of contradictory findings (e.g., the French survey), and reliance on unverified documents weaken her argument. Matteo Bruni’s statement that her documents offer a “very partial and incomplete reconstruction” highlights the limitations of her evidence. While Montagna’s claims build on her 2021 reporting, they largely rehash earlier arguments without addressing new counterevidence or the broader context of the Vatican’s decision-making process. Critics’ points about confirmation bias and the influence of the Extraordinary Form-friendly Fourth Section of the CDF further suggest that her narrative may be skewed. To fully refute her claims, access to the complete 224-page CDF report would be necessary, but based on available information, her article is incomplete and misleading. (https://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.php?ID=200244)[](https://akacatholic.com/diane-montagnas-empty-bombshell/)[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/)

MORE UPDATES TO COME, STAY TUNED!

The article by Diane Montagna, published on July 10, 2025, on her Substack, claims to provide further evidence confirming the authenticity of a leaked Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) report from 2020 regarding the implementation of Summorum Pontificum, Pope Benedict XVI’s 2007 apostolic letter liberalizing the Extraordinary Form. The article argues that this report undermines the rationale for Pope Francis’ 2021 motu proprio Traditionis Custodes, which restricted the Extraordinary Form. Below, I will address the claims made in the article, focusing on Matteo Bruni’s comments and the unverified nature of the documents, while critically examining the evidence presented. Key Claims in Montagna’s Article 1. Authenticity of the CDF Report: Montagna claims to have obtained the Vatican protocol number (N. 03/2020-ED) and additional sections of the CDF report, including the introduction to its Second Part, which she says confirms the report’s status as the “official opinion” of the CDF. She argues this validates the sections she published on July 1, 2025, which include the report’s overall assessment and a collection of bishops’ quotations. 2. Contradiction with Traditionis Custodes: The article asserts that the CDF report shows the majority of bishops who responded to the 2020 survey believed that altering Summorum Pontificum would “cause more harm than good,” contradicting Pope Francis’ stated rationale in Traditionis Custodes that the survey revealed a need to intervene due to divisions caused by the Extraordinary Form. 3. Matteo Bruni’s Comments: Montagna references Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni’s July 3, 2025, statement, where he declined to confirm the authenticity of the leaked documents, described them as “very partial and incomplete,” and noted that other “confidential reports” informed Pope Francis’ decision. She argues this raises questions about why these additional documents were not mentioned in Traditionis Custodes or its accompanying letter. 4. Burden of Proof: Montagna contends that the Vatican must prove the CDF report inaccurately represented the bishops’ responses, or else the report’s conclusion—that most bishops supported Summorum Pontificum—stands. Refutation with Evidence While Montagna’s article presents a compelling narrative, there are several points where her claims can be challenged or require further scrutiny, particularly due to the unverified nature of the documents and the broader context of the Vatican’s decision-making process. 1. Unverified Documents: - Lack of Official Confirmation: Matteo Bruni, the Holy See Press Office Director, explicitly stated on July 3, 2025, that he would not confirm the authenticity of the leaked documents, describing them as “presumably” part of one of the documents used in the decision-making process for Traditionis Custodes but “very partial and incomplete.” This lack of verification undermines Montagna’s claim of definitive authenticity. The protocol number (N. 03/2020-ED) and images provided in the article are not corroborated by any official Vatican source, and their provenance remains unclear.[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://www.osvnews.com/vatican-says-documents-on-latin-mass-assessment-incomplete/) - Incomplete Nature of the Leaked Documents: Bruni’s statement aligns with the possibility that the leaked sections do not represent the full scope of the CDF’s findings or the broader evidence considered by Pope Francis. Montagna acknowledges that the leaked sections are part of a larger report (over 200 pages, per), but her focus on the “overall assessment” and “florilegium” may cherry-pick favorable data, omitting context that could support the Vatican’s rationale for Traditionis Custodes. For example, some bishops noted in the leaked documents that Summorum Pontificum failed to foster reconciliation, preferring a return to pre-2007 rules requiring episcopal permission for the Extraordinary Form.[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/)[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/) - Potential Bias in Source: Montagna’s Substack is noted for its traditionalist leanings, which may influence her interpretation of the documents. Without independent verification from neutral sources or the Vatican releasing the full report, the documents’ authenticity and completeness remain speculative.[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/02/extra-extra-news-and-views-for-wednesday-july-2-2025/) 2. Matteo Bruni’s Comments and Additional Evidence: - Bruni’s July 3 statement indicates that the decision to issue Traditionis Custodes was based on more than just the CDF’s 2020 survey, including “further documentation” and “confidential reports” submitted to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. Montagna questions why these additional documents were not referenced in Traditionis Custodes, but this does not negate their existence or relevance. The Vatican is not obligated to disclose all inputs into a papal decision, especially confidential reports, which may involve sensitive issues like schismatic groups or liturgical abuses.[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://catholicvote.org/holy-see-press-office-spokesman-responds-to-alleged-vatican-latin-mass-report/)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053) - For instance, the leaked documents themselves note resistance from some bishops, particularly in regions like Italy and Spanish-speaking countries, due to “nescience, prejudice, and resistance” to Summorum Pontificum. Additionally, issues with traditionalist groups like Tradition, Family, and Property (TFP) in Brazil were not addressed in Montagna’s leaked sections, suggesting selective reporting.[](https://infovaticana.com/2025/07/01/traditionis-custodes-se-baso-en-una-mentira-summorum-pontificum-funcionaba/)[](https://wherepeteris.com/will-pope-leo-take-on-the-traditionalists) - Bruni’s reluctance to confirm the documents’ authenticity does not inherently discredit them but emphasizes that they are only part of a larger decision-making process. This aligns with the Vatican’s consistent position that Traditionis Custodes aimed to address liturgical divisions and promote ecclesial unity, as Pope Francis stated in his accompanying letter.[](https://www.osvnews.com/vatican-says-documents-on-latin-mass-assessment-incomplete/)[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286) 3. Context of Traditionis Custodes: - Pope Francis’ rationale for Traditionis Custodes was not solely based on the 2020 survey but also on his broader concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s use fostering division. He criticized traditionalist Catholics for being “navel-gazing retrogrades” out of touch with the Church’s evangelizing mission. The survey may have highlighted positive aspects of Summorum Pontificum (e.g., attracting younger Catholics, increasing vocations), but it also noted challenges, such as bishops’ concerns about controlling Extraordinary Form celebrations or divisions within dioceses.[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286)[](https://apnews.com/article/vatican-latin-mass-pope-leo-francis-catholic-5c15ea6c49b255a7d98cde9276a46acd)[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/) - The leaked documents suggest that some bishops warned that suppressing Summorum Pontificum could drive traditionalists to schismatic groups, but this does not negate the possibility that other evidence (e.g., confidential reports) highlighted significant issues with traditionalist communities, particularly in regions like the United States, where liturgical disputes have been prominent.[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286) - A new Italian book, The Liturgy Is Not a Show, co-authored by Don Nicola Bux and Saverio Gaeta, reportedly corroborates Montagna’s findings but also reveals that 42% of French bishops supported mutual enrichment between the Extraordinary Form and Ordinary Form, while 13% favored maintaining Summorum Pontificum’s balance. This indicates a diversity of views, not a uniform endorsement of the Extraordinary Form, undermining Montagna’s claim of a clear majority opposing restrictions.[](https://catholicism.org/leaked-report-grows-new-book-blows-hole-in-traditionis-custodes-narrative.html)[](https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports) 4. Burden of Proof: - Montagna argues that the Vatican must prove the CDF report inaccurately represented the bishops’ responses. However, this shifts the burden of proof inappropriately. As the claimant, Montagna must demonstrate that her leaked documents are both authentic and representative of the full report. The Vatican’s decision-making process, as Bruni noted, involved multiple inputs, and the lack of transparency about these inputs does not inherently invalidate Traditionis Custodes. Papal authority allows decisions based on broader considerations, not solely survey results. - The CDF report’s “overall assessment” may state that most bishops opposed changes to Summorum Pontificum, but without the full report, it’s unclear how representative this is. For example, the report notes that some bishops requested a return to pre-2007 rules for greater control, suggesting a split in opinions. Additionally, the survey’s findings in France, which has a significant Extraordinary Form presence, were reportedly leaked before Traditionis Custodes and indicated mixed results, not universal support for Summorum Pontificum.[](https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/03/vatican-downplays-leaked-documents-on-latin-mass/)[](https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/) 5. Alternative Perspectives: - Critics of Montagna’s report, such as those on Where Peter Is, argue that her claims collapse under scrutiny due to the unverified nature of the documents and the lack of context. They note that the leaked sections omit critical issues, such as problematic traditionalist groups in Brazil, and that the bishops’ responses included concerns about the Extraordinary Form’s implementation.[](https://wherepeteris.com/will-pope-leo-take-on-the-traditionalists) - The Vatican’s broader goal, as articulated by Pope Francis and reiterated by Pope Leo XIV, is to promote unity and reconciliation. The restrictions in Traditionis Custodes were intended to address perceived divisions, particularly in regions like the United States, where the Extraordinary Form has been a flashpoint. Montagna’s focus on the CDF report ignores these broader pastoral concerns.[](https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/debate-latin-mass-heats-after-apparent-leak-vatican-123411286) Matteo Bruni’s Comments Matteo Bruni’s statement on July 3, 2025, during a press conference on the “Mass for the Care of Creation,” is critical to understanding the Vatican’s position: - He stated, “I do not confirm the authenticity of the texts that have been published, which presumably concern part of one of the documents on which the decision was based and, as such, contribute to a reconstruction that is also very partial and incomplete with regard to the decision-making process. In fact, further documentation was later added to the consultation mentioned, including other confidential reports resulting from additional consultations that were submitted to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.”[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://apnews.com/article/vatican-latin-mass-pope-leo-francis-catholic-5c15ea6c49b255a7d98cde9276a46acd) - This suggests that the leaked documents, even if authentic, do not capture the full scope of evidence considered by Pope Francis. Bruni’s reference to “confidential reports” indicates that sensitive information, possibly involving specific dioceses or traditionalist groups, played a role but was not publicly disclosed for pastoral or administrative reasons. - Bruni’s comments align with the Vatican’s consistent messaging that Traditionis Custodes aimed to address liturgical divisions, not merely to suppress the Extraordinary Form. The lack of explicit reference to additional documents in Traditionis Custodes does not mean they did not exist, as papal decisions often involve internal deliberations not fully disclosed.

While Montagna’s article raises provocative questions about the rationale for Traditionis Custodes, it relies on unverified documents and lacks the full context of the Vatican’s decision-making process. Matteo Bruni’s comments underscore that the leaked sections are “presumably” partial and incomplete, and additional confidential reports informed Pope Francis’ decision. Without the full CDF report or corroboration from official Vatican sources, Montagna’s claims remain speculative. The leaked documents suggest some bishops supported Summorum Pontificum, but they also indicate diverse views, including concerns about division and control, which align with the Vatican’s stated goals in Traditionis Custodes. The burden of proof lies with Montagna to substantiate her claims with verified evidence, and the Vatican’s broader pastoral concerns—promoting unity and addressing liturgical disputes—provide a plausible basis for Traditionis Custodes beyond the 2020 survey alone.[](https://thecatholicthing.org/2025/07/08/vatican-spokesman-traditionis-custodes-leak-very-partial)[](https://americamagazine.org/faith/2025/07/02/latin-mass-pope-francis-traditionis-custodes-251053)[](https://apnews.com/article/vatican-latin-mass-pope-leo-francis-catholic-5c15ea6c49b255a7d98cde9276a46acd)

A Critique of the "We're So Back" Trope Among Catholic Traditionalists: Misplaced Nostalgia and a Misreading of Church History

A Critique of the "We're So Back" Trope Among Catholic Traditionalists: Misplaced Nostalgia and a Misreading of Church History

In recent years, particularly following the election of Pope Leo XIV on May 8, 2025, a segment of Catholic traditionalists has embraced the phrase "we're so back" as a rallying cry. This trope, often circulated on social media platforms and within certain online communities, suggests a triumphant return to a perceived golden age of Catholicism—characterized by rigid doctrinal enforcement, the widespread use of the Extraordinary Form, and a rejection of what they view as the liberalizing tendencies of the post-Vatican II Church. The election of an American pope, Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, who chose the name Leo XIV, has fueled this narrative among some traditionalists who see his Augustinian background and choice of name as a nod to pre-conciliar popes like Leo XIII, a figure associated with social teaching that some interpret as aligning with their ideals. However, this enthusiasm rests on a flawed premise: the notion that the Catholic Church "left" somewhere and is now "back" where it belongs. This critique argues that such a view is historically inaccurate, statistically unsupported, and theologically deficient, particularly when measured against the Church's growth under Pope Francis, the continuity of its mission, and the promises of Christ as reaffirmed by Pope Leo XIV. The Historical Misconception: The Church Never "Left" The "we're so back" trope implies a departure from an authentic Catholic identity, often traced to the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) and the subsequent papacies, especially that of Pope Francis (2013-2025). Traditionalists frequently point to changes in liturgy, such as the shift from the Extraordinary Form to the Ordinary Form Mass, and perceived doctrinal ambiguities as evidence of a Church that has strayed. Yet, this narrative overlooks the Church's unbroken continuity across two millennia. The Catholic Church, as an institution guided by the Holy Spirit, has never ceased to be the Body of Christ, despite internal challenges, schisms, or reforms. Historical precedents—such as the Arian heresy in the 4th century, the Great Schism of 1054, or the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century—demonstrate that the Church has faced periods of crisis and adaptation without losing its essence. The gates of hell, as Christ promised, have not prevailed (Matthew 16:18), a promise reiterated in theological reflections that emphasize the Church's resilience through human imperfection. Vatican II, far from being a rupture, was a development of doctrine, building on the foundations laid by previous councils. Popes like John Paul II and Benedict XVI, often revered by traditionalists, upheld its legitimacy, with Benedict XVI famously describing it as a "hermeneutic of continuity" rather than rupture. Pope Francis, despite his pastoral innovations, maintained this continuity, issuing magisterial documents like Amoris Laetitia (2016) and Laudato Si' (2015) that, while addressing modern issues, remained rooted in traditional Catholic teaching on mercy, justice, and stewardship. The claim that the Church "left" its authentic path under Francis ignores the fact that the Church's mission—proclaiming the Gospel and administering the sacraments—has persisted uninterrupted. The Extraordinary Form's restriction under Traditionis Custodes (2021) is cited as evidence of decline, but this was a disciplinary measure, not a doctrinal shift, and reflects a pastoral response to division rather than a rejection of tradition itself. Statistical Evidence: Church Growth Under Pope Francis One of the most striking counterpoints to the "we're so back" narrative is the measurable growth of the Catholic Church during Pope Francis' pontificate. Contrary to the traditionalist lament of a Church in decline, global Catholic population increased by over 10% from approximately 1.2 billion in 2013 to around 1.4 billion by 2025, according to estimates from Church statistics and reports. This growth, while not uniform across regions, reflects a robust expansion in Africa, Asia, and parts of Latin America, where Francis' emphasis on the poor and marginalized resonated deeply. In Africa alone, the number of Catholics rose from about 200 million to over 250 million, driven by missionary efforts and local vocations, a trend Francis actively supported through synodality and outreach. This growth challenges the traditionalist assertion that the Church's openness to dialogue, inclusivity, and social justice under Francis weakened its identity. Attendance at Mass and sacramental participation, while declining in some Western countries (a trend predating Francis), remained stable or increased in the Global South, where the Church's presence is expanding. The ordination of priests also saw a global uptick, with seminaries in Africa and Asia reporting higher enrollment, countering the narrative of a Church in crisis. Francis' reforms, such as addressing the sexual abuse scandal with stricter protocols and curial transparency, further strengthened institutional credibility, contributing to this growth. The "we're so back" trope, by contrast, offers no evidence of a Church that was "gone" or is now returning—rather, it reveals a nostalgic fixation on a Western, pre-Vatican II model that never represented the global Church's full reality. Theological Deficiency: Distrust in Christ's Promise At its core, the "we're so back" trope betrays a lack of trust in Christ's promise that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18). This promise, articulated by Jesus to Peter, the first pope, has been a cornerstone of Catholic theology, interpreted by saints and scholars as a guarantee of the Church's indefectibility. The traditionalist narrative, however, suggests that the Church under Francis—and now potentially under Leo XIV—has been so compromised by modernity, liberalism, or synodality that it required a dramatic "return." This view implies that the Holy Spirit's guidance faltered, a position that contradicts the Church's teaching on its divine protection. Theological reflections, both historical and contemporary, reinforce this critique. Early Church Fathers like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas emphasized that the Church's holiness derives not from the sinlessness of its members but from Christ's redemptive presence. During the Arian crisis, when most bishops adhered to heresy, the Church survived through a faithful remnant, proving that divine protection transcends human failings. Similarly, under Francis, challenges like clericalism and polarization were met with calls for conversion and unity, not abandonment of the faith. The traditionalist distrust in this process suggests a faith more in human control than in divine providence, a stance that undermines the very tradition they claim to defend. Pope Leo XIV's early statements further underscore this continuity. In his first address on May 8, 2025, he echoed Francis' themes of synodality and mercy, declaring, "God loves us, God loves you all, and evil will not prevail!" This reaffirmation of Christ's promise aligns with Francis' legacy and counters the traditionalist narrative of a Church that needed rescuing. Leo's commitment to a "synodal church" and his participation in the Synod on Synodality (2023-2024) indicate an intent to build on Francis' inclusive approach, not to revert to a pre-conciliar model. The "we're so back" trope, therefore, misaligns with the current pontiff's vision and the theological assurance of the Church's enduring mission. Pope Leo XIV and the Continuation of Francis' Legacy The election of Pope Leo XIV, the first American pontiff, has been interpreted by some traditionalists as a pivot away from Francis' papacy. His choice of the name Leo, evoking Leo XIII's social encyclicals like *Rerum Novarum* (1891), and his Augustinian background have fueled hopes of a return to a more "traditional" Church. However, Leo XIV's actions and words since his election on May 8, 2025, suggest a deliberate continuation of Francis' legacy. In his inaugural Mass homily on May 9, 2025, he called for a Church that serves a hostile world with joyful faith, echoing Francis' emphasis on outreach to the marginalized. His pledge to renew commitment to the path set by Vatican II and *Evangelii Gaudium* (2013) further aligns him with Francis' vision of a missionary, synodal Church. Leo's background as a missionary in Peru and his role as Prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops under Francis highlight his pastoral approach, which prioritizes listening to the laity and fostering unity—principles central to Francis' pontificate. His address to the Synod's 16th Ordinary Council on June 26, 2025, described synodality as "a style, an attitude that helps us to be Church," directly building on Francis' reforms. This continuity undermines the traditionalist expectation of a "return," as Leo XIV appears committed to addressing modern challenges—climate change, social justice, and ecumenism—rather than retreating to a nostalgic past. Traditionalists' optimism about Leo XIV often hinges on misinterpretations, such as seeing his name choice as a signal of doctrinal rigidity. Yet, Leo XIII's legacy was one of adaptation to industrial society, not a rejection of progress. Leo XIV's early focus on unity, as seen in his June 29, 2025, feast of Sts. Peter and Paul address, where he spoke of an "ecumenism of blood," suggests a forward-looking Church, not a backward glance. The "we're so back" trope, therefore, rests on a misreading of Leo's intentions and a projection of traditionalist desires onto his papacy. Cultural and Psychological Drivers of the Trope The "we're so back" sentiment also reflects cultural and psychological dynamics within traditionalist circles, particularly in the West. The phrase, borrowed from internet slang, signifies a resurgence after a perceived decline, mirroring trends in political and cultural conservatism. In the U.S., where Leo XIV hails from, the rise of national populism and media polarization has influenced Catholic discourse, with some traditionalists aligning the Church's "return" with right-wing values. This is evident in online posts where users express relief that Leo XIV might counter globalism or liberalism, a sentiment that oversimplifies the Church's transpolitical mission. Psychologically, the trope may stem from a desire for certainty in an era of rapid change—technological, cultural, and ecological. Francis' ambiguity on issues like LGBTQ+ pastoral care and women's roles, while rooted in mercy, unsettled those seeking clear boundaries. The election of an American pope, combined with his traditional name, offered a psychological anchor, fueling the "we're so back" narrative. However, this reflects more a reaction to secular trends than a response to the Church's actual state, which, as shown, has grown and adapted under Francis.

Critiquing the Evidence Base Traditionalists often cite anecdotal evidence—declining Mass attendance in Europe, the Extraordinary Form's popularity, or Francis' off-the-cuff remarks—as proof of a Church in crisis. Yet, these are selective and lack context. Mass attendance decline began post-World War II, long before Vatican II, due to secularization, not papal policy. The Extraordinary Form, while cherished by a minority, represents a fraction of global Catholic practice, with the Ordinary Form remaining the norm. Francis' remarks, often pastoral rather than doctrinal, are misinterpreted as shifts when they are invitations to dialogue, as seen in his synodal process. Conversely, evidence of Church vitality—global growth, new vocations, and Francis' reforms—receives less attention. The traditionalist focus on a "lost" Church ignores the Holy Spirit's role in guiding it through diversity. Leo XIV's continuation of this trajectory further invalidates the trope, as his synodal emphasis seeks to unify, not divide, the faithful. Conclusion: A Call for Trust and Unity The "we're so back" trope among Catholic traditionalists is a misjudgment of history, statistics, and theology. The Church never "left" its mission, growing under Pope Francis and maintaining Christ's promise against the gates of hell. Pope Leo XIV's commitment to Francis' legacy reinforces this continuity, challenging traditionalist nostalgia. Rather than celebrating a return, Catholics are called to trust in the Church's divine guidance and work toward unity, embracing the global, synodal Church of today. The trope, while emotionally resonant, lacks substance and risks fracturing the Body of Christ it claims to defend.

Pope Leo XIV’s Return to Castel Gandolfo: A Mixed Blessing for Faith, Economy, and Tradition

Pope Leo XIV’s Return to Castel Gandolfo: A Mixed Blessing for Faith, Economy, and Tradition

On a warm July evening in 2025, Pope Leo XIV arrived at Castel Gandolfo, the papal summer residence nestled in the Alban Hills just south of Rome, marking a notable shift in Vatican tradition. This marks the first time in over a decade that a pope has utilized this historic retreat, a practice largely abandoned by Pope Francis, who preferred the simplicity of staying within the Vatican walls. The decision by Leo XIV, who ascended to the papacy in 2022, has ignited a flurry of reactions—ranging from enthusiastic support to sharp criticism. As the Church navigates a complex modern landscape, this move raises questions about rest, economic impact, vanity, and the essence of Catholic identity. This poar exploration delves into the pros and cons of returning to Castel Gandolfo, critiques the misplaced priorities of traditionalist Catholics who see it as a triumph, and reflects on its implications for a Church facing financial and spiritual challenges. A Historical Haven: The Legacy of Castel Gandolfo Castel Gandolfo’s history as a papal retreat stretches back to 1596, when Pope Clement VIII acquired the property for the Church. Perched 1,300 feet above sea level, its strategic location offered a respite from Rome’s heat and the malaria-ridden Pontine Marshes. Over centuries, popes transformed it into a luxurious enclave, complete with a palace, gardens, a private farm, and even an astronomical observatory established by Pope Gregory XIII. The Apostolic Palace, with its 135 acres of land, became a symbol of papal privilege, hosting figures like Pope Pius XI, who famously broadcast the first radio message from the Vatican in 1931, and Pope John Paul II, who recuperated there after an assassination attempt in 1981. Pope Benedict XVI was the last to use it regularly, spending summers there until 2013. Pope Francis, however, opted against it, choosing to remain in the Vatican guesthouse, Santa Marta, as a gesture of humility. His decision reflected a broader shift toward a less ostentatious papacy, aligning with his emphasis on serving the poor. The property was opened to the public as a museum in 2016, generating revenue but leaving the town of Castel Gandolfo—population 8,900—without its traditional papal draw. Leo XIV’s return, announced in May 2025, signals a return to pre-Francis norms, prompting both nostalgia and debate. The Pros: Rest, Renewal, and Economic Revival Rest for the Pontiff The most immediate benefit of Leo XIV’s decision is the opportunity for rest. At 69, the pope shoulders a grueling schedule—leading Masses, meeting world leaders, and addressing global crises like climate change and migration. Rome’s summer temperatures, often exceeding 90°F (32°C), exacerbate this burden, posing health risks. Castel Gandolfo’s cooler climate, with average July temperatures around 75°F (24°C), provides a natural retreat. Historical accounts suggest popes like Pius XII used the residence to recover from exhaustion, a precedent that supports Leo’s choice. A rested pontiff can better fulfill his spiritual and administrative duties, ensuring the Church’s leadership remains robust. Medical experts agree that regular breaks enhance cognitive function and resilience. A 2023 study from the *Journal of Occupational Health* found that leaders under chronic stress are 30% more likely to experience burnout, a risk mitigated by periodic retreats. For Leo, whose papacy has already tackled divisive issues like clergy abuse reforms, this rest could sustain his long-term effectiveness. The serene gardens and private chapel at Castel Gandolfo offer a space for prayer and reflection, aligning with the Catholic tradition of sabbath rest as a divine mandate. Tourism and Economic Boost The economic impact on Castel Gandolfo is equally significant. The town’s economy has struggled since the papal retreat ceased being a regular fixture. Local businesses—cafes, souvenir shops, and the renowned mosaic workshop—relied on the influx of pilgrims and tourists drawn by the pope’s presence. In 2012, the last full year of Benedict XVI’s use, the town saw an estimated 150,000 visitors, contributing €5 million to the local economy, according to a report by the Italian Chamber of Commerce. Since the museum opened in 2016, visitation has averaged 80,000 annually, a respectable but diminished figure. Leo XIV’s return is expected to reverse this trend. Preliminary estimates from the Castel Gandolfo Tourism Board suggest a potential 50% increase in visitors for the 2025 summer season, injecting millions into the local economy. Hotels are already reporting bookings up 30% since the announcement, and local vendors anticipate higher sales of religious artifacts and regional specialties like porchetta. This revival benefits not just merchants but also the 1,200 residents directly employed in tourism-related sectors. For a town that felt abandoned, the pope’s presence restores a sense of identity and purpose. Moreover, the revenue generated could support broader regional development. The Alban Hills, a UNESCO-designated area, could see enhanced infrastructure—better roads, public transport, and cultural preservation—funded by tourism growth. This aligns with the Church’s social teaching on supporting local communities, turning a papal retreat into a catalyst for economic justice. The Cons: Vanity, Exploitation, and Financial Strain A Display of Vanity Despite these benefits, the lavishness of Castel Gandolfo raises ethical concerns. The Apostolic Palace, with its frescoed halls, private lake, and expansive gardens, contrasts sharply with the modest lifestyle of Jesus Christ, whom popes are called to emulate. Critics argue that maintaining such a property reflects vanity, a sin the Church has historically cautioned against. Pope Francis’s decision to forgo Castel Gandolfo was seen as a powerful statement of humility, resonating with his 2013 exhortation *Evangelii Gaudium*, where he urged the Church to be “poor and for the poor.” The optics are problematic in a global context where 700 million people live on less than $2.15 a day, per World Bank data (2024). Images of Leo XIV relaxing in a palace could alienate the faithful, especially in developing nations where the Church relies on grassroots support. The property’s upkeep—estimated at €2 million annually for maintenance, staff, and utilities—further fuels the perception of extravagance, drawing resources from parishes already struggling to fund schools and charities. The Pope as a Mascot Using the pope’s presence to boost tourism risks reducing him to a celebrity or mascot, a role incompatible with his spiritual mission. The Church is not a commercial enterprise, and the pontiff’s primary duty is to shepherd souls, not to serve as a tourist attraction. Historical parallels exist—medieval popes like Leo X were criticized for their lavish courts, contributing to the Reformation. While Leo XIV’s intent may be innocent, the commodification of his image—through guided tours, merchandise, and media coverage—could undermine the sacred nature of the papacy. This concern is heightened by social media, where influencers and news outlets amplify the spectacle. A 2024 Pew Research study found that 65% of Catholics under 35 view the Church’s public image as increasingly tied to entertainment, a trend that could deepen if Castel Gandolfo becomes a recurring photo op. The risk is not just reputational but theological, diluting the pope’s role as a moral leader. Financial Strain and Potential Sale The most pressing con is financial. The Catholic Church globally faces a donation crisis, with contributions dropping 15% in Western countries since 2018, according to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA, 2024). In the U.S. alone, dioceses reported a $1.2 billion deficit in 2023, driven by declining attendance and legal costs from abuse scandals. Maintaining Castel Gandolfo, with its high operational costs, could exacerbate this strain, especially if donations continue to wane. Speculation about selling the property has resurfaced. Pope Francis considered it in 2018, valuing the estate at €200 million, though the plan was shelved due to cultural heritage concerns. With Leo XIV’s return, the debate intensifies. Selling could fund critical initiatives—supporting refugees, rebuilding churches in war-torn regions like Ukraine, or addressing clergy shortages. Yet, the emotional attachment to Castel Gandolfo, coupled with its historical significance, complicates any decision. The financial argument is compelling: resources tied to a single retreat could be redirected to serve millions, aligning with the Church’s mission more directly. Traditionalist Reactions: A Misplaced Triumph The return to Castel Gandolfo has elicited jubilation from traditionalist Catholics, some proclaiming “we’re back” on social media platforms like X. This sentiment reflects a longing for a pre-Vatican II Church, where papal pomp and traditional practices were more prominent. For these groups, the retreat symbolizes a return to orthodoxy, a counterpoint to what they see as Francis’s progressive leanings. Yet, this enthusiasm reveals a troubling misplacement of priorities. Castel Gandolfo is not a cornerstone of Catholicism. The faith’s essence lies in the Eucharist, the Scriptures, and the teachings of Christ—not in vacation spots or ornate residences. The “we’re back” narrative suggests that a papal retreat is a litmus test for the Church’s health, a view that trivializes the deeper struggles of evangelization, moral renewal, and unity. Traditionalists’ focus on externals—liturgy, vestments, and now summer retreats—diverts attention from the Church’s mission to address modern challenges like secularism, poverty, and interfaith dialogue. Historically, the Church has thrived through adversity, not luxury. The early Christians met in catacombs, and saints like Francis of Assisi embraced poverty. The fixation on Castel Gandolfo as a victory ignores the reality that faith does not require opulence. Critics like theologian Dr. Massimo Faggioli argue that such traditionalism risks becoming a “nostalgic cult,” detached from the Gospel’s call to serve the marginalized. The “we’re back” claim, therefore, exposes a shallow understanding of Catholicism, prioritizing aesthetics over substance. Did Jesus vacation or have a palace vacation spot? Did His Disciples? Broader Implications for the Church Theological Reflections The debate over Castel Gandolfo touches on deeper theological questions about the papacy’s role. The pope is the “Servant of the Servants of God,” a title emphasizing humility over grandeur. Yet, the Church’s history includes both ascetics like Pope Celestine V and lavish patrons like Pope Julius II. Leo XIV’s choice can be seen as a balanced approach—acknowledging human needs while retaining tradition. However, it challenges the Church to articulate why such a retreat is justifiable when so many faithful lack basic necessities. Theological voices differ. Jesuit Father James Martin supports the rest argument, noting that Jesus withdrew to pray (Mark 1:35), suggesting a precedent for papal retreats. Conversely, liberation theologian Gustavo Gutiérrez might argue that the funds could better serve the poor, echoing Francis’s stance. This tension reflects the Church’s ongoing dialogue between tradition and social justice, with Castel Gandolfo as a microcosm. Contemporary Challenges The decision comes at a pivotal moment. The Church is losing members—Europe saw a 10% decline in Mass attendance from 2019 to 2024 (CARA data)—and faces financial pressures from lawsuits and declining vocations. In 2023, the Vatican reported a €50 million deficit, prompting cost-cutting measures. Against this backdrop, Castel Gandolfo’s use could be perceived as tone-deaf, especially if it diverts resources from parishes or missionary work. Yet, it also offers an opportunity. A well-rested pope could lead more effectively, and the tourism revenue could be channeled into Church projects. The key is transparency—ensuring funds benefit the faithful, not just the retreat’s upkeep. Leo XIV could set a precedent by pledging a portion of tourism proceeds to global aid, turning a potential liability into a virtue. A Path Forward Pope Leo XIV’s return to Castel Gandolfo is neither a clear victory nor a definitive misstep—it’s a complex decision with multifaceted impacts. The pros—rest for the pontiff and economic revival—are tangible and immediate, offering practical benefits. The cons—vanity, exploitation, and financial strain—pose legitimate ethical and logistical challenges that demand careful management. Traditionalists’ celebration of the move as a return to glory is misguided, reflecting poor priorities that sideline the faith’s core mission. Moving forward, the Church could mitigate criticism by modernizing the retreat’s use. This might include hosting interfaith summits or youth gatherings at Castel Gandolfo, aligning its purpose with contemporary needs. Financially, a public audit of costs and a commitment to redirect tourism revenue could address donor concerns. Spiritually, Leo XIV could use the retreat to model a balanced life—resting, praying, and serving—rather than reinforcing perceptions of privilege. Ultimately, Castel Gandolfo’s future hinges on how it serves the Church’s mission. If it becomes a tool for renewal and outreach, it could justify its existence. If it remains a symbol of past glory, it risks alienating a faithful already questioning the Church’s relevance. As of July 8, 2025, the world watches, awaiting Leo XIV’s next move in this unfolding saga.

The Inspiring Life and Legacy of St. Maria Goretti: A Beacon of Purity and Forgiveness

The Inspiring Life and Legacy of St. Maria Goretti: A Beacon of Purity and Forgiveness

St. Maria Goretti, one of the youngest canonized saints in the Catholic Church, is a powerful example of faith, purity, and forgiveness. Born into poverty on October 16, 1890, in Corinaldo, Italy, Maria’s short life was marked by profound virtue and an unwavering commitment to God, culminating in her martyrdom at the age of 11. Her story continues to inspire millions, offering lessons in courage, mercy, and devotion that resonate across generations. This blog post explores her life, her heroic death, and her enduring legacy, drawing on historical accounts and reflections from Catholic sources. A Life of Simplicity and Faith Maria Teresa Goretti was the third of seven children born to Luigi and Assunta Goretti, a poor farming family in rural Italy. The Gorettis faced relentless hardship, moving multiple times in search of better opportunities. By the time Maria was six, the family relocated to Colle Gianturco, near Paliano, and later to Le Ferriere in the Pontine Marshes, a region notorious for its malaria-infested swamps. When Maria was nine, her father succumbed to malaria, leaving her mother to provide for the family. Maria, despite her young age, took on significant responsibilities, managing household chores and caring for her younger siblings while her mother and older siblings worked in the fields. Though she never learned to read or write due to her family’s poverty, Maria’s faith was profound. She was deeply devoted to the Virgin Mary, often praying the Rosary for her father’s soul and visiting the shrine of Our Lady of Graces during trips to nearby villages. Her cheerful obedience and piety were evident to those around her, and she prepared diligently for her First Holy Communion at age 11, an event that deepened her spiritual commitment. A Martyr for Purity On July 5, 1902, Maria’s life took a tragic turn. The Gorettis shared a home with another family, the Serenellis, including 20-year-old Alessandro Serenelli. Alessandro had made repeated advances toward Maria, which she consistently rejected. On that fateful day, while Maria was sewing and watching her younger sister, Alessandro approached her with impure intentions. When she refused, declaring, “No! It is a sin! God does not want it!” and warned him of the spiritual consequences, Alessandro became enraged. He stabbed her 14 times, inflicting severe wounds to her heart, lungs, and intestines. Maria was rushed to a hospital in Nettuno, where doctors attempted surgery without anesthesia. Despite her agony, she remained steadfast, forgiving Alessandro and expressing her desire for him to join her in heaven. She died the following day, July 6, 1902, at the age of 11 years, 9 months, and 21 days. Her final words, “Yes, for the love of Jesus I forgive him... and I want him to be with me in Paradise,” reflected her extraordinary mercy. Alessandro’s Conversion and Maria’s Canonization Alessandro was arrested and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Initially unrepentant, he underwent a profound transformation after a dream in which Maria appeared to him, offering 14 white lilies—one for each of her wounds—symbolizing her forgiveness. This vision, occurring about six years into his sentence, marked the beginning of his conversion. After serving 27 years, Alessandro was released and sought forgiveness from Maria’s mother, Assunta, who graciously forgave him, saying she could not withhold what Maria had given. In a remarkable moment, Alessandro and Assunta attended Christmas Mass together at Maria’s shrine, receiving Communion side by side. Maria’s cause for canonization progressed rapidly. The process began in 1935, with Alessandro among the witnesses testifying to her sanctity. On April 27, 1947, she was beatified, and on June 24, 1950, Pope Pius XII canonized her in a historic outdoor ceremony at St. Peter’s Square, attended by over 500,000 people, including Assunta and Alessandro. Maria became the youngest officially recognized saint in the Catholic Church, celebrated for her martyrdom and purity. Legacy and Relevance Today St. Maria Goretti is the patron saint of purity, rape victims, young women, youth, and forgiveness. Her feast day, celebrated on July 6, was added to the General Roman Calendar in 1969. Her story resonates deeply in a world grappling with issues of sexual violence, purity, and forgiveness. Pope John Paul II, in a 2003 Angelus address, praised Maria as a model for youth, emphasizing that her life demonstrates the courage and sacrifice required to remain faithful to God’s commandments. Maria’s story also challenges modern perspectives on virginity and consent. While some contemporary voices question the emphasis on her physical purity, arguing it may overshadow her agency or imply victim-blaming, Catholic teaching underscores that Maria’s martyrdom was rooted in her defense of virtue and her concern for Alessandro’s soul. As noted in the *National Catholic Register*, Maria’s protest was not only about her own dignity but also about preventing Alessandro from committing a mortal sin. Her forgiveness transformed his life, illustrating the redemptive power of mercy. Her relics are housed in the Basilica of Nostra Signora delle Grazie e Santa Maria Goretti in Nettuno, where pilgrims visit to honor her. Contrary to some claims, her body is not incorrupt; her skeletal remains are preserved in a wax statue. Sites related to her life, including her birthplace in Corinaldo and the locations in Colle Gianturco and Nettuno, remain places of pilgrimage. Lessons from St. Maria Goretti Maria’s life offers timeless lessons: 1. Faith in Simplicity: Despite her lack of formal education, Maria’s trust in God was unwavering, reminding us that holiness is accessible to all. 2. Courage in Adversity: Her refusal to compromise her values, even at the cost of her life, inspires steadfastness in the face of temptation. 3. Power of Forgiveness: Maria’s forgiveness of Alessandro, even as she lay dying, demonstrates the transformative nature of mercy. 4. Purity as a Virtue: In a hyper-sexualized culture, Maria’s commitment to chastity challenges us to uphold dignity and respect for the body. 5. Intercession for Healing: As patroness of rape victims, Maria’s intercession offers hope and healing to survivors of abuse. Conclusion St. Maria Goretti’s life, though brief, shines as a testament to the strength of faith and the beauty of forgiveness. Her story is not just one of tragedy but of triumph—over sin, despair, and even death. As we reflect on her legacy, we are invited to emulate her courage, purity, and mercy in our own lives. Whether facing personal trials or societal pressures, Maria’s example encourages us to remain faithful to God and to extend forgiveness, even in the most difficult circumstances. St. Maria Goretti, pray for us.

References - Franciscan Media, “Saint Maria Goretti,” www.franciscanmedia.org [](https://www.franciscanmedia.org/saint-of-the-day/saint-maria-goretti/)

- Catholic News Agency, “St. Maria Goretti,” www.catholicnewsagency.com [](https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint/st-maria-goretti-530)

- Franciscan Media, “Purity & Purpose: The Brief Life of St. Maria Goretti,” www.franciscanmedia.org [](https://www.franciscanmedia.org/franciscan-spirit-blog/purity-and-purpose-the-brief-life-of-st-maria-goretti/)

- Wikipedia, “Maria Goretti,” en.wikipedia.org [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Goretti)

- National Catholic Register, “The St. Maria Goretti Conundrum,” www.ncregister.com [](https://www.ncregister.com/blog/the-st-maria-goretti-conundrum) - Maria Goretti Network, “St. Maria Goretti Story,” mgoretti.org [](https://mgoretti.org/mgstory) - National Catholic Register, “St. Maria Goretti — A Martyr More Relevant Today Than Ever,” www.ncregister.com [](https://www.ncregister.com/blog/st-maria-goretti-martyr-more-relevant-today-than-ever) - Catholic Apostolate Center Feast Days, “St. Maria Goretti,” www.catholicapostolatecenterfeastdays.org [](https://www.catholicapostolatecenterfeastdays.org/feast-days-and-solemnities/st-maria-goretti)

- Catholic Mom, “5 Lessons from St. Maria Goretti,” www.catholicmom.com [](https://www.catholicmom.com/articles/5-lessons-from-st.-maria-goretti)

- Gaudium Magazine, “Hope and Forgiveness: The Story of Alessandro Serenelli and St. Maria Goretti,” www.gaudiummag.com [](https://www.gaudiummag.com/p/hope-and-forgiveness-the-story-of)

- Catholic Saint Medals, “About St. Maria Goretti,” catholicsaintmedals.com [](https://catholicsaintmedals.com/saints/st-maria-goretti/)

- Church Pop, “7 Things to Know About the Beautiful Saint Maria Goretti,” www.churchpop.com [](https://www.churchpop.com/7-things-to-know-about-the-beautiful-saint-maria-goretti-model-of-chastity-forgiveness/)

- National Catholic Register, “Now More Than Ever, St. Maria Goretti Is a Sign of Contradiction,” www.ncregister.com[](https://www.ncregister.com/blog/st-maria-goretti-saints-and-art)

The New Votive Rite of the Mass “Pro Custodia Creationis”: A Celebration of Creation Rooted in Catholic Tradition

The New Votive Rite Option of the Mass “Pro Custodia Creationis”: A Celebration of Creation Rooted in Catholic Tradition

In July 2025, the Vatican announced the introduction of a new votive Mass titled *Pro Custodia Creationis* (For the Care of Creation), a liturgy focused on environmental stewardship and humanity’s responsibility to care for God’s creation. This development has sparked both interest and debate, with some questioning whether it veers toward nature worship or pagan practices like those associated with Pachamama or Mother Nature. This blog post will explain the new rite, ground it in Church teaching, clarify its intention, and address why it is distinctly Catholic and not a form of paganism. What is the Votive Mass “Pro Custodia Creationis”? A votive Mass in the Roman Catholic Church is a liturgy celebrated for a specific intention, distinct from the regular liturgical calendar. The Pro Custodia Creationis is designed to emphasize the care of creation, aligning with the Church’s growing focus on ecological responsibility. According to posts on X, the Mass was approved by Pope Leo XIV and includes prayers, such as the Prayer after Communion, which asks that “we may learn to live in harmony with all creatures”. It is intended to be celebrated optionally, particularly in contexts where environmental concerns are prominent, such as during the annual World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation on September 1. The Mass draws heavily from Pope Francis’s encyclical Laudato Si’ (2015), which calls for an “integral ecology” that integrates care for the environment with social justice and human dignity. The liturgy is not a replacement for the traditional Roman Rite but an addition meant to foster reflection on humanity’s role as stewards of creation. Church Teaching on Creation and Stewardship The Pro Custodia Creationis is firmly rooted in Catholic theology, which has long emphasized the goodness of creation and humanity’s responsibility to care for it. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) states: > “God wills the interdependence of creatures. The sun and the moon, the cedar and the little flower, the eagle and the sparrow: the spectacle of their countless diversities and inequalities tells us that no creature is self-sufficient. Creatures exist only in dependence on each other, to complete each other, in the service of each other.” (CCC 340) This teaching underscores that creation is a gift from God, ordered toward His glory, and entrusted to humanity for stewardship, not exploitation. The Book of Genesis further supports this, where God gives humans “dominion” over the earth (Genesis 1:26-28), interpreted by the Church as a call to responsible care, not domination. In Laudato Si’, Pope Francis expands on this, stating: > “We are not God. The earth was here before us and it has been given to us… Each community can take from the bounty of the earth whatever it needs for subsistence, but it also has the duty to protect the earth and to ensure its fruitfulness for coming generations.” (Laudato Si’, 67) The Pro Custodia Creationis reflects these teachings by encouraging Catholics to pray for the wisdom and strength to care for the environment in a way that honors God’s design. The Mass’s prayers and readings likely draw from scriptures like Psalm 24 (“The earth is the Lord’s and all that is in it”) and Romans 8:19-22, which speaks of creation groaning for redemption, reinforcing the theological foundation of ecological responsibility. Intention of the New Rite The intention of the Pro Custodia Creationis is to integrate environmental stewardship into the Church’s liturgical life, making it a focal point for prayer and action. It responds to contemporary ecological crises—climate change, deforestation, pollution—while framing them within a Catholic worldview. As Pope Francis noted in *Laudato Si’*, “Living our vocation to be protectors of God’s handiwork is essential to a life of virtue; it is not an optional or secondary aspect of our Christian experience” (Laudato Si’, 217). The Mass is meant to inspire Catholics to live out this vocation through sustainable practices, advocacy for environmental justice, and gratitude for creation’s beauty. It also aligns with the Church’s broader mission of inculturation, adapting the liturgy to address modern challenges while remaining faithful to doctrine. The Vatican’s announcement suggests Pope Leo XIV will celebrate this Mass at Castel Gandolfo in July 2025, signaling its importance as a model for global Catholic communities (). Addressing Concerns About Paganism Critics, as seen in posts on X, have expressed concerns that the Pro Custodia Creationis might resemble pagan nature worship, particularly evoking the 2019 Amazon Synod controversy involving Pachamama statues. These concerns often stem from misunderstandings of the Church’s approach to inculturation and the use of symbols that may appear pagan to some. To address this, it’s essential to distinguish Catholic reverence for creation from pagan practices like those associated with Pachamama or Mother Nature worship. Paganism, as historically understood, involves polytheistic or animistic beliefs that attribute divinity to natural elements or deities like Pachamama, an Andean goddess revered as “Mother Earth”. Such practices often include rituals offering sacrifices or prayers to nature deities for prosperity or protection, which are fundamentally at odds with Catholic monotheism. The Catholic Church teaches that there is one true God, the Creator, who is distinct from His creation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church clarifies: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pachamama) > “The universe, created in and by the eternal Word, the second person of the Holy Trinity, reflects the wisdom and goodness of God… Creation is the foundation of all God’s saving plans… and so we see in it something of the reflection of God’s glory.” (CCC 295, 299) The Pro Custodia Creationis does not worship creation but honors God through His creation, recognizing it as a gift that reveals His glory. This is distinct from paganism, which might deify nature itself, as seen in practices where Pachamama is venerated with offerings like food or incense. The Mass’s focus is on stewardship—caring for the earth as an act of obedience to God’s command to “till and keep” the Garden (Genesis 2:15).[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pachamama) The 2019 Amazon Synod controversy, where statues labeled as Pachamama were displayed in Vatican gardens, fueled accusations of idolatry. Pope Francis clarified that there “was no idolatrous intention” in their use, and sources indicate the statues, purchased from a craft market, symbolized life and indigenous culture, not worship. The Church has a history of inculturation, transforming cultural symbols to reflect Christian truths, as seen when early Christians repurposed Roman feast days to honor saints. However, the lack of clear explanation during the Synod led to confusion, highlighting the need for careful communication to avoid scandal. (https://www.homeofthemother.org/en/magazine/selected-articles/spiritual-life/10830-il-sinodo-per-l%25E2%2580%2599amazzonia-e-la-pachamama-2)[](https://francisclooney.hsites.harvard.edu/blog/pope-amazon-and-pachamama)[](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/zcipbw/why_did_the_pope_allow_pachamama_idol_at_the/) The Pro Custodia Creationis avoids such ambiguity by grounding its prayers and intention in Catholic doctrine, as articulated in Laudato Si’ and the Catechism. It does not invoke nature deities or promote pantheism, which equates God with the universe. Instead, it calls Catholics to live in harmony with creation, as the Prayer after Communion suggests, reflecting the interconnectedness of all creatures interdependent under God’s providence (CCC 340,). This aligns with St. Francis of Assisi’s Canticle of the Creatures, which praises God through “Sister Earth, our Mother,” without deifying nature. (https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10717a.htm)(https://mustfollowifican.wordpress.com/2024/01/24/pachamama-at-the-vatican/) Why This Matters Today The Pro Custodia Creationis responds to urgent ecological challenges while remaining faithful to Catholic teaching. It invites Catholics to reflect on their role as stewards in a world facing environmental crises, fostering a spirituality that sees care for creation as an expression of love for God and neighbor. As Pope Francis writes: > “A sense of deep communion with the rest of nature cannot be authentic if our hearts lack tenderness, compassion, and concern for our fellow human beings.” (*Laudato Si’*, 91) By integrating ecological awareness into the liturgy, the Mass bridges faith and action, encouraging Catholics to address environmental issues without compromising the Church’s monotheistic faith. The Pro Custodia Creationis is a votive Mass that celebrates God’s creation, rooted in the Church’s teachings on stewardship and the goodness of the created order. Its intention is to inspire Catholics to care for the earth as a moral and spiritual duty, not to worship nature as pagans might. By grounding itself in Scripture, the Catechism, and Laudato Si’, the Mass avoids the pitfalls of paganism, such as those associated with Pachamama or Mother Nature worship, and instead offers a distinctly Catholic vision of “integral ecology.” As the Church navigates modern challenges, this liturgy serves as a call to honor God by caring for His creation, ensuring that faith and environmental responsibility go hand in hand. --- References - *Catechism of the Catholic Church* (CCC), 1994.

- Pope Francis, *Laudato Si’*, 2015.

-: Indian Catholic Matters, “Pachamama: Understanding the Issue of Inculturation,” 2019. [](https://www.indiancatholicmatters.org/pachamama-understanding-the-issue-of-inculturation/)

-: Wikipedia, “Pachamama,” 2002. [](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pachamama)

-: Home of the Mother, “The Amazon Synod and the Pachamama,” 2020. [](https://www.homeofthemother.org/en/magazine/selected-articles/spiritual-life/10830-il-sinodo-per-l%25E2%2580%2599amazzonia-e-la-pachamama-2)

-: Francis X. Clooney, S.J., “The Pope, the Amazon, and Pachamama,” 2020. [](https://francisclooney.hsites.harvard.edu/blog/pope-amazon-and-pachamama)

-: Reddit, “Why did the Pope allow pachamama idol at the Amazon Synod?” 2022. [](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/zcipbw/why_did_the_pope_allow_pachamama_idol_at_the/)

-: New Advent, “Naturism,” n.d. [](https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10717a.htm)

-: I Must Follow if I Can, “Pachamama at the Vatican,” 2024. [](https://mustfollowifican.wordpress.com/2024/01/24/pachamama-at-the-vatican/)

-: @RichRaho, X post, July 3, 2025. -: @BigModernism, X post, July 3, 2025. -: @christendomapp, X post, July 1, 2025.