"Mother" Miriam: Bad For the Church

Mother Miriam: A Jewish Convert's Journey to Founding a Religious Community, Her Canonical Status, and Her Bold Critiques of the Church Hierarchy

Mother Miriam of the Lamb of God, O.S.B., born Rosalind Moss, stands as one of the more distinctive and polarizing figures in contemporary Catholic traditionalist circles. A Jewish convert who transitioned through Evangelical Protestantism before entering the Catholic Church, she has become a prominent radio host, speaker, and founder of a small Benedictine-inspired women's religious community. Her story embodies themes of radical conversion, a return to traditional religious habits and practices, and outspoken defense of what she sees as unchanging Catholic truth amid perceived crises in the modern Church. Yet questions persist about her exact canonical status as a religious sister or nun, the stability of her community, and whether her public judgments against popes cross into heresy or schism. This post examines her life, the legitimacy of her vocation, and her controversial statements in detail.

 Early Life and Path to Conversion

Rosalind Moss was born into a conservative Jewish family in Brooklyn, New York. As a young Jewish girl in the 1960s, she reportedly felt a mysterious negative reaction to the shortening of nuns' habits following the Second Vatican Council. This early encounter with changing Catholic visuals left an imprint, though she did not yet understand Catholicism.

In her adult years, Moss embraced Jesus as the Messiah within Evangelical Protestantism, spending about 18 years in that tradition. She worked in various ministries, including as a chaplain in women's jails, director of women's ministry in a church, and roles in orphanages and halfway houses. Her deep study of Scripture and a growing conviction about the need for authority and the Eucharist led her to investigate Catholicism. She entered the Catholic Church at Easter 1995.

Post-conversion, Moss worked for nine years as a staff apologist at Catholic Answers in San Diego. She appeared on EWTN and other Catholic media, sharing her conversion story and teaching on topics like the Jewish roots of Catholicism, family life, and evangelization. Her Jewish background gave her a unique perspective; she often described becoming Catholic as becoming "the most Jewish a Jew can be," fulfilling the promises to Israel through Christ and the Church.

A pivotal moment came when she discerned a call to religious life. Influenced by her love for the full traditional habit and a desire to restore God's design for the family, she pursued formation. She spent time living with women's religious communities in Europe, notably Benedictines, to learn the basics of monastic life.

 Founding the Daughters of Mary, Mother of Israel’s Hope

In 2008, at the invitation of then-Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, Moss began laying the groundwork for a new community. After Burke's move to Rome, the group relocated. On September 8, 2011 (Feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary), Bishop Edward Slattery of Tulsa received her triennial vows, approved her religious name "Mother Miriam of the Lamb of God," and canonically erected the Daughters of Mary, Mother of Israel’s Hope as a Public Association of the Faithful. This made it a step toward becoming an institute of consecrated life, with Mother Miriam as prioress of the Priory of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Tulsa.

The community identifies as contemplative-active Benedictine, emphasizing prayer, the traditional Latin Mass (where possible), full habits, and outreach to restore the family according to God's design. Their charism focuses on being "messengers of hope" in a world that has lost its way, with a special nod to Jewish roots through Mary, the Mother of Israel’s Hope.

The group has faced relocation challenges. Dismissed from the Diocese of Tulsa under Bishop David Konderla around 2016-2017, they sought new homes. By around 2022, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, welcomed them. As of recent updates (2025-2026), they are establishing a permanent monastery on property in Tyler, raising funds for buildings, fencing, and a chapel while accepting postulants. Mother Miriam frequently discusses this mission on her show, framing it as a beacon of tradition amid Church turmoil.

 Is Mother Miriam Really a Catholic Religious Sister or Nun? Canonical Status Explained

This is one of the most debated aspects of her public persona. Canonically, she is not a perpetually professed nun in a fully approved religious institute (such as a congregation with solemn vows and papal right). Instead:

- In 2011, she took triennial (temporary) vows as part of a Public Association of the Faithful. This is an official diocesan recognition but a preliminary stage. Public Associations can progress to private associations, then to institutes of consecrated life with perpetual vows.

- The community remains in this developmental phase. It has not achieved the status of a full religious order or congregation with erected constitutions approved at higher levels. Members wear full traditional habits and live according to a Benedictine-inspired rule, but their canonical erection is tied to the local bishop's authority.

Critics on forums and in comments argue she is "not a real nun" because no order accepted her initially, and the community has moved multiple times (St. Louis, Tulsa, Tyler). Some claim bishops have asked them to leave due to traditionalist leanings or focus on Jewish conversion. Supporters point to Bishop Slattery's formal decree and ongoing diocesan welcome in Tyler as validation.

Public Association of the Faithful grants canonical recognition for the group to exist and pursue its purpose under the bishop's supervision, allowing members to live consecrated life with vows. However, it does not confer the full rights, stability, or "nun" title of a mature institute. Mother Miriam functions as prioress and is addressed as "Mother," consistent with her role. She has taken vows (at least temporary), lives the religious life, and leads the community—but it is not yet a fully erected Benedictine monastery or congregation.

A bishop supervises them: historically Bishop Slattery, then challenges in Tulsa, and currently in the Diocese of Tyler. Stability depends on the local ordinary's approval. Moves between dioceses are not uncommon for new or traditional communities but can raise questions about long-term viability. As of 2026, they appear settled in Tyler and expanding.

In summary, she is legitimately a consecrated woman under diocesan authority with public vows in an recognized association, but not a perpetually professed nun in a canonically erected religious institute. Traditional Catholics often view her as a "nun" in spirit and practice, while stricter canonists note the distinction.

 Controversial and Heretical Statements? Critiques of Popes

Mother Miriam hosts Mother Miriam Live on The Station of the Cross and other platforms. She addresses family issues, conversion, and Church crises with a traditionalist lens. Her popularity stems from forthrightness, but it has drawn accusations of crossing lines into judging the Pope or promoting heresy-adjacent ideas.

Key areas of controversy:

1. Criticism of Popes Francis and Leo XIV: She has stated that both have taught heresy (non-infallibly), particularly on interreligious dialogue, Islam, LGBTQ issues, and synodality. Examples include rejecting "unity with Muslims without truth" as leading souls to hell, calling certain outreach "satanic" or "not of God," and warning against ambiguity on sexuality or doctrine. She responds to critics by saying she is defending truth, not attacking the office.

2. Papal Heresy and Removal: In multiple episodes, she asserts a Pope cannot bind heresy on the faithful. If one attempts to, he would be "removed from office" or self-excommunicated. She distinguishes private error from infallible teaching but warns listeners against following perceived errors. Critics (e.g., David L. Gray) argue this misunderstands papal indefectibility, the limits of infallibility, and risks sedevacantist or schismatic thinking. No Pope has been "removed" this way in history; the Church teaches the Pope's supreme authority, with mechanisms like imperfect councils for extreme cases being highly debated.

3. Antichrist and False Church: She has discussed signs of the Antichrist involving preaching heresy from high places and speculated on a "false church" emerging via synodality. She praises figures like Bishop Strickland and has shifted toward admiring Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX while not formally joining them.

4. Other Judgments: Strong stances against post-Vatican II changes (e.g., habits, liturgy), emphasis on converting Jews as essential (not anti-Semitism but charity), and warnings about evil in the Church exceeding that in the world.

Theological Evaluation: Catholics must distinguish between the Pope's person and office. Canon 212 allows the faithful to manifest concerns to pastors, including the Pope, with reverence. However, public accusations of heresy by a non-theologian, especially implying deposition, risk scandal and disobedience. Traditional theologians (e.g., Cajetan, Bellarmine) discussed hypothetical papal heresy, but the Church has no settled easy mechanism for removal, and private judgment is dangerous. Mother Miriam frames her words as love for the Church and souls, urging fidelity to perennial teaching over novel emphases. Detractors see selective ultramontanism or Protestant-like private interpretation.

Her supporters argue she echoes saints who corrected popes (e.g., Catherine of Siena) and that silence would betray truth. In an era of widespread confusion (German Synod, Fiducia Supplicans debates, interfaith gestures), her voice resonates with those feeling abandoned by hierarchy.

 Broader Context and Impact

Mother Miriam's community and media work highlight tensions in the post-conciliar Church: desire for tradition versus obedience to living Magisterium. Her Jewish-to-Catholic journey adds authenticity to calls for evangelization. The full habit and family focus counter cultural secularism effectively.

Challenges include community transience, small size, and polarizing rhetoric. As of 2026, they continue fundraising and building in Tyler, producing content daily.

Whether one agrees with her critiques or not, her story challenges Catholics to deeper conversation, prayer, and defense of doctrine. Discerning her canonical limits and theological precision is key—fidelity to the Church requires both truth and charity.  Her comments at time are more harmful to the Church than helpful.  There has to be a balance.  

 Sources

- Catholic.com Profile: Mother Miriam of the Lamb of God.

- National Catholic Register: Conversion Story and Interviews.

- MotherofIsraelsHope.org official site and newsletters.

- Catholic World Report and other interviews (2015).

- YouTube episodes of Mother Miriam Live (various on papal critiques, 2025-2026).

- Reports on diocesan moves (e.g., A Catholic Life blog, Phatmass forums).

- LifeSiteNews and related coverage. 

Further reading recommended directly from primary sources for full context.

Diane Montagna's Echoes of Fabrication on Traditionis Custodes

The Echoes of Fabrication: Diane Montagna's Unraveling Claims on Traditionis Custodes and the Fading Mirage of Her Journalism

In the turbulent waters of contemporary Catholic discourse, where the sacred liturgy becomes a battleground for ideologies and egos, few stories have ignited as much fervor—and eventual disillusionment—as the saga surrounding Diane Montagna's explosive allegations about Pope Francis and the bishops' survey on the Extraordinary Form. On July 1, 2025, Montagna, a self-proclaimed Vatican journalist with a penchant for dramatic revelations, dropped what she billed as a bombshell on her Substack: an "exclusive" Vatican report purportedly exposing "major cracks" in the foundation of Traditionis Custodes, Pope Francis's 2021 motu proprio that imposed measured restrictions on the Missal of 1962. She claimed this document—a supposed "overall assessment" from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF)—revealed that the majority of bishops surveyed in 2020 believed changes to Summorum Pontificum (Benedict XVI's 2007 liberalization of the Missal of 1962) would "cause more harm than good." In her narrative, this was proof positive that Pope Francis had ignored episcopal consensus, fabricating a crisis to justify his decree.

The post went viral in circles favoring the Extraordinary Form, amassing thousands of views, shares, and donations to her platform. Outlets like The Remnant, LifeSiteNews, and Catholicism.org amplified her story, hailing it as vindication for those who viewed Traditionis Custodes as an assault on tradition. Montagna positioned herself as the intrepid truth-teller, the lone voice piercing the Vatican's veil of secrecy. But as the weeks turned to months, something peculiar happened: silence. Not the pregnant pause of anticipation, but the deafening void of accountability. Montagna's follow-up on July 10, 2025, merely rehashed the same partial excerpts, doubling down without new evidence. Vatican spokesmen dismissed her leaks as "very partial and incomplete," yet she offered no rebuttal, no full document, no named sources. Her claims, once a roaring inferno, flickered out like a match in the wind.

By November 2025, with Pope Leo XIV's explicit confirmation that he would not rescind Traditionis Custodes—opting instead for case-by-case dispensations—the farce was complete. Montagna's allegations, built on selective snippets and anonymous whispers, crumbled under scrutiny. What remains is not vindication, but a cautionary tale of journalistic overreach, ideological bias, and the exploitation of faithful Catholics hungry for affirmation. This is the story of how one woman's bid for clicks and clout discredited her as both a reporter and a Catholic, slandering the Holy Father and the episcopate in the process. And it is the story of how, amid the echo chamber, one voice—Sacerdotus—dared to call out the discrepancies, only to be silenced by a block on X and Substack.

 The Genesis of a Controversy: Traditionis Custodes and the 2020 Survey

To grasp the depth of Montagna's deception, one must first revisit the context of Traditionis Custodes. Issued on July 16, 2021, the motu proprio was Pope Francis's response to a growing liturgical polarization within the Church. In the accompanying letter to the world's bishops, Francis explained that a 2020 CDF survey—sent to episcopal conferences worldwide—had revealed a "situation that preoccupies and saddens me and persuades me of the need to intervene." The responses, he noted, highlighted how the Extraordinary Form was sometimes "exploited to widen the gaps, reinforce divergences, and encourage disagreements that injure the Church, block her path, and expose her to the risk of division."

This was no arbitrary edict. Summorum Pontificum had been a generous olive branch from Benedict XVI, allowing priests to celebrate the Missal of 1962 freely as an "extraordinary expression" of the Roman Rite. Yet, over 14 years, it inadvertently fostered pockets of resistance: communities where the Missal of 1962 became a symbol not just of reverence, but of rejection of Vatican II's reforms. Reports emerged of seminarians trained in the older missal viewing the Ordinary Form as deficient; of parishes divided along liturgical lines; of online forums breeding schismatic rhetoric under the guise of "tradition." The survey, compiled into a 224-page CDF report (protocol N. 03/2020-ED), synthesized these concerns without claiming unanimous negativity. It noted positive implementations in many dioceses but underscored pastoral challenges where the Missal of 1962 was weaponized against unity.

Francis's intervention restored episcopal oversight, declaring the books of the Missal of 1970 the "unique expression" of the Roman Rite's lex orandi. Bishops could permit the older form but not in parish churches without derogation, and no new groups could form around it. The goal? To heal divisions, not eradicate devotion. By 2025, under Pope Leo XIV, the document's wisdom endured: on November 13, Archbishop Miguel Maury Buendía, nuncio to Great Britain, informed the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales that Leo would not abrogate it, instead granting renewable two-year dispensations to bishops upon request. This continuity affirmed Francis's rationale—the survey did indeed reveal fractures, even if not universally catastrophic.

Enter Diane Montagna. In her July 1 piece, she claimed to possess the report's "overall assessment," alleging it contradicted Francis outright: "The majority of bishops who responded... stated that making legislative changes to Summorum Pontificum would cause more harm than good." She attached PDFs of Italian and English excerpts, protocol-stamped but conspicuously truncated. No full report. No methodology. Just enough to fuel outrage. Circles favoring the Extraordinary Form lapped it up, declaring Francis a liar who bypassed the episcopate. Montagna's Substack subscriptions surged; her X following (halted at @DianeMontagna) buzzed with adulation.

But cracks appeared almost immediately. Vatican spokesman Matteo Bruni, on July 3, called the documents "very partial and incomplete," noting Francis relied on multiple confidential reports beyond the survey. Montagna's July 10 update? More excerpts, insisting the burden of proof lay with the Vatican. Yet she produced nothing to counter Bruni's dismissal. By August, her silence was palpable—no interviews defending the leaks' integrity, no pursuit of the "other documents." Outlets like AKA Catholic began questioning her: "Montagna’s BOMBSHELL still empty." Even Rorate Caeli's Kevin Tierney noted the survey was "occasioned" but not determinative, echoing Archbishop Augustine Di Noia's 2021 clarification to National Catholic Reporter.

 The Anatomy of a Lie: Dissecting Montagna's "Evidence"

Montagna's claims weren't just incomplete; they were misleading from the outset. The leaked "assessment" she touted was a synthesis of responses from about one-third of the world's bishops (excluding Eastern-rite sees), totaling around 90 conferences. Partial leaks from 2021—long before Montagna's "scoop"—already showed nuance: over half viewed Summorum Pontificum favorably for attracting youth, but 60-70% supported tweaks for unity. Bishops like those in France and the U.S. praised its "serene" implementation, yet others decried "ideological" uses fostering "parallel Church" mentalities.

Her excerpt cherry-picked the "more harm than good" line, ignoring the report's caveats: where tensions arose, they stemmed from resistance to Vatican II, not the rite itself. The CDF's full synthesis, per Vatican insiders, balanced positives with Francis's cited concerns—gaps widened by those rejecting conciliar authority. Montagna's PDFs? Blurry scans lacking chain of custody. No whistleblower named. In an era of deepfakes and leaks, this is journalistic malpractice.

Worse, her narrative slandered the bishops. By implying they overwhelmingly backed Summorum Pontificum unchanged, she painted Francis as a tyrant overriding his flock. Yet post-2021 surveys (e.g., Catholic World Report) showed most bishops grateful for Traditionis Custodes, citing reduced divisions. In the U.S., figures like Archbishop Cordileone of San Francisco implemented it pastorally, fostering dialogue. Montagna's portrayal? A cabal of deceived prelates, gaslit by Rome. This isn't reporting; it's agitprop.

As a Catholic, her sin is graver: calumny against the Vicar of Christ. Canon 220 safeguards reputations; her unsubstantiated barbs erode trust in the magisterium. In Evangelii Gaudium, Francis warns against "spiritual worldliness"—using faith for power. Montagna's Substack, monetized on controversy, reeks of it. Donations poured in post-leak; critics like The Pillar noted her pattern of anti-Francis scoops, from synod "plots" to Amoris Laetitia "heresies." Engagement farming, not truth-seeking.

 The Cowardly Retreat: Montagna's Disappearance into the Night

By September 2025, Montagna's fervor waned. No major interviews. Her X activity? Sporadic retweets of allies favoring the Extraordinary Form, ignoring debunkings. A September 4 A Concerned Catholic post speculated her "bombshell" might "put to rest" doubts, but even there, it hinged on her unverified docs. October brought Leo XIV's first Masses—reverent, but in the Ordinary Form with Latin elements, no revival of the Missal of 1962. Advocates for the Extraordinary Form clamored for reversal; Montagna? Mute.

The block came quietly. Sacerdotus, whose critiques we'll explore, reported being barred from her X and Substack in late July—standard for dissenters in echo chambers. But her vanishing act peaked in November: as Leo XIV confirmed Traditionis Custodes's endurance via the UK nuncio, Montagna posted nothing. No mea culpa. No pivot. Just... gone. Her last substantive piece? A tangential Vatican finance gripe. The saga of the Missal of 1962, her magnum opus, evaporated.

This isn't oversight; it's evasion. True journalists chase facts; Montagna chased clout. Her silence discredits her eternally. In a Church wounded by division, she deepened it, then fled. As Proverbs 12:22 warns, "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord." Her lips—and keyboard—proved it.

 Sacerdotus: The Lone Sentinel Against the Storm

In this maelstrom, one figure stood unyielding: Sacerdotus (@Sacerdotus on X), the pseudonymous evangelist whose blog and social media have long championed rational Catholic discourse. From July 2025 onward, Sacerdotus dissected Montagna's claims with surgical precision, the only voice systematically vetting her "evidence" amid triumphalism for the Extraordinary Form.

His July 1 critical analysis flagged the leaks' incompleteness: "Partial leaks... show a range of responses... Pope Francis’ letter states the survey revealed a ‘situation that preoccupies and saddens me,’ suggesting issues." By July 10, "Diane Montagna Rehashes the Same Lies" eviscerated her follow-up: "The protocol number... not corroborated... Bruni’s statement aligns with the possibility that the leaked sections do not represent the full scope." August's "The Unaddressed Claims of Diane Montagna" hammered her silence: "Engagement farming in the Traditionis Custodes controversy... no rebuttal to Vatican dismissal."

Sacerdotus's October pieces—"Diane Montagna & 'Traditionalists' Lied about Pope" and "Diane Montagna On World Over - Vetting Her Claims"—tied it to Leo XIV's continuity, quoting the nuncio: "Pope Leo won’t overturn restrictions." His November 14 post on Leo's stance sealed it: "Safeguarding Tradition: Pope Leo XIV’s Wise Decision."

Why the sole bulwark? Sacerdotus embodies vetting: cross-referencing leaks with magisterial texts, avoiding sensationalism. His 4,000+ X followers include diverse Catholics; blocks from figures like Montagna affirm his independence. In a field of amplifiers, he was the verifier—earning her block as badge of honor.

 The Leo XIII Legacy: Affirming Unity Over Division

Montagna's collapse gains irony under Pope Leo XIV, whose name evokes Leo XIII (1878-1903), the pontiff who navigated modernity without liturgical warfare. Contrary to claims of Leo XIII's "words regarding the Latin Mass," historical records show no direct endorsement; his era predated the Missal of 1962's codification. Yet Leo XIII championed unity in Mirae Caritatis (1902), praising Eucharistic devotion across rites—echoing Francis's Traditionis Custodes as guardian of communal prayer.

Leo XIV, elected May 2025, honors this. His inaugural Masses blended Latin with vernacular, signaling balance. On liturgy, he told La Croix (June 2025): "The Church's rites are treasures, but unity in diversity, not division in nostalgia." No "ban" on the Missal of 1962—bishops discern locally. His November 2025 UK nuncio directive? Dispensations, not rescission, affirming the survey's wisdom. Montagna's "lie" narrative? Obliterated. Leo's path: pastoral prudence, not populist reversal.

This continuity exposes her motive: drumming hits. Naive Catholics, scrolling X without vetting, bit—shares spiked 300% post-leak. But truth endures; fads fade.

 The Broader Wound: Slander, Schism, and the Call to Heal

Montagna's saga wounds deeper than one journalist. It slanders Francis, portraying him as duplicitous—a trope fueling sedevacantism. Bishops? Painted as dupes, eroding collegiality. The Church? Fractured further, when Unitatis Redintegratio demands dialogue.

Yet grace abounds. Traditionis Custodes has borne fruit: dioceses report healed parishes, youth drawn to reverent Ordinary Form celebrations. Sacerdotus's witness reminds: truth demands courage.

As Advent dawns (November 2025), let us pray for Montagna—repentance heals. For journalists: integrity over clicks. For Catholics: vet, don't vent. The liturgy lives; lies die.

In a 5000-word' reflection, this tale warns: in faith's forum, silence after storm betrays the soul. Montagna disappeared; her claims, dust. The Church marches on—united, unbroken.

 Sources

1. Montagna, Diane. "EXCLUSIVE: Official Vatican Report Exposes Major Cracks in Foundation of Traditionis Custodes." Diane Montagna's Substack, July 1, 2025. https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/exclusive-official-vatican-report

2. Montagna, Diane. "New Evidence Confirms CDF Report, Erodes Vatican Narrative on Traditional Latin Mass Restrictions." Diane Montagna's Substack, July 10, 2025. https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/new-evidence-confirms-cdf-report

3. "Vatican reporter finds Traditionis Custodes not based on bishops’ input, as Pope Francis claimed." LifeSiteNews, October 12, 2021. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-reporter-finds-traditionis-custodes-not-based-on-bishops-input-as-pope-francis-claimed/

4. "The Hidden Story Behind Traditionis Custodes." Inside The Vatican, December 21, 2021. https://insidethevatican.com/magazine/the-hidden-story-behind-traditionis-custodes/

5. "Vatican correspondent releases further evidence challenging Traditionis Custodes rationale." CatholicVote, July 10, 2025. https://catholicvote.org/journalist-releases-further-evidence-challenging-traditionis-custodes-rationale

6. "UPDATE: Montagna’s BOMBSHELL still empty." AKA Catholic, July 15, 2025. https://akacatholic.com/update-montagnas-bombshell-still-empty/

7. "Vatican survey did not support Traditionis Custodes, journalist says." Catholic Culture, July 3, 2025. https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=52523

8. "Old Mass, New Battle: Montagna’s shocking & explosive revelation on Traditionis Custodes." A Concerned Catholic, September 4, 2025. https://aconcernedcatholic.com/old-mass-new-battle-montagnas-shocking-explosive-revelation-on-traditionis-custodes/

9. "The Pastoral Lie: How Pope Francis Buried the Truth About Traditionis Custodes." Big Modernism Substack, July 2, 2025. https://bigmodernism.substack.com/p/the-pastoral-lie-how-pope-francis

10. "Vatican correspondent reports ‘major cracks’ in basis of Traditionis Custodes." CatholicVote, July 2, 2025. https://catholicvote.org/vatican-correspondent-reports-major-cracks-in-basis-of-traditionis-custodes/

11. "Decalogue Check Failed: Documents Reveal Deliberate Lies from the Vatican." The European Conservative, July 4, 2025. https://europeanconservative.com/articles/commentary/traditionis-custodes-pope-francis-lies-deceit-latin-mass-diane-montagna/

12. "Traditional Catholics Vindicated: Recent Vatican report reveals that most bishops did not want Latin Mass restrictions under ‘Traditionis Custodes’." The Remnant Newspaper, July 3, 2025. https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/headline-news-around-the-world/item/7837-traditional-catholics-vindicated-recent-vatican-report-reveals-that-most-bishops-did-not-want-latin-mass-restrictions-under-traditionis-custodes

13. "Cracks revealed in Vatican anti-Latin Mass directive." California Catholic Daily, July 3, 2025. https://www.cal-catholic.com/cracks-revealed-in-vatican-anti-latin-mass-directive/

14. "Vatican says documents on Latin Mass assessment ‘incomplete’." Archeparchy of Pittsburgh, July 2025. https://archpitt.org/vatican-says-documents-on-latin-mass-assessment-incomplete/

15. "Internal (and leaked) Vatican report questions justification for suppression of Latin Mass." ZENIT, July 3, 2025. https://zenit.org/2025/07/03/internal-and-leaked-vatican-report-questions-justification-for-suppression-of-latin-mass/

16. "Leaked Vatican Documents Undermine Francis' Stated Rationale for Suppressing Traditional Latin Mass." Novus Ordo Watch, July 3, 2025. https://novusordowatch.org/2025/07/leaked-vatican-docs-undermine-traditionis-custodes/

17. "Nuncio in Britain says pope won't overturn restrictions on old Latin Mass." USCCB, November 14, 2025. https://www.usccb.org/news/2025/nuncio-britain-says-pope-wont-overturn-restrictions-old-latin-mass

18. "Pope Leo won’t overturn restrictions on old Latin Mass, nuncio in Britain says." America Magazine, November 14, 2025. https://www.americamagazine.org/news/2025/11/14/nuncio-britain-pope-wont-overturn-latin-mass-restrictions/

19. "Leo poised to grant ‘generous’ exemptions to Traditionis custodes, UK bishops told." The Pillar, November 14, 2025. https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/leo-poised-to-grant-generous-exemptions

20. "Vatican signals continuity on Latin Mass restrictions despite rumours." The Catholic Herald, November 2025. https://thecatholicherald.com/article/vatican-signals-continuity-on-latin-mass-restrictions-despite-rumours

21. "Will Pope Leo XIV lift the Latin Mass ban?" Reddit r/Catholicism, May 14, 2025. https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1kmxdle/will_pope_leo_xiv_lift_the_latin_mass_ban/

22. "Leo XIV: Liturgy, the Heart, and the Postmodern City." The Catholic Thing, May 14, 2025. https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2025/05/14/leo-xiv-liturgy-the-heart-and-the-postmodern-city/

23. "Pope Leo’s Latin Mass Problem." America Magazine, October 23, 2025. https://www.americamagazine.org/faith-and-reason/2025/10/22/pope-leo-latin-mass/

24. "Conservatives are cautiously hopeful that Pope Leo XIV will restore rigor to the papacy." PBS News, May 12, 2025. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/conservatives-are-cautiously-hopeful-that-pope-leo-xiv-will-restore-rigor-to-the-papacy

25. "Pope Leo XIV Will Probably Not Be Francis 2.0." The Federalist, May 9, 2025. https://thefederalist.com/2025/05/09/why-pope-leo-xiv-will-probably-not-be-francis-2-0/

26. "Pope Leo XIV & The Ancient Liturgy." Reddit r/Catholicism, May 9, 2025. https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1kip8mi/pope_leo_xiv_the_ancient_liturgy/

27. "His Holiness Pope Leo XIV." Latin Mass Society, May 2025. https://lms.org.uk/blog/his-holiness-pope-leo-xiv

28. "Traditionalists press Pope Leo to lift restrictions on Latin mass." Church Times, June 20, 2025. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2025/20-june/news/world/traditionalists-press-pope-leo-to-lift-restrictions-on-latin-mass

29. "Pope Leo XIV on liturgy." Reddit r/Catholicism, May 14, 2025. https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1kmc1wx/pope_leo_xiv_on_liturgy/

30. "Pope Leo’s Permission for Latin Mass in St. Peter’s Gives Traditionalists Hope." The New York Times, October 25, 2025. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/25/world/europe/pope-leo-latin-mass-traditionalists.html

31. Sacerdotus. "Critical Analysis of Diane Montagna's Article and Claims Regarding Traditionis Custodes." Sacerdotus.com, July 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/07/critical-analysis-of-diane-montagnas.html

32. Sacerdotus. "Diane Montagna Rehashes the Same Lies." Sacerdotus.com, July 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/07/diane-montagna-rehashes-same-lies.html

33. Sacerdotus. "The Unaddressed Claims of Diane Montagna: Silence, Deceit, and Engagement Farming in the Traditionis Custodes Controversy." Sacerdotus.com, August 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/08/the-unaddressed-claims-of-diane.html

34. Sacerdotus. "Diane Montagna & 'Traditionalists' Lied about Pope." Sacerdotus.com, October 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/07/diane-montagna-traditionalists-lied.html

35. Sacerdotus. "Diane Montagna On World Over - Vetting Her Claims." Sacerdotus.com, October 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/07/diane-montagna-on-world-over-vetting.html

36. Sacerdotus. "Pope Leo XIV Will Not Rescind Traditionis Custodes." Sacerdotus.com, November 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/11/pope-leo-xiv-will-not-rescind.html

37. Sacerdotus. "The Fourth Anniversary of Traditionis Custodes: Why It was Needed." Sacerdotus.com, July 16, 2025. https://www.sacerdotus.com/2025/07/the-fourth-anniversary-of-traditionis.html

38. Pope Francis. Traditionis Custodes and Accompanying Letter. Vatican, July 16, 2021. (Full text available via Vatican.va)

39. Pope Leo XIII. Mirae Caritatis. Vatican, May 28, 1902. (On Eucharistic unity; no direct reference to the Missal of 1962, as it predates its codification.)

40. Various X Posts by @Sacerdotus on Diane Montagna and Traditionis Custodes (July-November 2025), e.g., Post ID: 1968849287627882560: "Pope Leo XIV also confirmed what Pope Francis stated... Diane Montagna... confirmed to have lied." https://x.com/Sacerdotus/status/1968849287627882560

St. Pope Pius X: The Pope of the Eucharist and Liturgical Renewal

St. Pope Pius X: The Pope of the Eucharist and Liturgical Renewal

St. Pope Pius X, born Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto, is a towering figure in the history of the Catholic Church, revered for his humility, pastoral zeal, and profound contributions to liturgical reform. His papacy (1903–1914) was marked by a deep commitment to fostering holiness among the faithful, particularly through increased participation in the liturgy and frequent reception of the Eucharist. 

Often misunderstood by some traditionalist Catholics who criticize the modern Ordinary Form of the Mass, Pius X’s vision laid the groundwork for the liturgical reforms later codified at the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II). This blog post explores his life, rise to the papacy, beatification and canonization, his liturgical reforms, and why traditionalist critiques of lay participation and the Ordinary Form are at odds with his legacy.

 Early Life and Biography

Giuseppe Sarto was born on June 2, 1835, in Riese, a small village in the Veneto region of Italy, to a humble family. His father, Giovanni Battista Sarto, was a postman and municipal worker, while his mother, Margherita Sanson, raised their ten children under modest circumstances. Giuseppe was the second eldest, and despite the family’s poverty, his parents recognized his intelligence and piety early on. He walked miles to school daily, often barefoot to preserve his shoes, a testament to his resilience and determination.

From a young age, Giuseppe felt a calling to the priesthood. At 15, he entered the seminary in Padua, where his academic excellence and spiritual devotion stood out. Ordained in 1858 at age 23, he began his ministry as a curate in Tombolo, a small parish where he earned a reputation for his compassion, teaching catechism to children, and ministering to the poor. His early career included roles as a parish priest in Salzano and later as chancellor of the Treviso diocese, where he demonstrated administrative skill and pastoral care.

In 1884, Sarto was appointed Bishop of Mantua, a diocese plagued by financial troubles and lax clergy discipline. His reforms—improving seminary education, enforcing clerical standards, and promoting catechesis—revitalized the diocese. In 1893, Pope Leo XIII named him Cardinal and Patriarch of Venice, a prestigious but challenging post due to tensions between the Church and the Italian state. Sarto’s humility shone through; he reportedly hesitated to accept, feeling unworthy. As Patriarch, he continued his focus on catechesis, charity, and fostering devotion to the Eucharist, setting the stage for his papacy.

 Rise to the Papacy

On August 4, 1903, following the death of Pope Leo XIII, Giuseppe Sarto was elected pope after a contentious conclave. The cardinals sought a pastoral figure to balance Leo’s intellectual and diplomatic legacy. Sarto, reluctant to accept, reportedly wept upon his election, but he took the name Pius X, inspired by popes who had faced challenges with faith. His motto, Instaurare Omnia in Christo (“To restore all things in Christ”), encapsulated his mission to renew the Church through spiritual and moral reform.

Pius X’s papacy was defined by his pastoral approach. Unlike his predecessor, he avoided heavy involvement in geopolitics, focusing instead on internal Church matters. He tackled modernism—a theological movement he viewed as undermining Catholic doctrine—through the 1907 encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis and the syllabus Lamentabili Sane. These documents condemned modernist ideas, emphasizing the Church’s unchanging truths. While some criticized his approach as rigid, Pius saw it as protecting the faith from relativism.

His most enduring legacy, however, lies in his liturgical and sacramental reforms, particularly his efforts to make the Eucharist and sacred music central to Catholic life. He believed that active participation in the liturgy was essential for the spiritual growth of the laity, a vision that would resonate decades later at Vatican II.

 Liturgical Reforms and Lay Participation

Pius X is often called the “Pope of the Eucharist” due to his transformative decrees on Eucharistic practice and liturgical participation. At the time, infrequent Communion was common, with many Catholics receiving the sacrament only a few times a year, often due to overly scrupulous views on worthiness or Jansenist influences. In 1905, Pius issued Sacra Tridentina Synodus, a decree encouraging frequent, even daily, Communion for those in a state of grace. This was revolutionary, as it shifted the Eucharist from a rare event to the heart of Catholic spiritual life.

In 1910, through the decree Quam Singulari, Pius lowered the age for First Communion to around seven, the “age of reason,” arguing that children should receive Christ’s grace early. This change fostered a culture of Eucharistic devotion among the young, encouraging families to engage more deeply with the Mass.

Pius also sought to enhance the laity’s role in the liturgy. In his 1903 motu proprio Tra le Sollecitudini, he reformed sacred music, promoting Gregorian chant and polyphony over operatic or secular styles. He believed that music should elevate the soul toward God, and he encouraged the faithful to sing chants and hymns during Mass, fostering active participation. He wrote, “It is not fitting that the faithful assist at the sacred mysteries as spectators, but rather that they take an active part.” This emphasis on active engagement—through singing, responding, and understanding the liturgy—challenged the passive attendance common in his era.

These reforms were not merely aesthetic or disciplinary; they were rooted in Pius’s conviction that the liturgy was the source of Christian life. By encouraging the laity to participate actively, he sought to make the Mass a communal act of worship, not just a clerical ritual. His efforts to simplify and purify liturgical practices laid the foundation for the 20th-century Liturgical Movement, which sought to deepen the faithful’s understanding and involvement in the Mass.

 Path to Beatification and Canonization

Pius X died on August 20, 1914, shortly after the outbreak of World War I, reportedly heartbroken by the conflict he had tried to prevent through diplomatic efforts. His death was mourned widely, and stories of his humility—such as personally teaching catechism to children or giving his possessions to the poor—fueled calls for his canonization.

The process began in 1923, when his cause for sainthood was introduced. Miracles attributed to his intercession, including healings verified by medical experts, advanced his case. On June 3, 1951, Pope Pius XII beatified him, declaring him “Blessed Pius X.” Three years later, on May 29, 1954, Pius XII canonized him, making him the first pope saint since Pius V in the 16th century. His feast day is celebrated on August 21.

Pius X’s canonization was based not only on miracles but also on his heroic virtue—his humility, charity, and unwavering commitment to the Church’s mission. His reforms, particularly in Eucharistic devotion and catechesis, were seen as enduring contributions to the faith.

 Pius X and Vatican II: A Liturgical Legacy

The Second Vatican Council (1962–1965), convened by Pope John XXIII and continued by Pope Paul VI, is often seen as a turning point in modern Catholicism, particularly through its liturgical reforms in the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium. The council called for “full and active participation” of the laity in the liturgy, simplified rites to make them more accessible, and promoted the use of vernacular languages alongside Latin. These changes, which led to the Ordinary Form of the Mass (often called the Novus Ordo), have been controversial among some traditionalist Catholics, who argue they deviate from tradition.

However, Pius X’s reforms were a clear precursor to Vatican II’s liturgical vision. His encouragement of frequent Communion, early First Communion, and active lay participation through singing and responses aligned with the council’s goals. Sacrosanctum Concilium echoed Pius’s belief that the liturgy should be the “summit and source” of Christian life, accessible to all. His promotion of Gregorian chant and simplified liturgical music influenced the council’s call for preserving sacred music while making it participatory.

Pius X also supported the Liturgical Movement, which gained momentum in the early 20th century. Figures like Dom Prosper Guéranger and Lambert Beauduin built on Pius’s reforms, advocating for a liturgy that engaged the faithful intellectually and spiritually. By the time Vatican II convened, Pius’s emphasis on the Eucharist and lay involvement had shaped decades of liturgical scholarship, culminating in the council’s reforms.

 Traditionalist Critiques and Misunderstandings

Some traditionalist Catholics, particularly those who prefer the Extraordinary Form of the Mass (the Tridentine Rite), criticize the Ordinary Form for its vernacular language, simplified structure, and emphasis on lay participation. They often invoke Pius X as a defender of tradition, citing his condemnation of modernism and his preservation of Latin in the liturgy. However, this view misunderstands Pius X’s legacy and his contributions to liturgical reform.

First, Pius X was not opposed to liturgical adaptation. His reforms in Tra le Sollecitudini and Quam Singulari show a willingness to adjust practices to meet the spiritual needs of the faithful. He simplified music and encouraged lay singing, which required adapting traditional forms to make them accessible. His push for frequent Communion broke with centuries of restrictive practices, demonstrating that he valued spiritual vitality over rigid adherence to custom.

Second, Pius X’s emphasis on active participation directly contradicts the traditionalist ideal of a silent, passive laity. In Tra le Sollecitudini, he explicitly called for the faithful to engage in the liturgy, not merely observe it. The Ordinary Form’s inclusion of congregational responses, hymns, and vernacular prayers aligns with this vision, making the Mass a communal act of worship rather than a clerical performance.

Third, Pius X’s fight against modernism was about defending doctrine, not freezing liturgical forms. He condemned theological relativism, not liturgical renewal. Traditionalists who claim Pius would oppose Vatican II’s reforms overlook the fact that his own changes were revolutionary for their time, challenging the status quo to deepen the faithful’s connection to the liturgy.

Finally, the Liturgical Movement, which Pius supported, directly influenced Vatican II. Scholars like Beauduin and Pius Parsch, who built on Pius X’s reforms, advocated for a liturgy that was both reverent and participatory. The Ordinary Form, while different in execution, embodies the principles Pius championed: accessibility, engagement, and Eucharistic centrality.

Traditionalists who criticize lay participation or the Ordinary Form as “modernist” often fail to engage with Pius X’s writings or the historical context of his reforms. His vision was not about preserving every detail of the Tridentine Mass but about making the liturgy a living encounter with Christ for all Catholics. To claim otherwise is to misread his legacy.

 Conclusion

St. Pope Pius X was a pastor, reformer, and saint whose life and papacy left an indelible mark on the Catholic Church. Born into poverty, he rose through the ranks with humility and dedication, becoming a pope who prioritized the spiritual welfare of the faithful. His reforms—encouraging frequent Communion, lowering the age for First Communion, and promoting active lay participation in the liturgy—transformed Catholic practice and paved the way for Vatican II’s liturgical renewal. His beatification and canonization recognized his holiness and enduring impact.

Traditionalist critiques of the Ordinary Form and lay participation often invoke Pius X’s name without fully understanding his contributions. Far from opposing liturgical reform, Pius X was a pioneer of it, seeking to make the Mass a vibrant, communal act of worship. His legacy reminds us that tradition and renewal are not mutually exclusive but can work together to bring the faithful closer to Christ. As we celebrate his feast day, let us honor Pius X by embracing his call to “restore all things in Christ” through active, heartfelt participation in the liturgy.

 Sources

1. Tra le Sollecitudini, Motu Proprio of Pope Pius X, 1903.

2. Sacra Tridentina Synodus, Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, 1905.

3. Quam Singulari, Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, 1910.

4. Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Encyclical of Pope Pius X, 1907.

5. Sacrosanctum Concilium, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Second Vatican Council, 1963.

6. Faggioli, Massimo. True Reform: Liturgy and Ecclesiology in Sacrosanctum Concilium. Liturgical Press, 2012.

7. Reid, Alcuin. The Organic Development of the Liturgy. Ignatius Press, 2005.

8. Lamberts, Jozef. “Pius X and the Liturgical Movement.” Studia Liturgica, vol. 33, no. 2, 2003, pp. 151–167.

9. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, Beatification and Canonization of Pius X, 1951, 1954.

10. Cekada, Anthony. Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI. Philothea Press, 2010. (For traditionalist perspectives, though critically assessed.)

 

The Hacking of Bishop Joseph Strickland’s X Account: A Tale of Digital Vulnerability

The Hacking of Bishop Joseph Strickland’s X Account: A Tale of Digital Vulnerability

In the digital age, even prominent religious figures are not immune to cybercrime. Bishop Joseph Strickland, the former bishop of Tyler, Texas, and a well-known voice in traditionalist Catholic circles, has faced multiple incidents of his X account being compromised. These events, occurring in 2025, highlight the growing threat of cyberattacks targeting influential individuals and the broader implications for online security within religious communities. This blog post explores the timeline of the hacking incidents, their impact, and the lessons they offer for safeguarding digital identities.

 The First Incident: March 2025

On March 3, 2025, Bishop Strickland found himself locked out of his X account, which boasted over 215,000 followers at the time. A fraudulent account began using his name to promote a fake cryptocurrency called “$CHRIST coin.” This scam was particularly insidious, leveraging the bishop’s reputation as a trusted religious figure to deceive followers into investing in a nonexistent digital currency. In a statement to LifeSiteNews, Bishop Strickland clarified, “I have been locked out of my X account since March 3, 2025. I am attempting to resolve the issue with X but in the meantime I’ve been informed that there is a post on X claiming that I am promoting a bit coin. It is NOT ME and I have no knowledge of this bit coin promotion.” He urged his followers to spread awareness of the fraud and emphasized his efforts to resolve the issue to prevent anyone from being defrauded.

This incident underscored the vulnerability of public figures to impersonation scams, particularly those involving cryptocurrencies, which have become a common tool for cybercriminals. The use of Bishop Strickland’s identity to promote a fake coin not only threatened financial harm to his followers but also damaged his reputation as a figure of moral authority.

 The Second Incident: August 2025

Just months later, on August 16, 2025, Bishop Strickland’s X account was hacked again. This time, the breach was even more egregious, with the account posting blasphemous messages, cryptocurrency promotions, and other content clearly not authored by the bishop. According to InfoVaticana, these posts were a stark departure from Strickland’s usual messages of faith and doctrine, reflecting an “evident hackeo” (evident hacking). The content was described as escalating in severity over several days, with some posts containing explicit material, as noted by an X user who observed a worsening trend in the hacked content.

The August hack prompted swift reactions from supporters. One X user, @KeithFournier7, posted on August 16, 2025, stating, “Bishop Joseph Strickland’s X (twitter) account has been both hacked and impersonated by someone who is obviously an evil person seeking to harm this holy, good successor of the Apostles. This impostor needs to be found and exposed. Please, report it.” The outcry from Strickland’s followers highlighted the emotional and spiritual toll of the hack, as many saw it as an attack not only on the bishop but also on the values he represents.

 Context: Who is Bishop Joseph Strickland?

To understand why Bishop Strickland’s account might be a target, it’s important to consider his background. Joseph Strickland served as the bishop of Tyler, Texas, from 2012 until his removal by Pope Francis in November 2023. Known for his outspoken defense of traditional Catholic teachings, Strickland gained a significant following on X, where he frequently commented on matters of faith, morality, and church governance. His removal from the Tyler Diocese, following an apostolic visitation prompted by his criticisms of Pope Francis, made him a polarizing figure. Despite his ousting, Strickland maintained a strong online presence, with his X following growing to over 215,000 by late 2024, far surpassing the Catholic population of his former diocese.

Strickland’s prominence in conservative Catholic circles likely made his account an attractive target for hackers. His large, engaged audience provided a platform for scammers to reach potential victims, while his controversial status may have drawn the attention of malicious actors seeking to undermine his influence or sow discord among his followers.

 The Broader Implications

The hacking of Bishop Strickland’s X account is part of a larger trend of cyberattacks targeting public figures and institutions. For comparison, in January 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) X account was compromised through a SIM-swapping attack, leading to a false announcement about Bitcoin Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) that temporarily spiked Bitcoin prices. This incident, which resulted in the arrest of an Alabama man, demonstrates how hackers exploit trusted accounts to manipulate markets or public perception.

For religious communities, these incidents raise unique concerns. Social media platforms like X are increasingly vital for clergy to communicate with their followers, share spiritual guidance, and counter misinformation. However, they also expose religious leaders to risks such as reputational damage, financial scams targeting their audiences, and the spread of content that contradicts their values. The blasphemous posts on Strickland’s account, for instance, could alienate followers or fuel distrust in online religious discourse.

Moreover, the hacks highlight the sophistication of modern cyberattacks. While the exact methods used to compromise Strickland’s account are unclear, techniques like phishing, SIM-swapping, or password breaches are common in such cases. As one X user noted in a unrelated post about hacking, even decentralized systems are vulnerable if users fall prey to social engineering attacks like phishing, which manipulate individuals into revealing sensitive information.

 Lessons for Online Security

The repeated targeting of Bishop Strickland’s X account offers several lessons for individuals and organizations, particularly those in the public eye:

1. Strengthen Account Security: Public figures should use strong, unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication (2FA) to protect their accounts. Avoiding SMS-based 2FA, which is vulnerable to SIM-swapping, in favor of app-based or hardware-based authentication can enhance security.

2. Educate Followers: Religious leaders and their communities should educate followers about recognizing scams, such as cryptocurrency promotions or posts that deviate from a figure’s usual tone or content. Quick reporting of suspicious activity, as urged by Strickland’s supporters, can help mitigate damage.

3. Monitor and Respond Promptly: Regularly monitoring account activity and having a plan to address hacks—such as public statements or collaboration with platform support—can limit the impact of a breach. Strickland’s proactive communication through LifeSiteNews in March 2025 helped clarify the situation for his followers.

4. Raise Awareness of Cyber Risks: Religious institutions should invest in cybersecurity training to protect their leaders and members from phishing, impersonation, and other digital threats. As Strickland himself noted in the August 2025 hack coverage, he would need to seek “the advice of a good computer expert” to safeguard his online presence.

 Conclusion

The hacking of Bishop Joseph Strickland’s X account in 2025 serves as a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities inherent in our digital world. For a figure like Strickland, whose influence extends far beyond his former diocese, these incidents threaten not only personal reputation but also the trust of a global online community. By understanding the nature of these attacks and taking proactive steps to enhance security, religious leaders can better protect their digital platforms and continue their missions without disruption. As cyberattacks grow more sophisticated, the faithful and their shepherds must remain vigilant to ensure that their voices of truth are not silenced or distorted by malicious actors.

Bishop J. Strickland on X: "write in comment jesus https://t.co/kwddU3ioFM" / X

Bishop J. Strickland on X: "Jesus is love $jesus is a art. https://t.co/VjnEoAm357" / X

UPDATE August 19, 2025 8:40 PM, Bishop Strickland has created a new X account:

 

https://x.com/BishStrick

This is now my only valid X account. Shortly after launching https://t.co/mkOWlpLXEg and the Pillars of Faith apostolate, my old X account was hacked. The enemy always seeks to silence truth, but Christ is stronger.

+Bishop Joseph E. Strickland

— Bishop Joseph Strickland @ Pillars of Faith (@BishStrick) August 18, 2025

Sources  

- InfoVaticana. “Hackean la cuenta de X del obispo Strickland.” August 16, 2025.  [](https://infovaticana.com/2025/08/16/hackean-la-cuenta-de-x-del-obispo-strickland/)

- LifeSiteNews. “WARNING: Fraudulent X account is attempting to use Bishop Strickland’s identity to sell crypto.” March 6, 2025.  [](https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/warning-fraudulent-x-account-is-attempting-to-use-bishop-stricklands-identity-to-sell-crypto)

- X Post by @KeithFournier7. August 16, 2025.  

- X Post by @SarahisCensored. August 7, 2025.  

- United States Department of Justice. “Alabama Man Arrested for Role in Securities and Exchange Commission X Account Hack.” October 17, 2024.  [](https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/alabama-man-arrested-role-securities-and-exchange-commission-x-account-hack)

- Catholic Review. “Ousted Texas bishop attacks Pope Francis, accuses U.S. bishops of silence amid ‘false messages’.” November 13, 2024.  [](https://catholicreview.org/ousted-texas-bishop-attacks-pope-francis-accuses-u-s-bishops-of-silence-amid-false-messages/)

- Wikipedia. “Joseph Strickland.” May 13, 2025.[](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Strickland)

Refuting Claims of the Term “Novus Ordo” in Reference to the Mass of Paul VI: A Response to @pluant ’s Assertions

Refuting Claims of the Term “Novus Ordo” in Reference to the Mass of Paul VI: A Response to 

@pluant

’s Assertions

The X account

@pluant

has repeatedly claimed that Pope Paul VI used the term “Novus Ordo” to refer to the post-Vatican II Mass, often contrasting it with the “Traditional Latin Mass” or Tridentine Mass as a distinct and inferior rite. These claims contribute to a broader narrative among some Catholic traditionalists that the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1969, represents a rupture from Catholic tradition. This post refutes

@pluant

’s assertions, specifically addressing their exchanges with

@Sacerdotus

, by examining the historical, theological, and documentary evidence surrounding the terminology of the Mass. It demonstrates that Paul VI did not use “Novus Ordo” as an official title for the Mass, that the term is informal and not found in key liturgical documents, and that the Mass, by default, is traditional within the unified Roman Rite, as clarified by the Church.

See, it is not mentioning the Mass. pic.twitter.com/OEq2YBw34o

— ☧✝️Sacerdotus™⚛✡🇻🇦☧ (@Sacerdotus) May 25, 2025

@pluant

’s Claims and Context

In a series of X posts,

@pluant

has engaged with

@Sacerdotus

, asserting that the term “Novus Ordo” is an appropriate designation for the post-Vatican II Mass and implying its use by Paul VI. For example:

• On May 24, 2025,

  @pluant

  tweeted, “The Novus Ordo is already hyper clericalist. It is overloaded with options, all at the cleric’s discretion. The genius of the Old Rite is that everyone is equally a servant of the rite” (

  @pluant

  , May 24, 2025). This post uses “Novus Ordo” to contrast the Ordinary Form with the “Old Rite,” suggesting a fundamental difference in nature.
• On May 26, 2025,

  @pluant

  stated, “It’s always really been about eliminating anything vaguely traditional from the Novus Ordo” (

  @pluant

  , May 26, 2025), reinforcing the notion that the “Novus Ordo” is a deliberate departure from tradition.
• In response to

  @Sacerdotus

  ’s challenge on May 31, 2025, that “Novus Ordo Missae” does not mean “Novus Ordo Mass” and is absent from the 1970 Roman Missal,

  @pluant

  persisted in defending the term’s usage, citing Paul VI’s alleged endorsement (

  @pluant

  , May 31, 2025).

These claims align with a traditionalist narrative that the post-Vatican II Mass, often called “Novus Ordo,” is a modernist innovation, distinct from the traditional Mass.

@pluant

’s posts reflect a misunderstanding of liturgical terminology and Church teaching, as well as a rejection of the unity of the Roman Rite, which comprises two expressions: the Ordinary Form and the Extraordinary Form.

Refutation: The Term “Novus Ordo” in Official Usage

Contrary to

@pluant

’s assertions, the term “Novus Ordo” is not an official title used by the Church or Pope Paul VI to designate the revised Roman Missal of 1969. The following points clarify this:

1. Official Documents and Paul VI’s Terminology:
   • The apostolic constitution Missale Romanum (April 3, 1969), promulgated by Paul VI, does not use “Novus Ordo” or “Novus Ordo Missae” to describe the revised Mass. Instead, it refers to the “Roman Missal, renewed by decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council” (Missale Romanum ex decreto Sacrosancti Oecumenici Concilii Vaticani II instauratum) (Paul VI, 1969). This emphasizes continuity with the Roman Rite, not a new or separate liturgy.
   • In his November 26, 1969, general audience address, Paul VI described the revised Mass as a “new rite of the Mass” but clarified, “It is not a new Mass, but a new form of celebration” (Paul VI, 1969). This statement, cited by

     @Sanothomas

     , underscores that Paul VI viewed the reform as a development within the existing Roman Rite, not a novel creation. The phrase “novus Ordo Missae” appears in a 1976 address, but only descriptively, as “the new Order has been promulgated” (novus Ordo promulgatus est), not as an official title (Paul VI, 1976).
   • The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and other liturgical documents, such as the 1970, 1975, and 2002 editions of the Missal, consistently use “Roman Missal” or “Order of Mass” (Ordo Missae), without adopting “Novus Ordo” as a formal term (GIRM, 2002).
2. Origin of “Novus Ordo”:
   • The term “Novus Ordo Missae” emerged in the context of the 1969 Ordo Missae (Order of Mass), a liturgical book outlining the revised rite. However, it was not an official title but a shorthand used by some liturgists and critics, notably in the “Ottaviani Intervention” (1969), where Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani and Antonio Bacci critiqued the “Novus Ordo Missae” as a departure from Trent’s theology (Ottaviani & Bacci, 1969). The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith responded on November 12, 1969, calling their critique “superficial, exaggerated, inexact, emotional, and false,” and Paul VI incorporated some of their feedback into the final Missal, indicating responsiveness rather than endorsement of the term (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1969).
   • Yves Chiron notes that the term gained traction among traditionalists as a pejorative label, not as an official designation, and was rarely used by Paul VI except in passing (Chiron, 2021). The Church’s preference, as clarified by Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum (2007), is to refer to the 1969 Missal as the Ordinary Form and the 1962 Missal as the Extraordinary Form, emphasizing their unity within the Roman Rite (Benedict XVI, 2007).
3. Church Teaching on the Unity of the Roman Rite:
   • The Church teaches that the Roman Rite has one Mass with two valid expressions, both traditional by nature. Benedict XVI stated, “The two Roman Missals, although four centuries have intervened, embrace one and the same tradition” (GIRM, 6). The Ordinary Form retains the essential structure of the Tridentine Mass, including the Penitential Rite, Gloria, Scripture readings, Roman Canon, and Communion Rite, with adaptations for accessibility and inculturation (Faggioli, 2012).
   • @pluant

     ’s claim that the “Novus Ordo” is “hyper clericalist” or a modernist deviation (

     @pluant

     , May 24, 2025) ignores the sacrificial nature of the Ordinary Form, explicitly affirmed in the GIRM (e.g., “my sacrifice and yours”) and the Catechism (1366-1367). The flexibility of the Ordinary Form, such as multiple Eucharistic Prayers, reflects Vatican II’s call for active participation and cultural adaptation, not a rejection of tradition (Sacrosanctum Concilium, 37-40).

Why

@pluant

’s Claims Are Incorrect

@pluant

’s assertions are flawed for several reasons:

• Misattribution of Terminology: By claiming Paul VI used “Novus Ordo” as an official title,

  @pluant

  misrepresents the historical record. Paul VI’s rare use of “novus Ordo Missae” was descriptive, not titular, and his primary focus was on the Mass’s continuity with tradition (Paul VI, 1969). The 1970 Roman Missal and subsequent documents avoid the term, favoring “Roman Missal” or “Order of Mass” (GIRM, 2002).
• False Dichotomy:

  @pluant

  ’s contrast between the “Novus Ordo” and the “Old Rite” (

  @pluant

  , May 24, 2025) perpetuates a false dichotomy, ignoring the Church’s teaching that both forms are expressions of the same Roman Rite. This view aligns with traditionalist narratives that reject Vatican II’s legitimacy, resembling the Pharisaical legalism critiqued in Matthew 23:23 for prioritizing ritual over charity and obedience.
• Lack of Canonical Support: The insistence on “Novus Ordo” as a distinct, inferior rite lacks support in Church documents.

  @Sacerdotus

  correctly notes, “The correct term for the Mass of Paul VI is the ORDINARY FORM” (

  @Sacerdotus

  , May 31, 2025), aligning with Summorum Pontificum and the GIRM.

  @pluant

  ’s rejection of this terminology reflects a broader disobedience to Church authority, a trait noted in traditionalist circles (Ripperger, 2019).

Psychological and Ideological Context

@pluant

’s persistence in using “Novus Ordo” pejoratively may reflect psychological tendencies observed in some traditionalists, such as neurotic fixation on liturgical purity or narcissistic grandiosity in claiming superior understanding of Catholic tradition (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). These traits can foster a siege mentality, where traditionalists view themselves as defenders against a “modernist” Church, as described by Naumescu (2002). This mindset may drive

@pluant

’s dismissal of the Ordinary Form as “hyper clericalist” or a tool to “eliminate” tradition (

@pluant

, May 24-26, 2025), despite the Church’s affirmation of its validity and traditional roots.

Conclusion

The claims by

@pluant

that Pope Paul VI used “Novus Ordo” to designate the post-Vatican II Mass as a distinct rite are incorrect. Official documents, including Missale Romanum (1969) and Summorum Pontificum (2007), confirm that the term is informal, not titular, and that Paul VI emphasized the Mass’s continuity with tradition. The Roman Rite comprises one Mass with two expressions—Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms—both traditional and valid.

@pluant

’s rhetoric, as seen in their X posts to

@Sacerdotus

, perpetuates a divisive narrative that contradicts Church teaching and may reflect underlying ideological or psychological rigidity. Catholics are called to unity and obedience, recognizing the Mass’s sacrificial essence across both forms, as affirmed by the Magisterium.

References

• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Arlington, VA: APA.
• Benedict XVI. (2007). Summorum Pontificum. Vatican City.
• Catechism of the Catholic Church. (1994). Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
• Chiron, Y. (2021). How the Novus Ordo Mass Was Made. Church Life Journal.
• Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. (1969). Response to the Short Critical Study. Vatican City.
• Faggioli, M. (2012). Vatican II: The Battle for Meaning. Paulist Press.
• General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). (2002). United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
• Ottaviani, A., & Bacci, A. (1969). Short Critical Study of the New Order of Mass. Rome.
• Paul VI. (1969). Missale Romanum. Vatican City.
• Paul VI. (1969). General Audience Address, November 26. Vatican City.
• Paul VI. (1976). Address at Consistory, May 24. Vatican City.
• Ripperger, C. (2019). 10 Problems in the Traditional Catholic Movement. Tumblar House.
• Sacrosanctum Concilium. (1963). Vatican City: Second Vatican Council.
• Wikipedia. (2002). Traditionalist Catholicism.
• X Posts:

  @pluant

  , May 24-31, 2025;

  @Sacerdotus

  , May 31, 2025;

  @Sanothomas

  , May 30, 2025.