One can hardly expect anything good from the upcoming new Vatican document. I suggest that they immediately insert into this document a paragraph about the criteria for recognition: “if private revelation contradicts the new inductive theology, or encroaches on the infinite dignity of man, or speaks of the apostates and heretics who have filled the Vatican, or calls for repentance of sins, or denounces sodomites, or talks much about anything other than mercy, then this revelation is false."

Pope Paul III does not “reverse Pope Nicolas’ papal bull”.

And all of Tucho’s references to the need for submission are not valid, because no one is obliged to submit to evil and error.

"Ultramontanism is the false belief that everything a pope says is without error. Everything a pope decides must be right. Everything a pope speaks or does is paramount and cannot be questioned".

Who came up with this definition?

I stopped reading this article as soon as the author started referring to documents V2.

The Catholic Church does not celebrate the 75th anniversary of the UN declaration, just as it did not celebrate the 500th anniversary of the “Reformation”, when the Vatican erected a statue of Luther and issued postage stamps with his portrait. The celebration of these anniversaries is carried out by a completely different, conciliar-synodal organization, which is trying to present it as if the Catholic Church is doing it.

I agree with you that harsh language is not always helpful or appropriate. No one is suggesting converting people this way, or spitting on the modernists we meet. The choice of a specific style and language depends on many factors. Here we touched upon the issue of specific things - Communio and Consilium. And regarding these things, I simply expressed my personal opinion, whether anyone likes it or not. If I were to say, “these publications are not adequate to Catholic truth,” that would not be an accurate description of my attitude towards them. If I consider them disgusting garbage, dangerous to people and not worthy of being touched, then I say so. I do not think that this assessment of mine, if read by any wavering mind, will turn him away from the Catholic Tradition. And if we are talking about neophytes in the tradition, then it is better for them to initially know that heretics are heretics, and sodomites are sodomites, and garbage is garbage, than to first read muddy and soft texts and then find out the hard truth.

Thank you for your comment! First of all, I want to thank you for the compliment when you called me an example of the “Trad” that Father Nix talks about.

At the same time, it doesn't seem right to attribute to me the comparison of Catholics to toilet paper. This was not in my post and I would never compare Catholics to anything unworthy. Moreover, I did not compare with toilet paper even the modernists and liberals who wrote in the two editions under discussion (Communio and Consilium), who can hardly be classified as Catholics, and who, due to their hostility to the Catholic Faith and the Church, deserve even much harsher epithets (which I did not use in this post).

Further, the message of your comment is essentially that “we need to watch what we say.” Well, let me disagree with you. You propose not to give the enemies of the Faith and the Church the opportunity to label us (extremists, radicals, etc.), so that they cannot form a public opinion negative towards us. However, being nice, using politically correct language, and showing tolerance towards the enemies of the Faith and the Church will not lead to victory. They will form public opinion against us in any case, even if we speak to them in the sweetest language. I do not consider radicalism a matter of temperament, but I do consider it a matter of Faith. As Josemaría Escrivá said, holy intransigence is not bigotry. We see what happened when John XXIII declared that the “medicine of mercy” must now be used. This has led to exactly where we are now.

As Father Félix Sardá y Salvany rightly said in his book (and this book was approved by the Congregation of the Index itself): “If the propagation of good and the necessity of combating evil require the employment of terms somewhat harsh against error and its supporters, this usage is certainly not against charity… We must render evil odious and detestable. We cannot attain this result without pointing out the dangers of evil, without showing how and why it is odious, detestable and contemptible. Christian oratory of all ages has ever employed against impiety the most vigorous and emphatic rhetoric in the arsenal of human speech. In the writings of the great athletes of Christianity, the usage of irony, imprecation, execration and of the most crushing epithets is continual”.

And Saint Thomas Aquinas says: “when certain ones, by their perverseness, hinder the salvation of the multitude, the preacher and the teacher should not fear to offend those men, in order that he may insure the salvation of the multitude” (Summa Theologiae, 3, 42, 2).

I don't think you are right in your concerns about our enemies' desire to destroy the Latin Church and the TLM. Of course, they won’t be able to do any of this, although they will be able to marginalize us or even drive us underground. It seems obvious that we need to resist this conciliar sect with all our might and respond to each of their nasty articles in various apostate magazines with ten articles. There is no room for pleasantries, compromises, or even negotiations. Only a total and most severe confrontation with this sect can bring results. However, now, unfortunately, the reality is that, as the Virgin Mary warned in Akita, the Church is full of those who make compromises.

Well, of course, you are right when you talk about the need for prayer. We must pray for the conversion of heretics and schismatics, as well as for the liberation of the Church from the enemies entrenched in its bosom (not excluding Francis, of course).

You can look at this from a different angle. Francis included the title of “Patriarch of the West” not in his “business card”, but in the section of “historical titles” (titolo storici), and in the photo this can be seen by the end of the word “storici” in the upper left part. Thus, Francis restored historical justice, since it would be foolish to deny that the title "Patriarch of the West" has been used throughout history as a title of Popes. In 2020, Francis renounced all of these titles, relegating them to the historical category. Cardinal Cantalamessa on 03/31/2023 praised this decision of Francis, especially regarding the title "Vicar of Christ", saying that this decision is correct, for Christ does not need a Vicar. Now Francis has simply added another historical title to the list of “historical titles”.

If man is by nature inferior to the angels in dignity, and, despite his fall, retains ontological dignity, which, as Tucho says, is infinite, then all the more demons must also have infinite ontological dignity, despite their fall. Moreover, absolutely speaking, the angels are more to the image of God than man. It is clear that man, unlike demons, can be reborn through Holy Baptism, which elevates us, as Pope Pius XII teaches, to a very “high dignity” (see “Mediator Dei”), although not “infinite.” But this fact does not help, because Tucho is not talking about moral or spiritual dignity, but about ontological dignity, even among the fallen. In this case, all the conclusions and practical recommendations that Tucho draws from the presence of infinite ontological dignity in every fallen person can be applied to the devil and demons, and, by the way, also to souls in hell, such as Judas, Luther, Cain. What is Tucho leading us to? So that we also honor demons and souls in hell? If Tucho understands by ontological “dignity” only the special status of human nature, then why do we need the term “dignity” here? Fallen angels also retained their angelic nature. Let's praise the ontological dignity of demons? How would this be different from demon worship in practical terms? Of course, we can love in fallen people and demons what is of God in them (i.e., their nature and/or the graces of God). But this is not what Tucho is talking about in his document, and his goals are different.