Rupnik rumors – and what might come next (The Pillar): “What happens when the disgraced priest’s trial comes to an end?”
Charlotte diocese releases letter addressing SSPX Catholics after excommunication (Charlotte Observer): “Martin urged Catholics attending SSPX chapels to pray and examine their relationship with the church, and said the Diocese of Charlotte is prepared to help those who wish to “regularize” their status and return to full communion.”
Candace Owens, Queen Bee (The Underneath – Substack): “Honest speech is straight forward, where the speaker is saying the truth (as they see it). Lying presupposes some grasp of the truth, but deliberately misleads other through speech.”
The Verdict Is In On The ‘Little House On The Prairie’ Reboot (The Daily Wire): “Netflix’s wholesome “Little House on the Prairie” celebrates life, family, and dignity.”
The Napa Way: Before We Debate, Let’s Have Dinner Together (National Catholic Register): “As Catholics, we must look beyond our disagreements to search for common ground.”
Was the American War of Independence a Just War? (Providence): “to probe this near 2000-year-long conversation in the Western cultural heritage on justifying war invariably demands that one indeed become a student of history, with its important lessons.”
The Magicians of the Modern Age (The Imaginative Conservative): “The search for truth must begin before the quest for common ground.”
The Monastic Reconfiguration: Sacred Space, Sacred Vocation, and the Redemption of Reality (What We Need Now – Substack): “We live in the aftermath of a great political, theological, and philosophical experiment and the verdict is in: We have destroyed our capacity for and recognition of beauty, transcendence, the sacred, the wholesome, and the meaningful.”
(*The posting of any particular news item or essay is not an endorsement of the content and perspective of said news item or essay.)
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
@ Was the American War of Independence a Just War?
The American founders were committed to maintaining a moral-legal tradition, common law, and natural rights based on natural-law (Charles).
As such author Charles is correct. It was not a revolution. Since most of what the founders were committed to, with limited variation, was drawn from their British heritage.
Legal opinions are split with the edge given to those who consider the War unjust. Taxation without representation is the centerpiece for remaining arguments. Charles finally accedes to the opinion of Queen Elizabeth II that America had just cause due to England’s poor statesmanship.
From my perspective both arguments for and against have value. Although British poor statesmanship, particularly the Mass deployment [30,000] of Hessian troops provided just incentive for a people to fight for their now threatened natural human rights endowed by God.
The question may be asked, Would Leo XIV agree with a revolutionary war? Or would he have preferred we remain Colonials? It seems God’s providence may at times conflict with what we consider just or unjust.
Father, true the question MAYbe asked , but SHOULD it be asked? Why hypothesize about what the Pope may have thought about a historical event if he had been there at the time? It seems our job is to love, support and follow him rather than question his every move and motive. If God has given him to us as our leader. It is our job to listen and follow. Agreement is not as necessary as obedience. If every soldier were to question every move of his superior officer, no war would be won. In an army only gross moral violations constitute a just reason for disobedience. The same could be said about our allegiance to the Pope and the Church hierarchy. We are volunteers not conscripts and as such we are willing followers. As volunteers we have the right and option to leave at any time if our conscience so directs ; but it is not our prerogative to be in charge . We must remember that the Church is neither democratic institution governed by popular vote nor a republic governed by a representative vote ;and it is neither our job to lobby nor try to gain leverage by forming partisan leverage groups or associations.
It is not a pope’s prerogative to be “in charge” either. That is not his role. Only Jesus Christ is in charge.
I think there were actually more French military fighting on our side than Hessians fighting for the Crown. The French troops included other nationalities, too. And maybe 500 Haitians.
There were American Loyalists, including slaves fighting for freedom, on the British side also.
It was complicated.
@ Was the War for Independence a Just War
Writer I. Daryl Charles concludes “yes”, and then caps his demonstration with this quote from Queen Elizabeth II:
“We lost the American colonies because we lacked the statesmanship to know the time and the manner of yielding what it is impossible to keep…But the lesson was learned . . . to respect the right of others to govern themselves in their own way. This was the outcome of the experience learned the hard way in 1776. Without that great act in the cause of liberty performed in Independence Hall two hundred years ago, we could never have transformed our Empire into a Commonwealth.”
But history is also a conundrum. If Benjamin Franklin’s earlier and proposed Albany Plan of Union in 1754 had secured support from the disparate colonies (!) as well as the Crown, the model for Britain’s Commonwealth of Nations (1926/1931) would have been seeded almost two centuries earlier–and the costly and tragic War for Independence as a “just war” likely would have been averted altogether.
About the Charlotte Diocese letter re SSPX : A huge oversight on the part of the Bishop of Charlotte is the omission about the Diocesan chapel set up last year to offer the Traditional Latin Mass (1962 missal, same as SSPX) in a location north of Charlotte, not very far from the current SSPX chapel. This Chapel of the Little Flower was opened with 2 Sunday masses and one on Holy Days of Obligation to “replace” the 4 diocesan parish TLM masses that the Bishop ended in October 2025, in his interpretation of Traditiones Custodes. The chapel was acknowledged as not being large enough to accommodate all the 4 masses now unavailable (due to closure). However it is reportedly less crowded than the current SSPX chapel. Bishop could have at least mentioned this as a solution for those current SSPX attendees who want to go to a TLM with full approval of the local diocese as well as Rome.
The oversight most obvious to the Faithful is that while the SSPX which affirms Sacred Tradition is being subject to an excommunication, those Baptized Catholics who do not desire to fulfill their Baptismal Promises because they desire to change Christ’s Teaching regarding The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life from the moment of conception to natural death and The Sanctity and Dignity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony which affirms God’s Divine Will and God’s Divine Law that we respect the inherent Sanctity and Dignity of all Human Life from the moment of conception, have not been excommunicated, illuminating the fact that the Church administrators who have excommunicated The SSPX for affirming Sacred Tradition, while retaining those Baptized who deny Sacred Tradition and thus deny The Deposit of Faith, cannot possibly have any authority in Christ’s Church, as they are responsible for creating a counterfeit magisterium for the purpose of excommunicating those who affirm Sacred Tradition, which is necessary if your desire was to replace God’s Divine Will and God’s Divine Law, and thus God’s Revelation, with man’s will and man made law, which denies Christ’s teaching on sexual morality, grounded in respect for the Sanctity and Dignity of all our beloved sons and daughters, from the moment of conception, striking the Office of The Papacy, with the intent of scattering the sheep, by claiming sexual sin done in private is not sin, just don’t call it marriage, while claiming, God’s Universal Call to Holiness is not a Call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds, and thus be Temples of The Holy Ghost in all our relationships and experiences.
“If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, ( no Holy Ghost, so no need to be a Temple for The Holy Ghost) nor is society affected ( no CCC 1849 “Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity.”) – Jorge Bergoglio denying Sacred Tradition and thus The Deposit of Faith, ipso facto defecting from The Catholic Church as an unfaithful cardinal, by his denial of the necessity of The Unity Of The Holy Ghost , The Spirit of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ, Who Proceeds From Both The Father And The Son, In The One Body Of Christ, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church.
Pope Benedict tried to warn us about this counterfeit magisterium attempting to subsist within The One Body of Christ while rejecting God’sUniversal Call to Holiness:
“When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker Himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.” – Pope Benedict’s Christmas Address 2012
Christmas greetings to the members of the Roman Curia (21 December 2012) | BENEDICT XVI
“Only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. (Mystici Coporis 22)”
RE: Was our war of independence a just war?
A couple of items: The author uses the terms just war theory and just war tradition. Most people use the term just war theory, as do I at least some of the time. The Catechism uses the term just war doctrine (2309) which is stronger.
One of the criteria the author does not mention is proportionality of ends. Does the end result we go to war for justify the cost? In this case was the treatment of the colonies so terrible that war was justified?
The question is sometimes put as to whether this war is worth dying for? But war involves killing as well as dying. So the question also has to be does this war justify killing? Fifty thousand men were killed in the war, roughly 25,000 each side. At the end of the war there were thousands of parents without a son, thousands of wives without a husband, and thousands of children without a father.
I am a just war advocate, but this is a key just war question that must be asked and answered when going to war.
A good perspective and very ably explained…
On the general proposition that “just war theory/doctrine” is either “obsolete” or more likely needs to be “updated,” yours truly offers three amateur propositions, from the back bleachers:
FIRST, St. Augustine’s original principles remain intact, but the context and the metrics (e.g., 50,000 killed in the War for Independence) need updating.
SECOND, the context is a high-cost/hair-trigger world which may call for a distinction between a legitimate “preemptive strike” (e.g., against global nuclear blackmail) versus an illegitimate “first strike.”
THIRD, the metric of proportionality calls for, both, attention to the downside of the no-action or muddling alternative, and a more analogical (rather than arithmetic) measure of what is proportional and what is not.
Now three citations partly supporting these propositions:
ONE, regarding the principle of “proportionality”, Pope John Paul II offers a sobering and inspiring insight on patriotism and national identity. At the front end of the Second World War an isolated Poland (Sept. 1, 1939) accepted the solitary burden of going to war against Hitler “despite the clear inferiority of her military and technological forces. At that moment the Polish authorities judged that this was the only way to defend the future of Europe and the European spirit” (John Paul II, “Memory and Identity,” Rizzoli, 2005). The metric of success was nil, but the good to be defended was absolute.
TWO, in terms of “context,” Civil…ization requires a translation between the arithmetic/calculus of likely outcomes, when bridging some possible conflicts between the West and the alternative jihadist sects within Islam for whom jihad against infidels is the very definition (!) of a just war.
“By means of your democracy (!) we will invade you, by means of our religion (!) we shall dominate you” (His Eminence monsignor Guiseppe Bernardini, archbishop of the Turkish Diocese of Smyrna, cited in Oriana Fallaci, “The Rage and the Pride,” Rizzoli, 2001, p. 98).
THREE, apart from religion (assuming the Western premise that such a distinction is possible), then there’s the disconnect between philosophy and Islamic rationalization attached to alleged divine interventions as these are read into historical events:
“[….] Al-Ghazali (1058-1111), the greatest theologian of Islam, wrote against any such opening toward natural philosophy in a work entitled the “Destruction of Philosophy.” And then in the back-and-forth sequence came the “Destruction of the Destruction” by Ibn Rushd (also known as Averroes), who was a direct influence on the Christian thought of the thirteenth century St. Thomas Aquinas at the University of Paris. Ibn Rushd’s work was followed by the “Destruction of the Destruction of the Destruction” by Hodia Zada (d. 1487), who at the command of Mohammed II again wrote against philosophical inquiry, following the successful siege of Constantinople in 1453 (W.H. McNeill, the “Rise of the West,” 1963).
“With this historic victory over Christianity in 1453, Islam had no need for philosophy [!]. Muslim ideology was fully vindicated by the direct action of Allah in history, as it had been centuries earlier in the sweeping military successes of the seventh and eighth centuries” (Beaulieu, “Beyond Secularism and Jihad: A Triangular Inquiry into the Mosque, the Manger & Jihad,” University Press of America, 2012).
“Was the American War of Independence a Just War?”
***
My thoughts are more was it necessary or wise war? I personally don’t think so. I don’t believe our 2nd war of secession was a good idea either. Civil wars can be the most destructive kind.
One of the effects of that war was loss of subjects by the crown. You can’t undo the war, but you are free to return the property in your control that remains alienated from Charles. You will of course, be significantly less free in expressing yourself online. But it’s your idea, now walk the walk or end the walk.
I had a number of ancestors waiting in vain for property to be returned by the rebels.
🙂
Read the entirety of the Declaration of Independence. It makes a good case for independence, arguments to which the Crown’s refusal to respond was as stubborn as Francis towards the Dubia. The author of the article was mostly fair-minded but understated the real grievances expressed in the DOI.
Thank you so much. I’ve read the Declaration and while I think the beginning is brilliant most of what follows I don’t agree with.
I’m conservative and traditionally minded and not a fan of revolutions or civil wars.
mrscracker: The Founders were enemies of Revolution as well, which is why they never fought a revolutionary war. Instead they defended their independence from a tyranny making war against them.
@ The Magicians of the Modern Age
Those individuals and institutions that possess the knowledge, tools, credentials, and influence to shape what millions of people believe about politics, economics, finance, technology, health, education, foreign affairs, and culture. Are we willing dupes? Complexity alone produces distance (Gleaves Whitney).
Whitney deftly demonstrates the power of persuasion in rhetorical argumentation misleading others to believe Algorythmes. During the Vietnam War McNamara turned to a body count strategy seeking to prove we were winning the War, whereas body counts didn’t reveal the overwhelming ground control of the Viet Cong and N Vietnamese regulars. It became the classic winning the battles but nevertheless losing the War.
Whitney labels deceptive ‘magical’ efforts immortal, and rightly so. It’s the mentality of the elite intellectual class of rhetorically controlling the masses of a nation.
Regarding these lines:
“After World War II in the U.S., the tobacco industry’s campaign to cast doubt on mounting evidence linking smoking to disease remains one of the most abhorrent examples. Rather than directly disprove the scientific consensus, “experts” were bought off. They prostituted themselves and produced “scientific studies” that successfully manufactured uncertainty long enough to delay public action.”
Inside YouTube itself, search for:
TV commercial showing doctors endorsing cigarettes
The one minute video titled “More Doctors Smoke Camels Than Any Other Cigarette” is unforgettable.
re Monastic Reconfiguration by Gavin Ashenden, and re Sebastian Morello’s Mysticism, MAGIC, etc., see https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/occult-subversion-traditional-catholicism/, and see Minerd, Mirus and another re a turn of the faith to MAGIC. Qoheleth again. There is nothing new under the sun. The same tricks, the same faith of ancient, medieval, and modern day. The same false prophets with their wares/allures of illusion.