Be silent no more! Cry out with one hundred thousand tongues. I see that, because of this silence, the world is in ruins, the Spouse of Christ has grown pale; the color is taken from her face because her blood has been sucked out, that is the blood of Christ, which is given as a free gift and not by right – St. Catherine of Siena
In the 3rd century BC, King Pyrrhus of Greece went to war against the Romans. Initially, his forces were victorious, but the casualties they sustained were so high that Pyrrhus was unable to win a more decisive later battle. From this historical failure is derived the term, Pyrrhic victory, which has come to mean a victory which is hollow: one which loses more than it gains.
Two thousand years later, Italy is again the scene of a Pyrrhic victory; mainstream traditionalist media is claiming a triumph while also sustaining great losses, both of credibility and of personal integrity.
A deal with the devil
The Tridentine Mass of the Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage held in St. Peter’s Basilica was hailed by some as the sign that Pope Leo is welcoming tradition into the Vatican. It was a product of the “Zip It” policy which promised to “see no evil” in return for access (for some) to the Latin Mass.
With a huge crowd of faithful Catholics and a number of high-ranking prelates in attendance, the liturgy was accompanied by an exorcism prayer offered by Cardinal Ernest Simoni. Cardinal Simoni, aged 97, had been tortured and imprisoned for 28 years in Albania for refusing to renounce his faith.
Without casting shade on the piety of the Cardinal, it must be asked whether a single exorcism prayer could be sufficient to cleanse St. Peter’s from the multitude of abuses she has endured over the past decade. Surely a solemn reconsecration would be necessary before traditionalists could dare to offer Mass inside St. Peter’s walls?
The Vatican’s liaison was Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, who was also in attendance on the day. Zuppi has been assisting at traditional liturgies around Rome for a number of years, one example being the Pontifical Mass he offered for Laetare Sunday with the FSSP in 2014.
Yet, Zuppi is so closely aligned with the promotion of sodomy that his presence at these Masses should be a source of scandal to traditional Catholics.
The pilgrimage of sodomites which entered the Basilica last month, organised with the explicit support of Cardinal Zuppi, was only the latest in a series of his sodomy-related scandals.
It seems ironic that the same voices that condemn collegiality among the bishops are insisting traditionalist Catholics unite under a milquetoast banner of love, in an effort to secure their Latin Masses. This tactic is flawed and will lead, in some cases, to the most tragic of consequences that can befall a Christian: the loss of his eternal soul.
Much of the current appeal to unity is based in emotion and not reason; there is little substance in the arguments which are often ad hominem (“You’re all sedes!” or “You hide behind your avatars!”) or straw men (“You say the Mass doesn’t matter!”)
Yet the most obvious weakness is the appeal to an obsolete tactic: that of tolerance in the face of an extremely devious enemy. While it may be argued that it was this approach which led to the widespread availability of the traditional Latin Mass under Pope Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum (I would posit that it did not), relying on previously-used tactics for their own sake is a great weakness for anyone engaged in a war.
The ancient military strategist, Sun Tzu, set out his approach to defeating an enemy in his treatise, The Art of War and warned against re-using a previous tactic because it worked in the past.
His advice to military commenders has been relied upon for centuries. He wrote:
Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances.
Military tactics are like unto water; for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards. So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.
He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain.
Sun Tzu – On the Art of War, #28-31
Reassess Tactics
Sun Tzu wrote these words more than 2500 years ago and they still ring true. “Let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances.” Applying this to the current crisis in the Church, we could say that during the pontificate of Pope Francis, many conservative, but Modernist prelates began to wake up to the fact that there was, in fact, a crisis and that Bergoglio was not its cause, but merely its symptom. That process, sometimes slow but at other times more rapid, of realising that something devastating happened at the Second Vatican Council was evident, as these good men began to piece together the pattern of revolutionary infiltration and indoctrination which led the Church to the sad state in which She finds Herself today.
Sun Tzu
Now that we have another Pope spouting the same heresies and errors, albeit in a more smooth and sophisticated manner, it is simply not reasonable to give the conservative Novus Ordo prelates ane more time, allowing them to gradually come to the conclusion that is evident to those with eyes to see: this is the time to declare strongly, clearly and without equivocation, the fundamental teachings of the Catholic Church.
This is the time to boldly draw attention to the errors being taught by Pope Prevost and his Synodal mouthpieces with calm and simplicity.
Avoid the strong
Sun Tzu recommended that strategists “avoid what is strong and strike at what is weak.” In the case at hand, what is “strong” is the Pope’s popularity, a perceived belief that the Church is back on track and, it must be said, the universal relief that Pope Francis is dead. Thus in order to avoid “what is strong”, conservative prelates should be maintaining the state of high alert which existed under Bergoglio, exposing the reality that the Church is still in grave danger, that souls are threatened and that aesthetics do not compensate for heterdox teaching.
This obligation extends to those traditionalist commentators who, having accepted the strategy of appeasement as laid out by Cardinal Burke, are now refusing to call out Pope Leo for his errors and have taken to chastising those who do have the fortitude to expose him.
When we add our approval of the new Pope’s actions and words to that already given by the mainstream Church and the world at large, we only magnify the errors and soothe guilty consciences, putting souls at risk of eternal damnation.
Attack the weakness
The tactic of attacking an opponent’s weakness is so obvious that it should require no explanation, yet this is precisely what the group we have come to know as “Trad. Inc.” has decided to avoid doing.
The great weakness of Pope Prevost is that he is literally speaking heresy. When he says that “we have to change attitudes before we even think about changing what the Church says about any given question”, this needs to be called out as heresy.
When he says that it is “highly unlikely” rather than impossible, that doctrine on sexuality will change, this needs to be called out as heresy.
No amount of incense, lace or Latin can make up for errors like these. (For an excellent appraisal of the Pope’s disastrous Crux interview, see this video by The Catholic Esquire.)
Swallowing the Bait
Many are overjoyed that Cardinal Burke is to offer a Latin Mass in St. Peter’s during the upcoming Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage. We are told that this is a sign that God has not abandoned His Church (But who says that He has? The neo-counter-revolutionaries certainly do not.) This permission is somehow seen as a gift, an olive branch being held out to traditionalists by the new Pope, as a sign of his good will.
But what has Sun Tzu to say about such a thing? He suggests caution unless the intentions of the enemy are known.
We cannot enter into alliances until we are acquainted with the designs of our neighbours. Do not swallow bait offered by the enemy.
Sun Tzu – On the Art of War, #32-33
The permission given for the Latin Mass does indeed have the appearance of bait intended to harm the traditionalist movement and it is not only “anonymous podcasters” suggesting there is a problem. Respected priests like Fr. Isaac Mary Relyea and Fr. Murr have also expressed their disappointment and fears about the Mass. Fr. Murr even said that St. Peter’s needs to be re-consecrated due to the Pachamama incident, this need being compounded by the more recent appearance of a sodomite pilgrimage group within its walls. (Alas, I have lost the reference video for this comment by Fr. Murr. The link will be added when I track it down.)
Pope Francis with the Pachamama idol in St. Peter’s Basilica
The ancient Roman poet, Virgil, had his own warning for cases like this one: “Beware of Greeks bearing gifts”. This was a reference to the Trojan Horse, a Grecian gift to the ancient city of Troy, which was filled with soldiers who then infiltrated and utterly destroyed the city and its inhabitants.
It’s worth pointing out that the term, “Greek love”, was used as a euphemism for sodomy by Classical scholars, which brings us back to one of the major themes of this pontificate and a red flag for anyone wishing to make peace with it: homosexuality. Pope Leo’s appointments and those of Pope Francis which Prevost has left in place are an ongoing source of scandal to the faithful.
St. Paul points out exactly what should be our attitude to sodomites and those who tolerate them or condone their sin:
“For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? (2 Cor 6: 14-16)
Scripture would seem to preclude offering Mass in a Church which has been defiled by pagan worship and a depraved, sacrilegious pilgrimage. It only adds to the scandal for Cardinal Burke and the Summorum Pontificum organisers to offer a TLM under such circumstances, yet we are told this is a sign that we are “winning”.
Ignorance of the enemy leads to a defeat
Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Sun Tzu – On the Art of War, #34
There is no question that, at some point in the future, the Church will rise again and our enemies will be thwarted. It shows a lack of faith in Our Lady’s promise of Her Triumph to believe otherwise. Yet until that day comes, the Church Militant will continue to suffer and will, most probably, experience an escalation in suffering and persecution, which only by the grace of God, we will be able to endure. This could be thought of the way that Catholics “know themselves.”
To say that the rallying of Traditionalist troops around a well-meaning, but Modernist, prelate like Cardinal Burke is a sign of the coming Restoration is not only delusional, but it is dangerous. Failing to point out Leo’s errors endangers souls – perhaps not the souls of Traditionalists who are better catechised, but the souls of those countless Novus Ordo catholics – the “normies”, who trust in the pope and uncritically accept what he teaches.
Narcissistic revolutionaries thrive on the tolerance produced by misplaced charity. The silence of Trad. Inc. is a fruit of “knowing oneself but not knowing the enemy.” According to the philosophy of Sun Tzu, such a situation leads to a defeat for every victory.
It may well be that those aligned with Burke will see their Masses protected or restored, but the price of this “victory” could be enormous. Doubtful Catholics who once had the opportunity to be challenged by the Resistance movement, who were provoked to investigate Vatican II and its errors and to question mainstream Catholic narratives, are now being confirmed in their sin by the silence of Trad. Inc.
It is not only sodomites who are at risk of this: when we consider that most Catholics today live in habitual mortal sin via the use of contraception, failing to confess honestly, making sacrilegious Communions, denying dogma such as the Real Presence and extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it offends against charity to allow them to believe that doctrine can change.
Silence is tantamount to saying “to hell with the rest of the Catholic world as long as we have our Masses.” That is the defeat which will be the cost of any perceived victory: a rejection of supernatural charity which will lead to the widespread loss of souls.
It’s a little like the Golden Rule (Those who have the Gold Make the Rules) except that in this case, those who think they are greater get to decide what is good.
For when traditional Catholic commentators were told to “zip it” rather than criticise the current papal aberrations, the “good ” involved was not the good of the Church nor was it the salvation of souls. Rather, the apparent “good”, decided by the “greater” ones, was their attempt to secure for themselves their Latin Masses. This, it seems, would be in return for a very small fee: keeping quiet about Leo and his papacy’s remarkable similarity to that of Bergoglio.
The Greater Good must be contrasted with the Common Good, which is actually the Catholic position.
Whereas the Common Good must take the needs of everyone into account, the Greater Good always involves the sacrifice of some for the sake of the whole. This principle is never more consequential than in the matter of salvation, where every individual’s soul needs to be considered.
For to remain silent when Pope Leo unashamedly continues the agenda of Bergoglio and his conciliar and post-conciliar predecessors does put souls at risk – of despair, of error and of deception.
One is reminded of the words of Our Lady of Buen Suceso of the Purification at Quito, Ecuador, where she said several times that ” that one who should speak will fall silent”.
If “the one”, presumably the Pope, falls silent then it is not surprising that other Catholics who should speak out would also follow suit. That is, those traditional Catholic commentators who were so quick to point out Bergoglio’s errors and who did so much good in alerting the faithful during his reign, fell silent when it came to Prevost.
Thankfully, it does appear that the ‘zip it” crowd already have egg on their faces and that some, at least, have begun to rethink their ill-fated strategy.
One commentator, notorious for his self-promotion, has already backtracked somewhat. This is the same man who made a video prior to the conclave in which he said that the election of Prevost would be the worst possible scenario for the Church. After the conclave, he scrubbed that video and refused to call our Pope Leo’s errors. (Thanks to Novus Ordo Watch, the original video can be found here.)
It should be mentioned that this backtracking coincided with the release of his latest book which he unashamedly promoted during his first foray into criticism of the new Pope. Perhaps he realised that the book’s target audience included those Catholics who are feeling dazed and confused by the traditionalists’ Zip-It policy.
Another Zip-it proponent has also begun to loosen his lips to allow some initial criticism of the shameful desecration of St. Peter’s during the James Martin crowd’s pilgrimage. Yet another has put out a strident blogpost, explaining that this LGBT pilgrimage crossed his bright line, allowing criticism to spring forth from his keyboard. We are assured that his wait-and-see policy was born, ever so ‘umbly, out of charity alone.
Don’t forget, these are the men who until now, gave Leo a pass when the red flags first began flying. They remained quiet when footage emerged of a talk he gave, praising the evil Cardinal Bernadin. Likewise, when Leo de facto canonised Bergoglio, the most prominent traditionalist commentators had nothing to say. The pagan Mass for Creation? Silence. Scandalous appointments? Crickets.
If the Great Unzipping really has taken place, it will be interesting to see what the future holds for the likes of Chris Jackson, Steven Kokx and The Catholic Esquire. They have done the heavy lifting during this wait-and-see phase of the new papacy, unflinchingly calling it as they have seen it, rather than kowtowing to the compromise directive issued, as has become all too clear, from the doyen of Trad-dom, Cardinal Burke.
For it is difficult to draw any other conclusion than this: that Burke was the middle-man in a mutually beneficial transaction between wealthy traditionalists and Modernist Rome.
Consider: a group of rich, traditionalist Catholics pulled their purse-strings closed under Bergoglio, thereby making a significant impact on the Vatican’s bottom line. Remember, Rome is in a quite desperate financial situation these days.
Those same wealthy Catholics had been suffering under Bergoglio. His outrageous behaviour caused them a loss of prestige and influence as they were no longer ‘in’ with the papacy, in the same way they had been under John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
In order to restore their reputations as the Catholic elite, it would be necessary to find a new Pope who matched their sensibilities – of aesthetics, anyway. Doctrine doesn’t matter when one has a private chapel with any number of cancelled priests willing to provide bespoke Latin Masses.
And so a deal was struck: in return for the flow of money to Rome, the mild-mannered Prevost would have to be elected. He looked the part and fluently spoke the correct languages: English and Latin. It would fall to Cardinal Burke to do the lobbying prior to the conclave.
If all this seems a bit far-fetched, it should be remembered that Steve Bannon said from the beginning that the conclave was “rigged”.
Additionally, some months ago, Anthony Stine, on Return to Tradition, cited an article from a big legacy media outlet in the US, which revealed that a secret meeting took place in Rome prior to the conclave. It was apparently attended by wealthy Italian and American Catholics who promised to send money to the Vatican if an American was elected Pope.
Remember also that the Italian news outlet, Corriere della Sera, confidently reported that Prevost was seen entering Cardinal Burke’s apartment on April 30 for ‘a top-secret summit’, even though this was strenuously denied by reliable reporters like Diane Montagna and Ed Pentin.
From whom is it likely that Montagna and Pentin receive their Vatican-insider information? Could it be from Cardinal Burke himself? Is it possible that the journalists were set up – no doubt for the Greater Good?
From where did Montagna receive the results of the bishops survey that shows Bergoglio had lied about the Latin Mass being unpopular with the hierarchy? Could those documents not have been leaked by Cardinal Burke himself?
Why did they not come out during Bergoglio’s reign? It was certainly possible to have arranged it.
Was it because such a revelation would have only hardened Bergoglio’s heart against the traditional Mass? Leaked under Prevost, however, the latter would potentially have the opportunity to play the Good Guy and rescind Traditiones Custodes, or at least, not bother to see it enforced.
Where does the so-called Trad Inc. fit into the picture? Well, if they want their Masses secured, and hopefully Traditiones Custodes rescinded, they would have to toe the line. No more criticism of Rome, no more bad press for the Pope. The rest of Christendom would then have to take its chances with the mish-mash of heresy, sodo-liturgies and Modernism going on outside the small enclaves of tradition. This would appease the Catholic elite by making the papacy look reasonable once more and start the coffers flowing to Rome.
Rome would have its income restored; the wealthy Catholics would have their prestige restored; Trad Inc. would have its Masses restored. At least, that was the plan, with Cardinal Burke as the lynch-pin. He was to be truly cardinalis. (Latin for ‘pivotal’).
There were two sticking points in this plot – other than whatever small murmurings came from the consciences of those involved. One is the yearning for truth that exists in the soul of every person of good will; the other is the fact that silence in the face of outrage has a limit.
Many traditional Catholics knew that this silence was unnatural and so sought their news from the few honest reporters, like those mentioned above. And this website, although very small, should be included among those who has tried to expose Pope Leo’s agenda from Day 1. (eg here.)
Now that Trad Inc’s floodgates of histrionics appear ready to open, releasing a barrage of complaints against Pope Leo onto the faithful, we should all be cautious as we begin again to consume their commentary. For they abandoned faithful Catholics in a time of need, no less than the shepherds whom they like to so roundly denounce as having abandoned the faithful.
The public’s trust in Trad. Inc. has been severely eroded and without a clear apology, the damage may be irreparable.
Ecclesiastical Freemasonry 
