

To My Readers: This week, TradWarrior writes a most interesting piece I think you'll enjoy very much. It is the first time a post of this unique quality has been published. The images above show the Most Blessed Trinity and the "ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future" from the classic A Christmas Carol by Dickens. Please continue to pray for John Gregory and his family. Feel free to comment as usual. If you have a specific comment or question for me, I will respond as always, but it may take me a bit longer to do so this week.
God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo
The Ghosts of Christmas
By TradWarrior
Every December, the world waits in great anticipation
as Christmas approaches. The Season of Advent paves the way as the precursor to
what becomes the most joyful season of the year. We remember family members and
friends who have gone before us. Their memories are etched in our own memories
as we recall many joyful times that we celebrated in years past with them.
There
are many stories that capture the Christmas spirit quite well. One such story
that has always been a favorite of many is Charles Dickens “A Christmas Carol.”
Penned as a novella by Dickens in 1843, it has captured the thoughts and hearts
of countless people around the globe. There are an array of characters in it
that very much resemble all of us in our own individual lives. The Christmas Spirit
is woven throughout the story.
The
story begins with Ebenezer Scrooge, a cold-hearted miser, who despises all
things Christmas and everything that has to do with it. He only cares about
himself, his money, and greed. On Christmas Eve, he refuses a dinner invitation
from his nephew Fred. He turns away two men seeking a donation for food and
heating for the poor. He grudgingly gives Christmas off to his underpaid clerk
Bob Cratchit. He spends Christmas the way he always prefers to: Alone!
That night, he is alone in his home when he hears the sound of moans and groans and the sound of dragging chains. An apparition appears to him that frightens him very much. The ghostly apparition reveals himself to be Jacob Marley, his business partner who died 7 years earlier. Scrooge finds it hard to believe that he is actually seeing what he is seeing, much like Thomas doubted that it was the risen Jesus that appeared to him. Marley asks Scrooge, why does he doubt his senses, just as Christ told Thomas to doubt no longer, but rather believe. Scrooge inquires further why Marley is appearing to him and why he appears to be in horrible pain as he drags his chains. Marley responds that he drags the chains for all of the life choices that he made in life that were not good that he is now paying the price for. He is a soul in Purgatory. His apparition is very much like an apparition out of Fr. Schouppe’s books “Purgatory” and “Hell”. In his book, “Purgatory”, there are all kinds of stories of souls who appear to those on Earth who are suffering horrible torments in Purgatory. They ask for prayers and indulgences offered up so that the painful flames that they are suffering will cease and they will be taken to Heaven where they can live forever with God in glory. Some souls in Purgatory are there for a very brief time. They had very little expiation to make for their temporal punishment that remained on their souls at the time of their deaths.
Other souls were not so
fortunate. They are on the bottom level of Purgatory, right at the base of Hell.
Their torments are far more severe and they will not be released from Purgatory
for a very long time. To satisfy God’s divine justice, they suffer multiple
torments and their pain is exponentially worse. In Fr. Schouppe’s book “Hell”,
the stories are even more frightening and overwhelming. Many people who have
read his “Purgatory” book had to stop because it was too intense. His book on Hell
is even far scarier. In his book on Hell, Fr. Schouppe tells stories of souls
in Hell who are burning in pain forever. They will never be released, their
torments will never cease, and their pain will go on and on forever. There is
no help for them. The stories of apparitions of the damned in his book are
horrifying and take the torments mentioned in his Purgatory book to a whole
other level. As 2 Maccabees reminds us, it is a holy and wholesome thought to
pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from their sin. This applies to the
souls in Purgatory.
Marley
reveals to Scrooge that if Scrooge does not amend his sinful ways, he awaits a
fate far worse than his own. He tells Scrooge that on that very Christmas
night, he will be visited by three ghosts. Scrooge tells Marley that he would
rather not be visited by these ghosts. Marley tells him that he has no choice.
These ghosts will be sent to Scrooge as one last wake up call. Scrooge either
changes his life or he lives a life damned in Hell, far worse than what Marley
is experiencing in Purgatory.
Scrooge thinks that this was just a dream. He awakens to see a figure next to his bed. He sees a striking figure who appears young and yet old with wisdom all at the same time. The figure has bright flowing hair and is in a white robe with summer flowers and a silver sash. This is The Ghost of Christmas Past. The Spirit takes him back to when he was a boy. He sees his old school he attended when he was a child. He sees a solitary student by himself very lonely. He reveals to The Ghost of Christmas Past that he is saddened because his mother died while giving birth to his sister. Next, he is transported to another scene where he is now a youth. His sister Fan visits with him. Fan tells him that his father has arranged for Ebenezer to be an apprentice for Mr. Fezziwig, a jolly man. The Ghost of Christmas Past remarks to Ebenezer that his sister died a young woman but that she had a child. He tells her that is true, it is his nephew Fred. The Ghost transports him to see another scene from his past. He is at the Fezziwig Christmas Eve party.
There is dancing and music and everyone is happy. Ebenezer realizes that he was once happy in his youth. Time grows short as The Ghost informs him and he is transported to yet another scene from his past. He is with a beautiful young woman named Belle. She was hoping to marry Ebenezer. She knows that he has changed. She tells him that an idol has replaced her. It is Scrooge’s love of money. It is his sole passion, his only love now and Belle points this out very clearly to him as she confronts him. She asks Scrooge if he is willing to marry a poor dower-less girl. Ebenezer looks down and refuses to answer her. Belle sees right through him and no longer wants anything to do with him. She will not marry him. He chose money over her (you cannot serve two masters). She says to him that she releases him and, “May you be happy in the life you have chosen!” The Ghost shows Scrooge that Belle eventually was happily married to another man and had several children.
He saw what his life could have been with her, had he chosen her over
his love of money. Scrooge gets angry with The Spirit and demands that this ghost
stop showing him these images. The Ghost shows him one more image, that of
Jacob Marley dying as onlookers remark that Ebenezer is a miserable wretch. Scrooge
is angry at The Spirit and demands to be taken away from these images that he
does not want to see, just as the Pharisees could not bear to see that the long
awaited Christ made the blind see, the deaf hear, the mute speak, etc. Scrooge
tells The Ghost “Spirit! Remove me from this place!” The Ghost of Christmas
Past responds, “I told you, these are shadows of things that have been. That
they are what they are, do not blame me!” Scrooge begs The Spirit to be taken
back to his bedroom for he can take no more of this. Scrooge is taken back to
his bedroom.
Scrooge wakes up in his bedroom, relieved that this was all just a dream (or so he thinks). He then sees a huge figure, seated on a throne, dressed in a green robe and wearing a wreath of mistletoe. His beard, robe, and crown of mistletoe are reminiscent of Christ’s beard, His robe when the Romans mocked Him, and the crown of thorns on His head. Who is this startling figure? He is revealed as The Ghost of Christmas Present. Despite The Ghost of Christmas Past and everything this spirit showed to Ebenezer, he is not a changed man. He is still a miserable, greedy miser who cares only about himself. This Spirit tells him that there are those who walk this Earth who do deeds of passion, pride, ill will, hatred, envy, bigotry, and selfishness. How right he is.
The Earth is full of these sins and more. He transports Scrooge to the Cratchit house. Bob and his family are a poor family, who own very little, but they have love in their house. “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Bob and his wife love each other and their many children beautifully. Ebenezer sees the youngest Cratchit, Tiny Tim. He is a sickly boy, on a crutch. Mrs. Cratchit asks if Tiny Tim behaved himself in church. Bob said he did and that Tiny Tim doesn’t mind if people see him in public places as a crippled. Tiny Tim hopes that people see him crippled on Christmas Day because the little boy hopes that it will remind people of who was the one who made lame beggars walk and blind men see. The boy has a pure heart. Ebenezer remarks to The Ghost of Christmas Present that he had no idea that Bob had a crippled son. The Ghost remarks, “I wonder why.” Ebenezer was too wrapped up in his money and greed to have ever noticed before.
Scrooge asks The Spirit if the boy will live? The Sprit
replies, “If these shadows remain unaltered by the future, the boy will die.” Scrooge
is troubled by this but The Spirit replies that it is good for the lame and
poor and sickly to die to decrease the surplus population. These were Scrooge’s
very words earlier in the story and The Spirit is throwing them right back at
Ebenezer. The Cratchit family gives a toast to Mr. Scrooge, the founder of the
feast. Although he treats Bob poorly and pays him little, the family is very
thankful for everything that they are given in life. It is reminiscent of the
one leper who returned to give thanks to Jesus for curing him of his leprosy. The
Ghost of Christmas Present transports him to his nephew Fred’s house. Fred
wishes that his Uncle Scrooge would attend Christmas dinner with his family but
he never does. Fred has a lovely young wife Janet. Fred remarks how his uncle
only sees Christmas as a humbug. He talks about how his uncle has all of this
wealth but does nothing good with it. This is reminiscent of Christ talking
about what good is it if a man has all the wealth in the world, but still loses
his soul. In the end, he loses everything. Janet has no pity for Ebenezer. But
Fred does. He sees him as a poor soul and always hopes he one day changes his
ways. Ebenezer sees his sister’s face in his young nephew. He misses her
dearly.
The
Ghost of Christmas Present transports Ebenezer to the frigid outside weather.
There are beggars on the streets and Scrooge wants to be taken away. The Ghost
opens his robe where he shows him a little boy and a little girl who are
dressed in rags and are malnourished. Scrooge asks him who these children are.
The Ghost tells them that the boy is Ignorance and the girl is Want. These are
all the poor children of the world that roam the streets, neglected by many who
see them. This is reminiscent of Jesus saying, “Let the little children come to
me.” The Ghost says, “Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?” Again, he
uses Scrooge’s own words against him. Scrooge begs him to get him out of such a
wretched place. He can see no more of this! The Ghost of Christmas Present is
gone.
Scrooge
finds himself alone in the cold streets. It is windy and there is thunder in
the background. He sees a tall figure, completely cloaked and hooded in black.
This figure has skeletal hands with bony fingers and never talks. This is The
Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come (Future). Scrooge says to The Spirit, “I take it
that I am in the presence of The Spirit of Christmas Yet To Come?” The Ghost
nods. This Spirit never speaks. Scrooge continues, “You are about to show me
shadows of the things that have not happened, but will happen in the time
before us. Is that not so, Spirit?” The Spirit nods. Scrooge tells The Spirit
that he fears this Ghost more than any of the others thus far. This ominous figure
cloaked and hooded in black terrifies him and is reminiscent of the grim
reaper. The Ghost then transports him to a scene where bankers are discussing a
man that died and how they do not know where the man’s money will be dispersed.
One of the men says that no one will want to go to this man’s funeral. Scrooge
does not understand why The Ghost is showing this vision to him.
Scrooge
is next transported to a scene where people are discussing items that belonged
to a dead man as they discuss what these items may be worth. Scrooge still does
not understand why The Ghost is showing him these scenes.
The
Ghost transports Scrooge to yet another place, this time to the Cratchit home.
He sees the Cratchit household very sad and downtrodden. Bob Cratchit enters the
house and he is extremely somber. Scrooge sees that the reason that everyone is
so sad in the house is because Tiny Tim has died. Bob is especially saddened as
he no longer has his little son to carry on his shoulders. The emotions start
to get to Scrooge as he sees a future that is dark with an empty chair and a
crutch with no owner by it.
The Spirit is not through with Scrooge yet. He next transports him to a cemetery. Scrooge is very nervous and frightened by this point of the story. The Ghost points to a tombstone. Scrooge asks The Ghost, “Before I draw nearer to that stone to which you point, answer me one question. Are these the shadows of the things that will be, or are they the shadows of things that may be, only?” This is a very powerful moment and reminiscent of the difference of the Catholic position where grace and free will work together vs. the Calvinist position where things are predetermined and there is no chance of changing them. According to Calvinist predestination, held by many, God predetermined some souls to go to Heaven and some souls to go to Hell before the world ever was and there is nothing that we can do to change our fate. Our free will is useless in the matter. This has of course been condemned by the Catholic Church but this part of the story is very important because the “will” vs. the “may” makes all the difference here. The Ghost points to the tombstone. Scrooge creeps towards the tombstone and upon seeing the inscription on it, he falls to his knees trembling.
He says to The Spirit, “No, no, it can’t be! Am I that man?! Am I the man who died who no one mourned? Say it isn’t so, Spirit! Say it isn’t so!” The Spirit points to the tombstone. Scrooge (crying now) says, “Spirit! Hear me! I am not the man I was. I will not be the man I must have been but for your intervention. Why show me this if I am past all hope?” The Ghost’s hand trembles. Scrooge continues, “Surely your nature intercedes for me, and pities me. Assure me that I may yet change these shadows you have shown me, by a changed life!”
The Ghost’s hand continues to tremble. Scrooge says, “I will
honor Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year. I will remember
the lessons of the Past; I will live in the Present; I will live toward the Future.
The Spirits of all three will strive within me. I will not shut out the lessons
that they teach. Oh, tell me that I may sponge away the writing on this stone!”
(The 3 Persons of the Blessed Trinity – Father, Son, and Holy Ghost live within
those who have been baptized and receive the sacraments that the Catholic
Church dispenses to Her members. The 3 Persons live in the souls of those who
possess sanctifying grace. The 3 Persons of the Trinity have a correlation here
to the 3 Ghosts in the story.) Scrooge begs The Spirit to spare him this
dreadful death. He knows that he is at death’s door, but even worse, Hell’s
door. The next thing he experiences is he wakes up in his bed.
Scrooge
is overjoyed and dancing and happy to have come through this scary ordeal that
the 3 Ghosts put him through, all in one night. He remarks how the 3 Spirits
did it all in one night and how they can do anything they like (reminiscent
again of the 3 Persons of The Blessed Trinity). He opens his bedroom window and
sees a boy running in the snowy streets. He asks the boy if a large turkey is
still in the poultry shop. The boy says it is. Scrooge tells him to bring it to
him and he will pay the boy very handsomely for his efforts. Scrooge decides to
send the turkey to Bob Cratchit’s house.
Scrooge
sees two men on the streets who always ask for money. He whispers into one
man’s ear how much of a donation he will give him, and the man can hardly
believe his ears and whispers the amount into the other man’s ears. Scrooge has
changed and they can tell a transformation has taken place. (When we receive
the sacraments, transformations occur in our souls).
Scrooge
next visits his nephew Fred’s home. Fred can hardly believe to see his Uncle
Scrooge at the door. Scrooge asks if the invitation to dine with Fred and his
family is still in force, to which Fred responds that it absolutely is. Fred
introduces his uncle to his wife Janet. Scrooge says to Janet that he can see
why Fred chose her from among all woman (this is very reminiscent of how God
chose The Blessed Virgin Mary from all women). Janet is very happy that Uncle
Scrooge has come to dine with them. Scrooge tells them, “I am sorry for the
things I said about Christmas. And sorry for the poor reception I gave you
yesterday, of which you were so undeserving. I see the image of my sister in
your face. I loved her, you know. And she, you.” Fred replies, “I know it,
Uncle Scrooge. She loved you very much, and wished until her dying day that we
should always be close.” Scrooge replies, “And so we are, Fred, and so we shall
be. So we shall be.” Scrooge’s transformation is very easy to see. He has one
final visit to make.
Scrooge
is at his workplace when Bob Cratchit enters late. Scrooge says that he will no
longer put up with Bob’s tardiness and that he will no longer stand for this
anymore. He tells him, “ And therefore…I am going to double your salary!”
Bob cannot believe what he just heard or saw. Scrooge tells him that he will
assist Bob’s family from this point forward in any way that he can and he
promises that Tiny Tim will walk again. Scrooge was better than his word. He
did it all, and infinitely more. And to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a
second father.
Conclusion
There are several
Christian themes that run all throughout Dickens story. There are strong
references to the 3 Persons of The Blessed Trinity with the 3 Ghosts all
throughout the story. The Ghost of Christmas Present in some ways strongly
resembles Jesus Christ. Fan, Belle, and Janet display virtuous qualities,
similar to The Blessed Virgin Mary as well as female saints. Bob Cratchit is a
hardworking man who sacrifices much to provide a decent life for his family. He
bears a resemblance to St. Joseph. Fred never gives up on his Uncle Scrooge and
desires that they be a family. Tiny Tim embodies a very strong youthful
innocence that gets to Scrooge, even before his complete conversion. Dickens
uses his characters masterfully well with every stroke of his pen.
There
are vices and virtues that run throughout Dickens story. Where we see greed,
money, and power in Scrooge, we see that countered by kindness, innocence, and
charity in characters such as Bob Cratchit, Tim Cratchit, and Fred.
Perhaps
the most endearing part of Dickens story is the overlying theme of redemption.
Scrooge is visited by Jacob Marley, a man suffering the pains and torments of Purgatory.
Jacob Marley warns Scrooge that if he does not change his ways, he will end up
in an even worse state. Hell is strongly implied here.
He is further warned by
the 3 Ghosts that he must amend his sinful ways before it is too late for him.
He is slow to change. He does not want to hear what these Ghosts have to say to
him. The Ghost of Christmas Past shows him painful scenes from his past. They
stir up memories that he long hoped to forget. The Ghost of Christmas Present
shows him how he currently is living and how his life’s actions are affecting
all of those around him. Still, he refuses to complete the change that is
needed. Finally, The Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come drives home the final part
of Scrooge’s transformation from a life of greed to one of generosity, where he
sees that in the end, he dies alone and no one cares that he is even dead. This
Ghost who frightens him the most, pushes him over the edge to conversion.
In our own lives, we often fall prey to sin, including the 7 deadly sins of lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, anger, envy, and pride. Fortunately, there are virtues to help counteract these deadly sins. Lust is countered by chastity, gluttony by temperance, greed by charity, sloth by diligence, anger by patience, envy by kindness, and pride by humility. Our good Lord gives us chance after chance to make amends in our lives and to change our lives for good. Until we take our last breath, we always have a chance to achieve salvation if we only cooperate with God’s grace. It takes humility and love of God to want to change for the better.
As
Fr. Schouppe demonstrates in his books “Purgatory” and “Hell”, most souls do
not make it to heaven when they die. Many will have to undergo a painful
purgation in Purgatory; whereas, others will sadly be lost for all eternity in
Hell. What a frightening thought! The Christmas season is one in which we
reflect on all that God has done for us, most importantly, becoming one of us,
so that we could be redeemed. Christ could have redeemed us in any way that He
so chose, but He chose the best and most suitable way that He saw fit, entering
into the world as a little baby, growing up, and finally dying for our sins on
the cross. There is no greater love that what He demonstrated. St. Anthony of Padua has a quote that is often
referenced to him where he supposedly made reference to how only poverty was
lacking in heaven. In order for Christ to truly be like us in all ways (except
sin), He had to enter into this world and to embrace poverty.
Many saints have spoken
on the Incarnation. St. John Vianney said, “Who could find it hard to persevere at the sight of a God who
never commands us to do anything which he has not practiced himself?” St. Leo
the Great remarked, “Invisible in his own nature he became visible in ours.
Beyond our grasp, he chose to come within our grasp. Existing before time
began, he began to exist at a moment in time. Incapable of suffering as God, he
did not refuse to be a man, capable of suffering. Immortal, he chose to be
subject to the laws of death.” St. Cyril of Alexandria said, “He undertook to
help the descendants of Abraham, fashioning a body for himself from a woman and
sharing our flesh and blood, to enable us to see in him not only God, but also,
by reason of this union, a man like ourselves.”
The story “A Christmas Carol” is the story of a man’s redemption as God
gives him a second chance. This is only possible because the Incarnation made
this possible. We too all have a second chance, and indeed, many chances
throughout our lives to make amends and to turn our lives around. We all
struggle with vices and sins, the result of original sin. God’s grace is always
there for the taking, if we just take advantage of it. He is always there to
help us. No sin is greater than God’s love.
There have been many wonderful adaptations of Dickens “A Christmas
Carol” that have been made throughout the years. The story has been told over
and over and has gained new audiences over time. It has become a beloved
classic in the hearts and minds of people around the globe.
As we celebrate this Christmas season, let us take time to seriously
reflect on the Incarnation and what Our Lord has done for us. If we were the
only person to have ever existed, He still would have been born as a baby in
Bethlehem so that we could be redeemed one day by His blood on the cross. We
are truly blessed and for this we should continuously show our gratitude and
give thanksgiving to God for all that He has done for us and continues to do
for us.
In the words of Tiny Tim, “God bless us, every one!”
A Very Merry Christmas to all!
Works Consulted
Dickens, Charles. A Christmas Carol: In Prose. Being a Ghost Story of Christmas. Chapman & Hall, 1843.
Schouppe S.J., Fr. F.X. Purgatory: Explained by the Lives and Legends of the Saints. Tan Books, 1926.
Schouppe S.J., Fr. F.X. The Dogma of Hell: Illustrated by Facts Taken From Profane and Sacred History. Tan Books, 1883.
Happy New Year Introibo!
ReplyDeleteJust recently, I posted about a cartoon character I made named Catalina Santos. She is a 17th century Catholic woman, and I created her to respond to the pagan Disney characters infiltrating the Philippines. You may read about her here: https://tradmasscebu.blogspot.com/2025/12/catalina-santos-counter-princess.html
Since I am talking about cartoons, what was the stance of the Catholic Church towards Disney before Vatican II?
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. I learned a lot from you Introibo.
Interesting. Where will you upload your cartoons?
DeleteI am still developing the stories as of now because I have other work to do. By the way, thank you for your articles exposing Disney.
DeleteRyan
Ryan,
DeleteHappy New Year! Poni is the expert on Disney!
God Bless,
---Introibo
Thank you to you as well.
DeleteWhat a beautiful story ! It shows that even the most hardened person can change their life through the grace of God. Merry Christmas to all !
ReplyDeleteSimon,
DeleteThank you very much. Merry Christmas to you.
God bless,
-TradWarrior
Thank you TradWarrior very much. I really like your first writing .Indeed, a beautiful story . A very blessed Christmas-tide to you, Introibo, Simon, Leo, Joanna and all readers of this great blog .May 2026 be a grace-filled year for us all. Keep up the good fight for the Faith . The Saints are praying for us .
ReplyDeleteGod bless
TradSedeCath,NZ
TradSedeCath, NZ,
DeleteThank you very much. This was actually my second writing for Introibo. My first writing was an article that was published last month entitled, “This Too Shall Pass.” Please be sure to check it out.
God bless you and Merry Christmas,
-TradWarrior
Dear TradSedeCath over there in far-off Kiwiland,
DeleteYour very kind wishes in my regard for Christmastide are much appreciated and reciprocated. As they say in your country (correct me if I'm wrong),
Ngā mihi nui,
Leo
A blessed Christmas-tide and grace-filled 2026 to you John Gregory too. Love your writings too.
ReplyDeleteGod bless
TradSedeCath,NZ
I have always been very cautious of reading ‘A Christmas Carol’ since the author refers to these visiting supernatural entities as “ghosts”, not angels taking a human form, not souls in Purgatory, but “ghosts”. Angels can take a human form and appear to human beings in extremely rare events, demons also can influence and appear before humans, and souls of purgatory have appeared to ask for prayers and serve as a warning against sinful lives. Saint Maria Goretti also appeared before her murderer to convert him. The secular/occult concept of a “ghost” means a person who has died yet still sticks around here on earth to haunt people, cause trouble, or carry out some mission. This is, of course, not Catholic. I have many of Charles Dickens’ books, who many would consider the greatest storyteller ever, at least of The Victorian age, but I always tread carefully when reading any book that could pose a danger. Charles Dickens was Anglican, perhaps more Unitarian with a generic ideas about Christianity, which can’t be considered Christian if they are not fully in line with the teachings of The Church. Are there moral themes in line with Christian morality in this book? Yes, but you can find those themes in many books. Jacob Marley visiting from Purgatory is a conclusion many of come up with, but he never mentions the purifying fires of Purgatory, just chains. People can draw parallels and interpret the book to try and make it fit with Catholic teaching, but I find it to be a stretch, and see it more as generic Protestant sentiments with the concept of “ghost” thrown in there. Which can mislead many. Are these angels? Who are they and where did they come from? How does Jacob Marley know they will visit? Much of the storyline doesn’t fall in line with Catholic teaching, except the moral lessons, unless the reader interprets the symbolism that way, but I don’t see it.
ReplyDeleteThe same thing goes for The Lord of The Rings. People who claim to be Catholic like to read these books and watch the movies, and they almost always say that these mythical stories are for a Catholic audience, with Catholic themes. I disagree. JRR Tolkien made ecumenical statements, was into fairytales and mythology. The Lord of The Rings is filled with references to Norse Mythology, Magic, Spells, and acts as a replacement for Christ The King. Yes, people can find parallels, but The Occult Marvel Superheroes Franchise has parallels, but we all know Marvel is demonic. I just stay away from these forms of entertainment.
Dear Anonymous, December 29, 2025 at1:17 PM,
DeleteYou make excellent, valid points. I very much doubt that Charles Dickens was sympathetic to the Catholic Faith, so it would be surprising indeed if he had consciously promoted Catholic principles and themes. That said, I still enjoyed TradWarrior's piece. Thank you, TW!
You are absolutely correct in your assessment of JRR Tolkien and his output. Many non-Catholics some of them very anti-Catholic into the bargain, don't consider "The Lord Of The Rings" as Catholic in any shape or form. What do they see that Catholics don't observe? Wishful thinking on the part of Catholic fans, perhaps?
Best wishes,
Leo
@anon1:17pm,
DeleteYou bring up some interesting points. You are correct in Dickens’ religious background being Anglican, with Unitarian leanings. With that being said, does that disqualify his writings as not being useful? I would argue “No.” There are many other writers who have written many insightful things, though they were far from a Traditional Catholic. C.S. Lewis comes to mind. I cited him in my first article that was published on Introibo’s blog last month. While I would not consider him a favorite author of mine, and he certainly wasn’t a Traditional Catholic, he nevertheless wrote many interesting things, some of which you would be hard pressed to find among other authors. There are others too who I have enjoyed reading over the course of the years. They may not have been Traditional Catholics, but their insights were so good on this or that topic that it left me glad that I had read them. In fact, I enjoyed reading certain aspects of their writings more than some theological writings. Dostoevsky is another person that comes to mind. He gets quoted a lot in Catholic circles and there have been several others too. Because they were not Traditional Catholics, should their writings not be studied or should they be completely disregarded? I would argue “No.” The sheer weight of the positives that they brought to the table is reason alone for why they should be read, though they never became Traditional Catholics. I always enjoyed “A Christmas Carol” because of how relatable it is to all audiences and how powerful the story of redemption comes through in it. The themes of past, present, and future are very interesting in themselves, as all human beings look back to the past, live in the present, and contemplate their future. I think a lot of this has to do with the question, “How strong is one in the Faith?” If someone knows the Faith very well, I do not think that Dickens would pose a problem, as nothing is going to shake the individual from pulling away from the One True Faith. It’s like when Introibo uses the example of how it is okay for SOME (emphasis added) people to go to the SSPX and attend an Una Cum Mass because they are not going to have their faith shaken and they need the sacraments. For other people, it would be far more of a danger (and yes, there are a lot of poorly catechized Catholics today). Many people would just prefer to stay home if they did not have a Sedevacantist church near them. If their conscience tells them to stay home, then so be it. Could Marley have been written to say to Scrooge that he was burning in the flames of Purgatory and he needed prayers to help in the expiation of his temporal punishment? Sure, but again, we are not dealing with a Traditional Catholic literature story here. I’m not sure if any exist in the world of literature (great as that would be!) I take the story for what it’s worth. There are very powerful Catholic themes that run throughout it, though it wasn’t written by a Catholic.
“The Lord of The Rings” was a story that I never personally got into. Many, many people that I have met through the years could not believe that I never saw that movie, but it’s just not a genre that fascinated me. To each their own.
CONTINUED…There are many corollaries that we could use here when it comes to books, films, etc. For example, would Mozart’s music be fine to listen to? Many people consider him one of the greatest musicians ever and would have no qualms listening to him. Others would not listen to him because he was a freemason. Is one side correct here and the other side wrong? You mention Marvel is demonic. There is no question that we have to be wary of much of what we read and watch today, however, there are many Marvel and DC comic book characters that were written with Catholic backgrounds. Characters such as Daredevil and Nightcrawler would be just two examples. In some of their stories, there is a lot of Catholic imagery that is used (depending on who the author of the story is). I do agree that many of these movies today have gotten a whole lot darker and demonic and again we have to be very careful. I do not think that we can make a blanket statement with much of this though.
DeleteA bit of a sidebar, but it reminded me of this - I have seen this go very far the other way (especially with some families). I have seen many cases where parents (both traditionalists and those who are conservative Novus Ordo) try to shun their children away from all forms of media in general – movies, TV shows, music, etc. and they will not allow their children to have any form of entertainment in their lives whatsoever. They feel that it would be sinful for their children (and themselves) to have anything to do with something that is not 100% Traditional Catholic. While it is very noble to want to steer their families away from much of the filth that is out there, I have witnessed some people take this much too far. The result was not good. It left their children becoming so incredibly isolated that when they got old enough and were on their own in the outside world, they simply could not function properly because of how restricted they were growing up and it handicapped them in many regards. I know of some children whose parents were so ultra-strict in raising their children, that their children eventually ran away from home and became addicted to drugs, alcohol, etc. Again, this is a bit of a sidebar, but some of your points in your post reminded me of this and I just thought that I would mention it.
I take Dickens story for what it is, a great tale that has many good aspects to it and that makes a person think about the different attributes that affect the world we live, greed and pride, love and kindness, sorrow and joy, falling and forgiveness, confinement and redemption. Would it be great to have a Traditional Catholic literary author tell a story with every part of it being 100% theologically sound in every facet of the story? Sure, but we do not get that in literature. It is literature, not Catholic theology manuals. It would be great if we did get that with literary authors, just like it would be great if we could go back to the days when we had a reigning pope to shepherd the church. If only.
-TradWarrior
I have more respect for a parent that takes the time to censor movie DVDs or VHS tapes than a parent who bans everything without contemplation.
DeleteMany parents for example can fall into the temptation of restricting everything without actually focusing on instilling in their children the love of Jesus. The result is that they learn to hate the religion, which is arguably worse than Tolkien being a spiritual trainwreck who referenced entities he didn't believe in or worship.
At the same time other forms of entertainment like woodworking or sports should not be barred without a serious concern. Rather, I believe they should be instilled. They do not harm adjustment in society and prove little risk for apostasy.
Same with socialization: Homeschooling parents must try to make sure their children are confident and play with other children.
As for myself, I grew up watching movies with questionable content - Kung Fu Panda, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, ET, Shrek - and yet my father took enough effort to teach us to love Jesus and take theology seriously. Instead of attacking Star Wars without explanation, he would for example criticize new age beliefs.
This is what matters.
While I would not let my kids watch these movies, I feel a little bit of flexibility is necessary. Many kids who have overtly strict parents will reject them once given an opportunity or will disobey them when nobody is home
El poni albinegro,
DeleteI agree with you. You speak words of wisdom.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
Good comments, Poni.
DeleteDoes anyone have comments on C.S. Lewis's Narnia series? Thanks.
-S.T.
Narnia is Jesus fanfiction and I find that to be extremely disrespectful.
DeleteEverybody has their limits, and Narnia breaks the most important one.
Poni, thank you. That's a shame.
Delete-S.T.
I think it's important to be discerning about media but not to fall into scrupulosity concerning it. I think those who just condemn everything that they don't consider explicitly Catholic in each and every detail show just as much intellectual immaturity as those who allow and consume just about everything. Not every work of fiction needs to be explicitly Catholic, but it should include good themes or values and not be explicitly anti-Catholic either.
DeleteCatholic tradition has always permitted fiction, allegory, and imaginative storytelling so long as they do not glorify sin or contradict faith. A Christmas Carol is a moral parable about repentance and mercy, not a metaphysical treatise on the afterlife. Likewise, Tolkien’s work is mythic literature shaped by a Catholic moral vision. Discernment, not fear, is the Catholic approach. Excessive rigor risks scrupulosity and can push souls away rather than draw them toward Christ.
DeleteYou're welcome
Delete@anon9:54am,
DeleteThank you very much for commenting. I agree with everything you said. “In Medio Stat Veritas” is something I try to follow very closely. I have seen a lot of scrupulosity and prudishness with people that I have known that have definitely gone too far the other way. This is not healthy either. I have never lived my life like that. I think that your comment is right on the mark!
God bless you and thanks for the post!
-TradWarrior
@anon10:10am,
DeleteThank you for the post. Just like anon9:54am above, I think that you are also right on the mark and I agree with you too. I am not sure if you are the same poster or a different one, but both your comment and the one above are comments I completely agree with. I have known people that are so scrupulous that they practically reject all movies, TV shows, music, books, etc. I have never lived my life like that. Versatility and a variety is not a bad thing. Of course the Faith comes first, but some people definitely go too far the other way.
God bless you and thanks for the great comment!
-TradWarrior
Seeking Truth,
Delete"In medio stat veritas" is the motto by which to live. "In the middle stands the truth." I agree with TradWarrior and Poni who both decry excess. We must "learn to discern."
Certain things can be "baptized" and used for the glory of God. Case in point, St. Thomas Aquinas using the philosophy of Aristotle. Things which are intrinsically evil can never be used. For example, there is nothing that can ever make an abortion good or useful for the Church.
Fr. DePauw was once denounced by a local SSPX priest for having a TV set which he used to watch the evening news at 11 before retiring for the night. This priest claimed that a television set was "intrinsically evil" and put Fr. DePauw in a state of sin (!)
The following Sunday, Fr. DePauw addressed the issue from the pulpit. After the announcements and before the sermon, Fr. DePauw (who spoke bluntly and never avoided confrontation when needed) stated:
"It has come to my attention that a certain so-called Traditionalist priest has claimed that it is gravely sinful for me, or anyone else, to have a TV because television is "intrinsically evil." That such a priest, so poorly trained, is hearing Confessions and giving advice makes me shake my head in disbelief.
He belongs to a society formed by a cowardly Archbishop, who when asked by Bishop Kurz and me to join us in our fight for Truth and Tradition said, "Thanks but no thanks," and came out of hiding five years later.
This priest of the society wouldn't have passed my Moral Theology course when I was a professor at the seminary in Baltimore pre-Vatican II.
Rather than go into detail, I'll say this: If TV is "intrinsically evil," how could Pope Pius XII make St. Clare of Assisi the Patron Saint of Television? When has the Church ever given Patron Saints to things that are intrinsically immoral? That's all I have to say on the matter."
He then delivered his sermon after that "mike drop moment."
God Bless,
---Introibo
To My Readers:
ReplyDeleteIn the comments section of last week's post, an answer was given by a commenter that I must address. The commenter is an intelligent and sincere Traditionalist, and I enjoy his comments.
In responding to someone else, I wrote:
"Orthodox clergy have valid orders, they can be used in danger of death if no Traditionalist priest can be found."
To this, the commenter in question replied:
"According to Fr. Leslie Rumble in "Radio Reples":
"When no Catholic priest is available, the Catholic Church permits a dying Catholic to receive one Sacrament only from a Greek priest, and that is the Sacrament of Confession."
That comment rules out the reception of Extreme Unction and, of course, Holy Communion from a "Greek" (Eastern Heterodox) priest. A fair number of EH priests would refuse to hear the confessions of Catholics, anyhow."
Two things that need to be addressed: 1. NEVER use a popular theology book (like the Q&A book cited) even if written by an approved theologian. You will often get incomplete answers and may act upon them to your detriment. 2. Always use a theology manual or dissertation for Doctor of Sacred Theology or Canon Law, because these have been checked by the Magisterium very carefully and give a complete answer.
Here was my response:
"Frs. Rumble and Carty are giving an incomplete answer. That is a Q&A book not a theology manual.
According to theologian Szal, "Canon 938, section 1, uses the words 'omnis et solus sacerdos.' The scope of 'omnis' [all] is in no way circumscribed or qualified, and hence can be understood to include schismatic priests" [in administering Extreme Unction to Catholics in danger of death].
(See "The Communication of Catholics with Schismatics,"[1948], pg. 99)
Szal explains that Extreme Unction may be necessary for salvation-just as baptism and Penance-- in certain cases. For example, when one is bereft of his senses, greater security of salvation is given to the dying person through extreme unction than absolution, because internal attrition is sufficient for extreme unction, whereas an eternally manifested attrition is considered by most theologians to be necessary for the validity of Penance.
Holy Viaticum must be refused. So the Last Rites consists of Penance and Extreme Unction when given by an EO priest to a Traditionalist in danger of death.
Please don't consult popular theology books (even ones written by approved theologians) when attempting to find the answer to a theological question. Only approved manuals will give full and complete answers approved by the Magisterium.
God Bless,
---Introibo"
Therefore, you MAY receive Extreme Unction from an EO priest in danger of death. Should the need ever arise (God forbid), I don't want someone thinking Extreme Unction cannot be given by an EO priest if in danger of death with no Traditionalist priest available.
God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo
Introibo, thank you for this helpful response. It's always a good idea to reference theology manuals, especially for situations like those described above. Would you be able to supply a list of good theology manuals? I know you mentioned theologian Szal. I checked my small and limited library, and I found I already have several theology manuals by Connell, Jone, and Van Noort. Any other recommendations? I like to have books on hand for when I have the time to peruse and see what catches my attention.
DeleteDear Introibo (and those reading this),
DeleteA short time ago, I penned a response to your reply in last week's post, before I saw the above, relating to the matter of the liceity of receiving some Sacraments from Eastern Heterodox priests when in danger of death. Maybe those remarks can be displayed here (if you approve them!), instead of there, should it be deemed appropriate. By the way, does Szal address the topic of scandal in respect of receiving the Last Rites from non-Catholic priests? Just wondering.
Greetings to one and all,
Leo
Leo
DeleteHere is my further reply to you, my friend:
Leo
You write: "Many thanks indeed for your reply. It is most helpful. I note, though, that Szal makes reference to schismatic priests only. What about heretical ones? Schism and heresy are not synonymous. The Eastern Heterodox are not only schismatics; they are heretics as well."
Reply: Theologian Szal notes there are two kinds of schismatics; those in "pure schism" and "mixed schism."
Pure schismatics are separated only in obedience to the Holy See. He concedes that very few pure schismatics exist today (as of 1948). Mixed schismatics are also heretical , hence the EO are covered here. He clarifies that when he speaks of schismatic clerics--unless stated otherwise---he means BOTH pure and mixed schismatics.
It makes sense as "omnia" means ALL priests validly ordained. That would even include priests excommunicated vitandus for heresy like Leonard Feeney.
You write: "Nonetheless, I am puzzled that Fr. Rumble (and Fr. Carty) provided an "incomplete answer". I would describe it as inaccurate. Why did they get it wrong?"
Reply: They didn't. Remember, they were writing a popular theology book, not a scholarly manual or dissertation.
I once came upon a small booklet published in 1949 by the Archdiocese of NY. It was a popular introduction to the faith, with sections about various topics and bullets noting certain Catholic teachings.
One bullet said, "The sacrament of baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation." The statement is 100% true. The fact that it didn't go into detail that Baptism may be received in fact OR BY DESIRE does not make the bulleted statement false. In 1949, the lunatic Feeney was just getting started, but you can see how a person wouldn't get the whole picture from that little booklet.
Rumble did apostatize, but his popular volumes were orthodox pre-Vatican II.
@anon6:11 (Leo?)
You write: "Why must the Holy Viaticum be refused?"
Reply: Three sacraments are needed for the salvation of all who have use of reason: Baptism, Penance, and the Eucharist. That's why all three can be received by desire (BOD, Act of Perfect Contrition, and Spiritual Communion respectively).
However, when you are dying, salvation depends on being free of original and/or mortal sin and in the state of grace. Ergo, Penance and Baptism are indispensable. Not so with the Eucharist. The reception of Communion does not remit mortal sin. Since there is no necessity of losing one's soul, and there is danger of perversion by the schismatic giving the Host and saying something to make it seem the dying Catholic is in agreement/unity with his sect, Holy Viaticum is to be refused.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Leo
DeleteYes. Theologian Szal always teaches the "danger of scandal" must never be present.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Cyrus,
DeleteSome great theologians I would add to your list:
In Moral Theology:
*Prummer
*Slater
Dogmatic Theology:
*Pohle
*Tanquerey
*Ott
*Scheeben
Moral/Pastoral Theology:
*Davis
God Bless,
---Introibo
Dear Introibo @ 7:36 PM,
DeleteI have no desire to drag out this correspondence unnecessarily, but consider this: the matter of scandal rearing its ugly head could make things even worse for the poor dying person if he becomes worked up over the issue, wondering if scandal will ensue by his receiving the Last Rites from a non-Catholic priest. In such a situation, he might find it extremely difficult, given his nearness to death, to explain to all and sundry that he is not compromising the Faith. Very tricky indeed!
Oremus pro invicem,
Leo
TradWarrior,
ReplyDeleteInteresting article. Jacob Marley gets to me every time I watch any version of the Christmas Carol. He's a good reminder that we should not waste our precious time on earth which is something we can all work on (especially me).
This article is timely because I just started reading a couple of books that were recommended in this combox a few months ago called "Occult Phenomena in the Light of Theology" by the Cistercian theologian Alois Wiesinger and "Ghosts and Poltergeists" by theologian Herbert Thurston S.J. which I received as a Christmas gift. They are both very deep on the subject.
A more modern booklet that I suggest is "Poltergeists and the Seven Types of Ghosts" by Rev. John Hampsch which breaks down the types of ghosts people occasionally see.
One specific case of ghosts sightings I've always wondered about are those of the Civil War such as at Gettysburg or other such battlefields where men appear as phantoms of that era like they are still awaiting for something to happen like it was going on back then. So many sightings but the question is why does God allow such things to manifest itself? Is it perhaps to remind us of our end and encourage us to "Make the way of the Lord straight." I don't know but it seems like it. Happy New Year!
Lee
Hi Lee,
DeleteThank you for your comment. Your books that you referenced, which have been mentioned on this blog before, sound extremely intriguing! My reading list is already very large in terms of books that I want to get to, but these titles you mention do sound REALLY good. I’m trying not to add any more books at this time (but these titles are very tempting LOL!). Please let me know how you enjoyed these books once you are done reading them.
I too have wondered about ghost sightings as they deal with the civil war. I was recently reading a few weeks ago about some cemeteries that are known to be extremely haunted and there are sightings at some of them quite frequently. In terms of phantasms, I often wonder what they could be. It would seem to me that there would be 5 classifications – 1) Angels, 2) Demons, 3) Saints in Heaven, 4) Suffering souls in Purgatory, 5) Damned souls in Hell. I don’t think that angels or the blessed souls in Heaven are going to haunt cemeteries. Souls in Purgatory are a possibility but as we see from Fr. Schouppe’s books and throughout church history with many cases, they usually ask for our prayers to help them expiate their temporal punishment because once they go to judgement, they cannot help themselves and they rely on us to help them. In short, they want out of Purgatory and FAST! That just leaves demons and damned souls in hell (although apparitions of the damned seem quite rare). These topics are very interesting and there are many wonders in this world that leave us puzzled.
As long as we continue to follow the Catholic Church and her teachings, stay in a state of grace, and live as best we can, that is all that matters. One day when we get to Heaven (God willing), we will understand why these mystical things were allowed to occur on the Earth.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
Dear Lee, TradWarrior (and anyone else),
DeleteDo you know of/recommend any literature providing a Catholic view of aliens, extraterrestrials, UFOs and that sort of thing? I would, reluctantly, accept works published by adherents of the Bogus Novus Apostasy.
Thanks in advance for your help,
Leo
Leo,
DeletePlease see my post:
https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2022/10/a-waste-of-space-are-humans-alone-in.html
God Bless,
---Introibo
Dear Introibo,
DeleteThanks for the link to the post, which latter has been read. I thought you wouldn't refrain from bringing the Dimonds into the discussion! J. Allen Hynek came to accept Jacques Vallée's theory that alleged extraterrestrials are extradimensionals, considering, among other things, that they defy the laws of physics. My opinion on the matter is found in a separate comment on this page.
God bless you and yours,
Leo
Hi Leo,
DeleteI was thinking of the article that Introibo wrote which he referenced for you. I cannot think of anything else at the moment that deals with that subject in a manner that really does the subject justice. Introibo’s writing is pretty top notch (as all of his writings are).
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
John Gregory,
ReplyDeleteYou are in my thoughts and prayers, my friend. Merry Christmas to you.
God bless,
-TradWarrior
Could you please pray for a lady who suffered a stroke today and her condition is still unknown? She is the mother of my brother's good friend.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for your charity.
May God Bless You,
Joanna
Hi Joanna,
DeleteI will keep this lady in my prayers, especially my daily rosary. I hope that she is okay.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
Praying Joanna!
DeleteWill do, Joanna.
Delete-S.T.
Dear Joanna,
DeleteBędę się modlić za kobietę, o której wspomniałaś. Wiem, jak to jest mieć udar, ponieważ mój kochany, obecnie nieżyjący, Tata cierpiał na tę chorobę.
Niech Bóg błogosławi ją i Ciebie,
Leo
P.S. I hope that Introibo and all the readers here don't mind seeing this reply in Polish. Trusting it is accurate!
Joanna
DeletePraying and I ask all my readers to do so as well.
God Bless,
---Introibo
TradWarrior, anon 4:55, Seeking Truth, Leo, and Introibo,
DeleteThank you so much, my friends!
Leo,
it's perfect Polish!
I'm very sorry to hear about your late father; I'll be praying for the repose of his soul. I miss my late dad too. We lost him to cancer almost twenty years ago. I can't believe it's been two decades since he passed away in 2006.
God Bless You all and a Happy New Year to all who visit this site,
Joanna
Dear Joanna,
DeleteThank you for your charity in praying for my very dear Tata, who passed away a decade ago. An interesting thing: two years before he died, a senior, experienced doctor summoned me to the hospital urgently, saying that my father was dying. The situation was very dire, indeed. I called a validly-ordained priest (not a sedevacantist) who came very quickly and administered Extreme Unction and the Last Rites. Fr. N, then a confrere, Fr. B, came to pray alongside Tata's bedside for a few hours. This happened late at night. I stayed with him until the morning, and was amazed that he pulled through, as if nothing serious had happened. The doctor couldn't believe it. He said Tata was definitely dying, and couldn't understand how he could have recovered so quickly. A nurse (not a Catholic) whispered in my ear, saying that she and some of her colleagues were convinced a miracle had occurred, but she added, rather wryly, that the doctors would never say anything like that, only that it was one of life's mysteries.
Do keep us posted about how the lady with the stroke is progressing.
Matko Boska Ostrobramska, módl się za nią, módl się za nas.
Bóg zapłać!
Leo
Joanna,
DeleteI will continue to keep this lady in my prayers. I will also keep your father's soul in my prayers too. You also are in my daily prayers. Your contributions to this blog over the years have been invaluable!
God bless you.
Leo,
Thank you for sharing that touching story about your father. I will keep your father's soul in my prayers. Your writings these last few months on Introibo’s blog have really added to this blog! I like reading everything that you write.
God bless you.
-TradWarrior
Dear TradWarrior,
DeleteThank you for your kind words and for offering to pray for my beloved late father. I am sure he would appreciate it!
A message to Joanna S. (nothing po polsku this time: contradiction?):
Your own dear father is in my poor prayers.
God bless you both,
Leo
TradWarrior and Leo,
Deletethank you so much for all of your prayers! It's no exaggeration when I say they keep me going when things get rough in real life. I'm keeping you in mine on a daily basis.
Writing to you both and reading your comments has been a pleasure. Thank you for the discussion below on "The Twilight Zone" and the idea of beauty vs. ugliness.
God Bless You,
Joanna
Dear Joanna,
DeleteI value your prayers and thank you for your kindness. I also like reading your comments and look forward to them. Don't be surprised if I include a Polish phrase or two when writing to you; maybe you can respond likewise to me!
Idź z Bogiem!
Leo
Trad Warrior:
ReplyDeleteThis was an interpretation of Dickens' tale that I had never thought of! Very interesting and thought-
provoking. You clearly put much labor and love into your post.
Thank you for that, and thanks,
Intro, for providing the forum for us to read this and all your guest posters' articles.
I enjoy them thoroughly.
A Blessed New Year to all!
-Jannie
Hi Jannie,
DeleteThank you so much for the kind words. Yes, it actually was a lot of work putting this entire piece together, as I had to go from start to finish in examining the entire story. I really am glad that you enjoyed it.
I will keep you in prayer. A Blessed New Year to you as well!
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
Jannie
DeleteA very Happy New Year to your family and you!
God Bless,
---Introibo
Thanks for article. It was interesting. I personally opt out of all entertainment etc but understand all comments here. I saw this movie in my earlier life. All things like these movies are just too much for me now and seems a waste of time. Especially after hearing sermons on how we will be judged on our use of time. I am already so deficient! God bless all of you!
ReplyDeleteOn another matter re sspx. This group mentored me for years. They are very serious Catholics and left the sspx but are still RR. This is their newest article against sedevacantism:
Answering a Sedevacantist’s Rhetorical Question: All Catholics are in Communion with the Pope: https://catholiccandle.org/2025/12/29/all-catholics-are-in-communion-with-the-pope/
Any comments or guidance welcomed! Sadly, not only did I help people come into the NO I also helped a few come to this RR position. I am always battling how I veered people in wrong direction and now can't convince them of the errors. Neverending torture! Thanks for all the help I get here.
I'll let someone wiser, and more patient than me answer, but I immediately saw errors on that page. I'm pretty sure Introibo and others are familiar with that website. They definitely are confused about the sedevacantist position and what schism is. It's actually the only safe position (credit to Novus Ordo Watch).
DeleteYou made some good points. I think everyone needs to find their balance, and also be really honest with themselves about it. That said, if someone wants to use their time more wisely but struggles, then they should definitely pray for help and do their part to cooperate with God's grace.
God Bless you, too,
-S.T.
Dear Anonymous, December 30, 2025 at 5:04 PM,
DeleteLike Simple Truth, I saw various errors, serious ones at that, on the linkyou provided. Unfortunately, I don't have the time to demolish them all - not enough hours in the day, and I'm not really equipped for the task. Introibo and Novus Ordo Watch would be far better qualified. I should point out one glaring piece of nonsense, however: "Catholic Candle" holds that Sideshow Bob/aka Nope Leo 14 is simultaneously the head of two Churches which are in open contradiction with each other. Simple logic and reason are enough to refute the impossibility of such a situation from a Catholic perspective.This particular form of craziness isn't heretical (I stand open to correction), but the Church doesn't waste her time pronouncing everything self-evidently plain weird to be heresy. She knows Catholics (but not of the stripe of CC, it seems) have enough sense to be able to spot all-too-obvious nuttiness when they see it. One is reminded of the poor, late Stephen Hawking who, quite seriously, posited that the universe created itself. Here was a sad case of a brilliant man who perverted his God-given intellect, rather than accept the obvious. I don't think it is uncharitable to suggest that "Catholic Candle" is any different - anything but horrible sedevacantism!
I am given to understand, by way of what I regard as personal 'signal graces', that there is indeed some validity to sede-privationism. Without going into the Thesis or Bp. Sandbourn's particular position, I am given to understand that there is some manner or residue of actual & applicable truth to it; and I wonder if Introibo could give some further details and to his own reckonings on that position, which, often-times, he has remarked as being possible.
DeleteI might add that my own reasoning and, I suppose 'desired' position, is that of totality, viz. that of strict Sedevacantism and total refutation of the SP stance and thus the Thesis.
I am at a loss to understand how ostensibly non-Catholics - some like Bergoglio the Abominable and that little poofter Provost being by all manifest appearance staunch enemies of God - could be in any way 'material popes' or 'pope placeholders '.
Introibo, please help.
Dear Seeking Truth,
DeleteProfuse apologies for addressing you as "Simple Truth". I hope I didn't offend you. Yours truly is just too old and tired.
Yours in the Holy Family,
Leo
Leo,
DeleteThank you, but no apologies are necessary. I like the name "Simple Truth". I'm glad you post on Introibo's blog.
In Jesus and Mary,
-S.T.
Dear S.T.,
DeleteI look forward to reading comments made by your good self. Much is learned from them.
Thank you,
Leo
@anon10:22
DeleteFrom a long time ago, see my post:
https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2014/11/sedeprivationism.html
I believe that Luciani (JPI) MAY have become pope prior to his murder. He wanted Fr. DePauw to "bring the Church back." Therefore, sedeprivationism MAY be true. Yet I remain a "garden variety" sedevacantist.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Thank you, I will read that; however how could Luciani have ever become validly pope given that he had been a garden-variety V2 heretic? Indeed, he was one of the worst.
DeleteYou know what turned him? I think he read the (missing) Fatima Secret and that is why he summoned Fr. De Pauw to "bring the Church back". He was a heretic but I think a man of 'good-will', so to speak. He was not a Mason (obviously; they killed him).
Have you any more details to share regarding that letter to Fr.? What happened to it? Where is it now?
Dear Introibo,
DeleteAs far as "Lucky Luciano" (sorry, Luciani) is concerned, we go by his very public adherence to The Great Apostasy prior to his "election" as "pope". The fact that he chose the stage name JP1 was a further public manifestation of his adherence to Novus Bogusism. That is how Catholics know with certainty that he could not have been a Pope in any shape or form, regardless of what he may have said or done in private. The Thesis, even if valid, would not have applied in his case. Just my two cents' worth.
Yours,
Leo
Introibo,
DeleteI understand Leo is new in these parts, and so is probably unaware of the letter Luciani sent Fr. DePauw, summoning him to Rome for the Red Cap of Cardinal Priest, with commission to restore the liturgy - i.e. that Luciani was attempting to suppress VII and 'turn back the clock' so to speak - however his point is my point, viz. how could Luciani ever attain to formal or valid pope on account of his VII heresies, even if corrected and occasioning his return to orthodox Catholicism?
I thought once a heretic = never a pope.
I read just recently some sede priest, I think, completely saying opposite re jp1. If I find that post I will submit here but was surprised he was so adamant.
Delete@anon12:12
DeleteYes, I have said as much as I can about that event. As to your statement: "I thought once a heretic = never a pope" is not fully presented. For example, a man is a Protestant. He realizes Catholicism is true and converts. He is no longer a heretic. Should he become a priest and go up the ranks to Cardinal (I'm speaking pre-V2 of course), is he eligible to be elected a True pope? Of course!
If Luciani converted to Catholicism he would no longer be a heretic. Sedeprivationism contends that the only thing a material pope can do is appoint material cardinals to lect another material (or potential) pope. Is a material pope a true pope. No, he is no pope at all. If a man is elected by the electoral college to be president of the U.S. he is President-elect. Does the President-elect have any presidential rights, duties, powers/authority? Until he is sworn in and actually becomes President, the answer is NO.
Likewise, if the material pope removes the impediment (heresy) to reception of papal authority, can he then become pope? I am open to that possibility because I believe Luciani may have died as a Catholic --and MAYBE even pope. Only God knows.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Dear Anonymous, January 2, 2026 at 12:12 AM,
DeleteEven if the anecdote about Nope JP1 and Father DePauw were true, that was not done in the public forum, so Luciani remained a bogus pope until he died. Popes Paul IV and St. Pius V taught and legislated that a heretic was permanently barred from the Papal office.
More Catholic light relief (I'm running out of these):
A priest, new to town, is calling on a man who is working hard in his garden. He greets him: "You and God are doing great things in your garden".
"You should have seen it when He had it to Himself!"
In the Holy Family,
Leo
Thank you very much, that makes sense. Thank you.
DeleteThere was a French cardinal & theologian, whose name I forget - you would know - who outrightly rejected VII and was excommunicated from the false church for his valour; he died this century and maintained that the Vatican released Fatima Secret referred to Luciani, that he was the bishop in white.
Leo
DeleteYou write: "Even if the anecdote about Nope JP1 and Father DePauw were true,..."
Reply: It is absolutely true.
You write: "that was not done in the public forum"
Reply: He was preparing for such!
You write: "Popes Paul IV and St. Pius V taught and legislated that a heretic was permanently barred from the Papal office."
reply: For as long as he remains a heretic, CONCEDED; after his repentance, DENIED. No theologian ever interpreted those decrees such that a repented heretic who returned to the Faith could not become pope after embracing tha Catholic Faith once more.
This is not to say sedeprivationism is true. However, I remain open as I saw the details of what nearly happened.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Dear Introibo,
DeleteThank you for your reply. What you say is moot (and I am not denying that the letter in question was written) because JP1 went to his judgment as the public leader of the "V2" anti-Church.There is no public evidence he renounced his apostasy; even if he had, he would not have acceded to the Papacy, because he was never a Pope to begin with. A Pope cannot fall into heresy - one has never done so - and a heretic cannot be Pope. Yes, a heretic can convert and be eligible for the Papal office, but Luciani was a heretic and did not convert, publically, before dying. His election was illicit and invalid, because only Catholics can only elect a Catholic as Pope. I prefer not to indulge in speculation, what may have been, but in verifiable facts - what actually happened, and what was seen to happen.
May God bless you and yours,
Leo
Introibo, please respond to Leo's comment and make any necessary corrections. Surely how fortunate we are that Leo has taken such an interest in your blog.
DeleteLeo
DeleteHeretics don’t ask the priest who was the First to publicly condemn Vatican II to come to Rome and restore Catholicism.
“Public” has been defined by some theologians (Michel comes to mind) as a few loquacious people, not letting the entire world know. If office can be lost this way, could it be regained this way? We don’t know.
You are correct Luciani could never have attained the papacy in the 1978 conclave due to his heresy. Yet, could material cardinals appoint a material pope capable of attaining the papacy? You merely assert the answer is no and assume Sedeprivationism is wrong because it’s not true (begging the question).
Again, I’m not a Sedeprivationist. I find many of its adherents to be strange in their promotion of it.
If you reject sedeprivationism, that’s fine. I’m a Sedevacantist myself as well. However, unlike those who adopt “the (so-called) Thesis” we must refrain from telling people it cannot be true as if it is sinful. I’m open but far from convinced. This blog will welcome both sedevacantism and sedeprivationism as long as adherents don’t enforce their view as dogma against the other.
God Bless,
—-Introibo
Dear Introibo, I am very surprised to hear of this letter from John Paul I to Fr. DePauw. If this was a document from him indicating repentance and reversion to the Faith shortly before his death, I believe anyone in possession of such evidence would have an obligation to publish it for several reasons:
Delete1) To repair the scandal caused by John Paul I in his complicity in the Vatican 2 religion and the Novus Ordo, since he was retracting his acceptance of the Novus Ordo.
2) To rehabilite the memory of John Paul I, since even dead people are entitled to a good reputation. If John Paul I repented of modernism before his death, but died before making his repentance public, he would still have a right to a public good reputation as a believer in the Catholic Faith and someone who rejected modernism.
3) For the sake of the common good. There are millions of souls who accept the Novus Ordo and Vatican 2 only because they believe the modernist popes taught it. If they knew at least one of them, John Paul I, actually rejected the Novus Ordo right before his death, they would be more inclined to abandon the Novus Ordo themselves.
While there might be concerns about publishing documents without the consent of the sender or receiver, the common good always trumps such concerns except in extremely rare cases such as the seal of the confessional.
Fr. Julian Larrabee
Dear Fr. Larrabee
DeleteThank you for your comment. I know for a fact of the existence of the letter. It was spoken of by Fr. DePauw and witnessed by others. Let me be clear: I do NOT have possession of said letter. All of Fr. DePauw's belongings are legally owned by the CTM, Inc. I am upset (to say the least) as to what happened to Father's Chapel after his death in 2005 and the direction of the Board of Directors. I will not get into specifics.
While I have much written correspondence between myself and Fr. DePauw, he would never reduce to writing anything about Luciani (JPI). I did bring the subject up when talking to Fr in the 1990s. He said, "If only he had lived longer! We wouldn't be in the mess we're in today! The enemies of the Church MURDERED him." He then changed the subject.
Here are the exact words of Fr. DePauw and information made public by the CTM in September of 2013, over 8 years after Father's death:
"What did occur was the following as he himself stated on the 15th anniversary of the Pope’s death: “Well, I tell you one thing, if he had remained Pope, you wouldn’t have me here at the Chapel because with that beautiful official letter signed by the Secretary of State, also came an unofficial message that I better start packing my suitcase, that there was a job waiting for me in Rome, in the Vatican, to help Pope John Paul I bring the Truth back to the Church. Well, it wasn’t to be and the Lord, Who knows what He does, obviously wanted me to be in this Chapel … what was I going to do in Rome? Well let’s just forget it …” Pope John Paul I was not going to “make room” for traditionalist Catholics, but rather return the Church to the Truth of which Father would have played a significant role within the already existing jurisdictional structures of the Holy See. He was to have had the authority to ensure that return."
Make of that what you will, Fr. Larrabee. You gave three excellent reasons to publish the letter. I do not have it, and those who do possess the letter have not published it. you will get nowhere fast with the Board of Directors, and as a lawyer, I can tell you there is nothing that can be done legally to compel publication.
God Bless You Father Larrabee,
---Introibo
Dear Introibo, January 3, 2026 at 3:36 AM,
DeleteI do not hold that "sedeprivationism" is wrong because it is not true (begging the question), but because there are legitimate Catholic teachings, reasons and principles why it is false, some of which have been touched on in previous comments made by yours truly. The website, contra-thesis.com , treats of these. Far be it from me to tell people it cannot be true as if it were sinful. I would simply ask those who hold the Thesis to consider the Catholic evidence against it. If anything, it is "sedeprivationists" who, in practice, hold it as a dogma and self-evidently true, and some clergy impose it on the laity. A wise, elderly priest - now deceased - who studied the topic, told me that drowning people clutched at straws, understandably so, but the Thesis wasn't even a straw that could be grasped, but a heavy weight that dragged its holder down to the sea bed. I agree with that, but will not impose this way of expressing it on anyone. To my mind, poor Albino Luciani never was a Pope, not even a "material" one - and I won't oblige others to accept that position either.
May I conclude with something light-hearted? This is a true story.
At an important civic function in Boston, Cardinal Richard Cushing (yes, THAT Cushing, Feeneyites!) found himself next to a rabbi. The cardinal offered him some finger food:
- "Would you like some ham, Dr. Adler?"
- "Certainly - at Your Eminence's wedding."
In the Holy Name of Jesus,
Leo
Dear Introibo,
DeleteMy apologies: in my haste to submit the previous comment, I forgot to add the following:
Even on the basis of that now-famous letter to Fr. DePauw, JP1 would still have remained a questionable pope. Doubtful pope = Non-pope (Nope).
Would imposers and followers of the Thesis use said letter to declare, "Habemus Papam!"? I think not, but that is just my opinion.
All good wishes,
Leo
Introibo,
DeleteDid Fr. DePauw ever remark on the Fatima Secret released by the men in Rome in 2000?
Given Luciani's intent to restore the Church and his subsequent demise, perhaps he was on one level the 'bisgop in white' depicted in that vision.
Dear Leo, perhaps, in haste or otherwise, you miss the significance of this affair: imagine how better the world would be and how many countless souls might have been otherwise saved had Luciani anathematised, fully or in part, the Robber Council and it's poisonous fruits.
DeleteThere is, I think, in some Traditionalists (and I'm not charging Leo with this) a void of charity, an abundance of contempt and an ugly smugness towards the c. 1.6 billion Novo Ordists, not to mention the many more who have passed on, who are the first degree victims of the horrible events of the 67 years past. The Gospel has been, in effect, stolen from them and the world more broadly and it seems Luciani, in full valour, acted to stop and correct this. Seemingly, it cost him his life.
Dear Anonymous at January 4, 2026 at 12:33 PM,
DeleteYes, you make some valid points. If only Luciani had done as you said, but, to the outside world, he was not seen to have done so, and thus we are where we are.
I pray to God that I am not guilty of those sins and faults you describe (I have enough other ones!). I grieve for all the victims of The Great Apostasy, because I know many of them, and they are better people than I. I HATE the situation we're in; it is like a never-ending nightmare. I would rather be going to my parish church for daily Mass than wasting time with blog comments, but I am in this situation because of God's inscrutable Will and must work out my salvation accordingly.
Because of the heavy nature of the preceeding, allow me to conclude with something light; I am being eekumaniacal this time, because what follows is a PROTESTANT joke:
Observed on a notice board outside a church early one Sunday morning:
"The topic of today's sermon is: LOVE YOUR ENEMY."
The following Sunday morning, the message was:
"The topic of today's sermon is: DRINK IS YOUR ENEMY!"
I leave you with this advice: Do unto others as they would do unto you.
God bless you,
Leo
@anon12:33pm,
DeleteWhen you said that there is among some traditionalists a void of charity, an abundance of contempt, and an ugly smugness towards the 1.6 billion Novus Ordo’s, I couldn’t agree more. Like you, I do not believe that Leo is included here as he seems like a very kind person. But yes, I have met many traditionalists that I have had major problems with. The key word is “some” not “all”, but it is a problem that I have encountered many, many times, where I have a far better rapport with several Novus Ordo’s that I know, as opposed to some traditionalists that I know.
Thank you for commenting on that.
God bless,
-TradWarrior
TW & Leo: Thank you both for your replies to my remark (or remonstration); Deus benedicta te ; et Virgo custodiat te.
DeleteDear TradWarrior,
DeleteWhat an excellent response and one with which I am in total agreement. Your experiences with some traddies and Bogus Ordo victims (because that is what they are) mirror mine. I have no doubt that both you and Anonymous at 5:27 are charitable, considerate and pleasant fellow Catholics.
Dominus sit semper vobiscum,
Leo
@anon11:31
DeleteFr. DePauw said it was bunk. A cover-up.
God Bless,
---Introibo
In my experience novus ordos are meaner.
DeleteIn my post above, I made a glaring error myself! I stated: "Simple logic and reason are enough to refute the impossibility of such a situation from a Catholic perspective." It should have read: "Simple logic and reason are enough to refute the POSSIBILITY of such a situation from a Catholic perspective."
ReplyDeleteSorry!
Thank you Leo, ST and all who commented. It was very helpful. I often challenged CC regarding pope being head of church and other organizations. It made zero sense a pope can be part of condemned groups. They would just make me feel stupid for even bringing it up, quoting Thomas Aquinas or using kindergarten reasoning. Then I challenged their own positions such as taking the covid vaxx is always a mortal sin. So how can a pope tell the flock to get the vaxx which may lead to their own death. They would always say it does not meet the definition of Vatican I ex cathedra so pope not officially teaching. It is really scary how confused most are, especially those who want to stand with God, not against Him.
ReplyDeleteTradWarrior,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your thought-provoking post and for your efforts on it. My wife said she enjoyed reading it.
An early blessed Feast of the Circumcision to all. As we have been reminded by this article, let us reflect on this past year - the good and the bad - and resolve to do better in the next. Let us let go of our past failings and regrets, and focus on using whatever time left we have to please our Lord.
God Bless,
-S.T.
Seeking Truth,
DeleteThank you very much for the nice post. I am glad that you and your wife liked my article. I always enjoy reading your comments.
God bless you both and I wish you both a Happy New Year!
-TradWarrior
What about the Rod Serling series ‘The Twilight Zone’, from the late 1950s to early 1960s? I used to watch this show (reruns) during The New Year’s Eve Marathon, and at other times. I have viewed many dozens of episodes, some many dozens of times. I have since stopped and haven’t watch it in some years. The reason is that many of the episodes have moral lessons as part of the episode, but a substantial amount elements of magic, the occult, the bizarre, science fiction, and are probably not suitable for Catholics to watch. Does any one have any thoughts on this TV series?
ReplyDeleteNo idea about Twilight Zone... it depends on the individual episode, I guess?
Delete@anon4:39pm,
DeleteIt’s funny you brought this up because I usually catch an episode or two of “The Twilight Zone’ marathon on New Year’s Eve. The show is a mixed bag. There are some episodes that have really good morals to them. There are a couple of episodes that I really like. Then there are some episodes that are just so weird and “out there” that they are just way too bizarre for my liking. A lot of episodes on that show (quite a lot) dealt with aliens. I am not a believer in extraterrestrials (some people are) and these episodes never really fascinated me. There were a lot of episodes that dealt with aliens. Then there are some episodes that were just so stupid that they make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Episodes that border on the occult, yes I agree, they should be stayed away from. The show was never a favorite of mine but every now and again I may catch an episode or two. Episodes that stand out in terms of having a pretty good moral to them would be “Time Enough at Last” (with Burgess Meredith), “The Obsolete Man” (also with Burgess Meredith, and I always loved the moral to this story), “The Masks”, and “Eye of the Beholder.” These stories had good morals to them in my opinion. There were a few others too. Honestly, most of the series I could leave because it just didn’t fascinate me that much.
Many people have different preferences too. Some people enjoy a good mystery. Some people like comedies. Other people like an action story or a science fiction story. People have different tastes. As long as something is not so obviously sinful (in which case it needs to be avoided), I do not see anything seriously wrong with it. People need to use prudential judgement. Indulging in everything is not good or healthy and avoiding everything can lead to scrupulosity which is never good either. “In Medio Stat Veritas.”
I hope this answer helped.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
The Roald Dahl stories were superior, not relying on magic, occult or the 'supernatural' (using the term by its temporal meaning), but rather man's inherent wickedness and perverseness.
DeleteCharlie and the Chocolate Factory is his best book, would like to revisit the others.
DeletePoni: that was of his children's literature; read his short stories for adults.
DeleteSuch as?
DeleteThere are dozens of them, typically published in collections titled "Tales of the Unexpected". There are numerous publications.
DeleteDo a search on the world-wide inter-connected network (or, 'inter-net') and you will most surely find me them. There was also a tele-vision series produc d.
Dear TradWarrior,
ReplyDeleteYour answer certainly helped me, and I agree with your observations. Rod Serling was also the host of "Night Gallery" (if I remember correctly). Like "TheTwilight Zone", some stories were good, others, not so. Later series of TTZ were rubbish.
I do not believe there is intelligent life elsewhere in the vastness of space, but that is just my opinion. The Earth is the centre of the universe and God Himself dwelt among us. We are special. Some serious UFO researchers, even non-Catholic ones such as Jacques Vallée, hold that no beings have travelled vast distances across space to us, but that they are actually based here, living in another dimension. People laugh at that, saying it is science fiction bunkum, but Vallée maintains his position, saying it explains things better than any other theory. As Catholics, we shouldn't discount diabolical activity in the matter. It is curious indeed that some "aliens" have manifested negative reactions to the Name of Our Blessed Lord, for instance. Not surprisingly, the Novus Bogus authorities in the enemy-occupied Vatican go along with the extraterrestrial baloney. That should tell us a lot.
As always, I do like to read whatever you write. Keep up the good work!
May you have a blessed 2026,
Leo
Thanks for the response to my earlier question about ‘The Twilight Zone’. I saw the episodes you referenced many times, ‘Time Enough at Last’ being the best one in my opinion. Definitely many alien episodes, I do not believe in extraterrestrials or alien life anywhere in the Universe, it goes against Scripture and Catholic teaching. The Twilight Zone had many western themes too. The ones I used to watch most were the ones with a twist ending, ones with moral messages, and some of the dystopian ones. But now I just stay away from movies and TV shows. I mostly just watch Catholic content, current events, and try to find edifying material as much as possible. Happy New Year.
DeleteLeo,
DeleteThank you for the great comment and the kind words. I agree with what you said. Your comments have really added to the discussion on this blog. I wish you a Blessed 2026 as well.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
Leo,
DeleteThank you for the great comment and the kind words. I agree with what you said. Your comments have really added to the discussion on this blog. I wish you a Blessed 2026 as well.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
@anon9:24pm,
DeleteYou are welcome. I try to comment to whomever writes to me as best I can. I agree that the episode “Time Enough at Last” is a very good one. (Warning – spoilers ahead). What I like about that episode is the moral that encompasses the whole story. Henry Bemis is an avid bookworm. All he wants to do is read his books. His angry boss at work and his nagging wife cannot stand his reading. He escapes one day into a bank vault where he can read undisturbed. An H-bomb goes off and shakes the whole foundation. When he gets out of the vault, he sees that the world has been utterly destroyed in a nuclear apocalypse. The vault protected him. He has enough canned food to last him a lifetime. He despairs but then sees the ruins of a library with all of the books intact. It is just books and books everywhere. He is in Heaven because he no longer has any people on Earth to nag him and tell him what to do and he can now read all the books he wants for the remainder of his life. He reaches down to pick up a book and stumbles, and breaks his eyeglasses in the process. He cannot believe what just happened. He can no longer see. He is surrounded by what he loves most in life, only to never enjoy it as his eyeglasses have been broken. What he thought was Heaven on Earth has now become Hell on Earth for the remainder of his life.
The moral is very powerful: Be Careful What You Wish For.
I like “The Obsolete Man” because this story took place in the height of the Cold War. The totalitarian state wants nothing to do with God. The character Wordsworth is very clever in how he proves to the state that every man matters and that his belief and faith in God cannot be taken away by the godless state that has encompassed the Earth. The moral of that story was very good.
“The Masks” was very good and unfortunately is a scenario that exists a lot in this world when a parent dies. The character in the story is dying and he knows his greedy family members only want his money and could care less about him. It’s a sad story but the moral is very good.
“Eye of the Beholder” shows the age old question of what really is beauty. What many people consider ugly is actually very beautiful and it really is in the eye of the beholder.
There were a few other episodes that I thought had a good moral to them too. But like I said previously, most of the series was not my type of show. With a few notable exceptions, it was just too weird and “out there”. I did enjoy the moral of a few of the stories though. I don’t blame you for staying away from many movies and TV shows today. Finding good content to watch is VERY difficult these days!
God bless you. Happy New Year!
-TradWarrior
“Eye of Beholder” episode was a perversion of beauty vs ugliness. This was a bad message since the beautiful people were considered ugly and the deformed majority of this dystopian society were considered normal and beautiful. Physical abnormalities and deformities are not objectively beautiful. It’s like comparing a Fra Angelico painting to the splatter on your the canvas created by Jackson Pollock. It’s like comparing a Bach concerto to gangster rap. Serling was a Jew, later became a Unitarian, and he definitely was influenced by modernism and the counter cultural Revolution being stirred up in the 1960s with some of his productions. Beauty is pleasing to the senses and the intellect and the higher faculties are what discern the beauty. Beauty is intelligible and ordered. All things created by God are beautiful in design. Insects, not so much, but they are there so we can have a contrast in order to appreciate the truly magnificent.
DeleteDear TradWarrior,
DeleteThank you for going to the trouble of providing a description of some classic episodes of "The Twilight Zone". Reading it brought back memories I thought were long since gone, especially of "Eye of the Beholder". I seem to recall that the main character in the latter was Donna Douglas who played the rôle of Elly-Mae [spelling?] Clampett in "The Beverly Hillbillies". More power to your [figurative] pen!
May I conclude this post with some Catholic humour? If not, Introibo, feel free to delete what follows.
A priest calls on a parishioner whom he hasn't seen in quite a while.
- "Paddy, I haven't noticed you at Mass for quite some time".
- "I don't go to church any more, Father. There are too many hypocrites there".
- "Come back, anyway. There's always room for one more".
Many blessings to you and yours,
Leo
Insects are useful. Flies clean the world from corpses and their maggots can heal serious injuries. This not to defend Twilight Zone (because I am not familiar with the show), but rather, to defend the role of insects and akin creatures.
DeleteLeo,
DeleteThat was a good joke! Funny! Thanks for sharing.
-TradWarrior
@anon11:03am,
DeleteThank you for sharing. I see your points. I guess I always kind of took that episode slightly different. To the alien race of people, they were the normal looking ones. They were the majority. They would naturally see themselves as the beautiful ones. To the humans, they would look beautiful to us, but being in a world surrounded by the alien race, naturally they would see themselves as ugly, since they were the minority. In reality, they were of course very beautiful. I appreciate your input though. I agree with the last half of your post. That makes sense.
God bless,
-TradWarrior
@anon11:03
DeleteI agree with TradWarrior. I think there is another point: that what people find attractive in another varies greatly. I have a good friend "Bill" (not his real name) who is married to a woman that the great majority of men would find unattractive. In all honesty, I don't find her attractive at all. Bill is considered handsome. He loves his wife and they have been happily married for 40 years (they got married upon college graduation at age 22--they met at college). He has always been faithful and loves her very much--he thinks she is beautiful and who is anyone else to say differently?
Another point: true beauty comes from within. I once worked with a woman I was not attracted to at all. After getting to know her, she was kind, caring, interested in the things of God, and had a good sense of humor. I found myself attracted to her. Her looks hadn't changed, only my perception of her. Had we not been colleagues, I would have asked her out.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Introibo,
DeleteThank you for sharing that post. That was very good. Years ago, I was over a friend’s house. There was a movie that he just flipped on as we were talking and he was changing the channels. He said to me, “Wow, she’s beautiful, isn’t she?” I said, “Yes, she is.” A few minutes went by and then we realized something. He was attracted to the brunette in the movie and I was attracted to the blonde. Lol! We each thought that we were talking about the same person until the conversation went on a little bit more and we realized we each found a different female attractive in the movie.
And yes, you are correct. It is what is inside that is truly beautiful. External physical attraction (while important to some degree) will change and fade over time. What is on the inside is what matters most. Your example of the woman you worked with explains that excellently!
God bless,
-TradWarrior
I think you are missing the point. Of course people can find and be attracted to the inner beauty of a person. I would argue that for someone discerning the marriage vocation, that the virtues of that person would be the main traits to look for and physical attractiveness would not be a top criteria. We all know beauty and looks fade, and this is why wholesome traditionalists look for qualities of virtue when finding friends or a marriage partner. The point is that there is objective physical beauty in the world and there is objective ugliness. It’s not subjective. Chaos and disorder are ugly. Order and things pleasing to our highest faculties are beautiful. A person with no nose and three eyes that weighs 400 pounds is not beautiful. A painting of someone vomiting is ugly, a Fra Angelico is objectively beautiful. Sterile modern architecture that is often chaotic and disordered is unsightly and ugly. Medieval Catholic Cathedrals are beautiful. It’s not a matter of opinion. It’s part of being rational. Normal people feel repulsed by the examples I have given when it comes to the ugly. They recognize these hideous things immediately. We are attracted to the ordered, the true, the good, not the disordered and deformed. When it comes to people, yes a person might be physically ugly, that doesn’t mean they are not still designed and made by God for a purpose and who have a soul and might be virtuous. But there are physically ugly people in the world, and we recognize this when we see it. It doesn’t mean we should be mean to them or judge physical traits they can’t control. But it’s a fact. The point is objective beauty vs. subjective beauty. There can be degrees of beauty but we know what is inherently beautiful and what is ugly.
DeleteWith reference to the discussion on beauty/ugliness, this might be of interest:
Deletehttps://www.traditioninaction.org/SOD/j131sdGermanineCousin_6-15.htm
Who was beautiful in the sight of God, His Angels and Saints here?
Leo
@anon11:12
DeleteI understand your point, but I don't believe the Twilight Zone episode was denying objective beauty. While I'm not an "aesthetic relativist," there are not always clear-cut answers. I agree with mush of what you wrote. However, consider the question: "Are African-American women objectively beautiful"? I have a friend who married a black woman. I, personally, do not find African-American women physically attractive. In this case, beauty IS in the eye of the beholder. I think the Twilight Zone episode was focusing on things like that, in my opinion.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Hi Introibo,
DeleteI echo everything that you said. I also do not deny objective truth, beauty, and goodness. But some things in life are not clear-cut answers, as you mentioned. Your example of a friend who married an African American woman is similar to the example I mentioned in my reply above of the brunette vs. the blonde. Your response is spot on in my opinion.
God bless you,
-TradWarrior
The problem is that they use a group of people in this twilight zone episode that are all objectively ugly. Not unattractive, but hideously deformed, with twisted mouths, gargantuan nostrils, and other very noticeable facial abnormalities and then contrast that with an objectively attractive women and handsome man, and say that the deformed are beautiful and the proportioned and ordered features are ugly. It’s like saying Novus Ordo cube Church with scraps of metal hanging off the building “beauty”, and medieval Church built in 12th century Italy “ugly”, we know that’s not true. I understand what you are saying but that episode certainly pushes relativism, modernism, and acceptance of the disordered.
DeleteIs this correct . All valid cardinals appointed by Pope Pius XI1 are now dead. This would mean the material Pope theory would not be possible. Do you think that bishop Guerard des Laurier's thoughts were when he wrote this thesis that within a few years things would turn around?
ReplyDeleteCan you see the SSPX having new bishops this year. Do you folk think many of their followers would go back to the FSSP or other "approved" groups.
May all have a blessed 2026.
Paul
Dear Paul,
DeleteIf I understand correctly, the Thesis holds that the bogus popes (Nopes) are given "supplied jurisdiction" to appoint cardinals (even if said boys in red are notorious heretics and therefore not even Catholics) to elect a future Nope who renounces The Great Apostasy and (miraculously!) becomes an actual Pope! The Thesis, therefore, has an unlimited shelf life. Needless to say, it is all bunkum.
Anonymous, January 1, 2026 at 5:49 PM sums it up. He is correct in what he says about the SSPX and FSSP. The quote from Fr. Faber hits the nail on the head. He was certainly writing for our times!
Best wishes
Leo
Dear Paul, I personally think the Thesis is not feasible and I am weary following any priest who proclaims it. Scary times. This is not the only thing that deters me either. SSPX and FSSP are novus ordo in my opinion. I want nothing to do with them.
ReplyDelete"We must remember that if all the manifestly good men were on one side and all the manifestly bad men on the other, there would be no danger of anyone, least of all the elect, being deceived by lying wonders. It is the good men, good once, we must hope good still, who are to do the work of Anti-Christ and so sadly to crucify the Lord afresh…. Bear in mind this feature of the last days, that this deceitfulness arises from good men being on the wrong side."
--Fr. Frederick Faber, Sermon for Pentecost Sunday, 1861
Leo
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I have noted how often the folk in the pews at the SSPX look confused when asked hard questions regarding their position. Do they really think homo Prevost is going to approve of bishops for them. They are in a dreamworld. Did you ever attend their Msses before becoming a sede
Paul?
Dear Paul,
DeleteThe short answer to your question: yes.
I stopped having anything to do with the SSPX years ago, apart from attending Requiems. Friendships were strained, and even lost, as a result. One of the SSPX priests saw fit to warn his followers, saying not to have any discussions with me, because I would lead them astray. I had no idea I could be so persuasive! It seems he implicitly acknowledged the logic behind the sedevacantist position.
It looks as if Introibo has allowed Catholic humour on his blog; so, here goes:
A priest is delivering an impassioned sermon about the pains of Hell, where, among other things, there would be gnashing of teeth. An elderly woman, close to the pulpit, mumbles: "Father, I don't have any teeth". He thunders back: "Teeth will be provided!".
Greetings,
Leo
Leo,
DeleteThanks for sharing the jokes. We've enjoyed them, especially the one about the teacher and the whale.
-S.T.
Dear S.T.,
DeleteI don't remember posting a joke about the teacher and the whale. Am I losing it?
Puzzled,
Leo
Leo,
DeleteNo, evidently I am. Sorry for the confusion. The joke about the teacher and the story of Jonah and the whale was from an anonymous poster posted on Introibo's recent article on the topic.
-S.T.
Haha re teeth! I know a woman with no teeth. She is only one I helped escape novus disordo but she still clings to NO deceptions like divine mercy and Medjugorje but at least does not go near those churches anymore. Meanwhile another stolen church burned. People cannot see He destroys these places of sacrilege!
ReplyDeleteDo you know which priests can apply the Dominican and Crosier indulgences for the Rosary currently?
ReplyDelete@anon10:13
DeleteUnfortunately, I do not. If anyone does, please comment.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Because it was said that Dominican indulgences can only be blessed by Dominican priests, and Crosier indulgences by Holy Cross Fathers. Idk, I was hoping if Traditionalist priests could bless Rosaries and attach these specific indulgences to them?
DeleteAlso Introibo - if you don't mind me asking, who blessed your Rosary and all? Was it Fr. DePauw or another?
DeleteIs it correct the SSPX is following the Novus Ordo Holy Days of Obligation ?
ReplyDelete@anon4:58
DeleteI don't know. In the SSPX things are different in different countries. I don't know if it is used or if they have an "official position." If anyone knows, please comment.
God Bless,
---Introibo