Is Pope Leo XIV reaking was Pope Francis? There's a subtle cue that he might just be doing that with regard to one of Francis's most controversial documents. Also, is Pride Month on the decline?
Hopeful signs that might be the case. This and more in today's Forward Boldly. Hello and welcome to Forward Boldly.
I'm Christine Niles. First of all, happy month of the Sacred Heart. June is the month of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
It is not Pride Month. It's not love is love month. It is the month of humility.
The humility embodied and exemplified in the Sacred Heart of Jesus. That love poured out to humankind through his most Sacred Heart. So if you have a Sacred Heart image, hang it up in your home.
Better yet, if you have a Sacred Heart banner or flag, hang it out in your yard. Let the world know that you honor our Lord this month of June, and consider making acts of reparation to the Sacred Heart. For all the offenses and there are many, many offenses committed against him specifically, especially in this month.
What did he tell Saint Margaret Mary Alcock when he appeared to her with his heart burning on fire with love? He said, behold the heart which has so loved men that it has spared nothing even to exhausting and consuming itself in order to testify to its love. And in return I receive from the greater part only in gratitude, by their irreverence and sacrilege, and by the coldness and contempt they have for me in this sacrament of love.
Our Lord's heart is burning with love for us. It's on fire with an all consuming love for us. And most of the world doesn't know.
Most of the world doesn't understand, and a lot don't even care. So make reparation. Love him back.
Go spend time in adoration. In prayer. If you don't have an adoration chapel, then sit in front of the Blessed Sacrament.
Love Christ. Go to mass as often as possible. Love him in the way you treat your spouse and the way you treat your children, your family, friends, neighbors in the way you treat strangers, including the rude strangers.
Love him to showing acts of kindness, patience, humility, meekness, and you know that you can demonstrate that too on social media. In fact, social media is the perfect opportunity to make reparation to the heart of Jesus because, as you know, on social media, especially these anonymous accounts, people can be really rude. You know, they can say things that they would never dare say to you in person.
They'll just say whatever they want. Extremely rude. And these are perfect opportunities for you to practice the meekness and humility of Christ for you, not to lash back with the same rudeness or meanness, in some cases cruelty, but instead to be meek and humble of heart.
And even better, pray. Pray for these individuals. That is the path on which sanctity lies.
As the saints have taught us. When people inter us a small injury or a grave injury, if we can offer up that injury not just for souls in general, but for the one who injured us. That is a path to sanctity.
And you see that over and over and over again in the lives of the saints. This is what they did. They suffered humiliations and injuries and harms from other people.
And what would they do? They would pray. They would offer up that humiliation, that suffering, that harm for the sake of the one who caused them harm.
Perfect example of this. I've done has shown her before is Saint Maria Goretti. She was literally.
She killed. She was killed, by, who is now a blessed Alessandra. Sir Anelli.
Incredible story. Go listen to that if you haven't. Because it's incredible.
Is not just the life of Saint Mary Goretti. Everybody knows about that. Do you know about what happened to blessed Alessandra Simonelli?
Do you know how Saint Mary greatest mother responded? She is a saint, even though she's not officially canonized. She is a saint in heaven, I am convinced, because of the way that she embraced the murderer of her daughter.
But that I've already done shows on that incredible story. But Saint Mary Goretti offered up her terrible sufferings from all the knife wounds inflicted on her by her murderer. For his salvation, she offered it up as she was dying.
She dies. And what happens? All the suffering she offered up for him, obtained for him the grace of conversion and now sainthood.
He's a blessed in heaven. He actually answers prayers from heaven. Absolutely amazing.
That is what the Sacred Heart of Jesus can accomplish in the hearts of those willing to embrace him, love him truly, and follow his example of loving those who have harmed you. And that is what the month of June. The Sacred Heart really embodies.
That incredible supernatural love. Now, turning to our main topic. Something very interesting that I noticed yesterday Sunday that anyone would have missed if they just blink their eyes.
It was subtle. It was so subtle that, like I said, if you blinked, your eyes would have missed it. It was subtle, but significant.
I believe so on June 1st, when the world is celebrating Gay Pride Month, Pope Leo devoted his homily during Sunday Mass, which was spoken on the Jubilee for families, children, grandparents and the elderly. He devoted his homily to marriage. Marriage between a man and a woman.
Because there is no other marriage other than between a man and a woman. So that is the first thing that on the very first of the month of June, that is what he devoted his homily to. But even more significant in that homily, I think, is what appears to be a slight break with Pope Francis specifically with the apostolic exhortation Amorth.
Let's Letizia. How so? Now it comes down to a single phrase in Leo's Sunday homily.
Quote marriage is not an ideal, but the canon of true love between a man and a woman. Total, faithful, fruitful love. Marriage is not an ideal, but the canon meaning the standard, the criterion of true love between a man and a woman, total, faithful, fruitful love.
In other words, marriage is not some pie in the sky lofty ideal that some of us can only hope to grasp, but is very difficult to attain. Father Pope Leo saying marriage is the standard. It's the standard of true love between a man and a woman.
I don't know if many of you know this, but this concept of marriage as being an ideal was actually debated during the synod discussions that led up to Amores Letizia, as well as afterwards. So this line by Pope Leo is not insignificant. It means something in the context of all that debate.
And he was fully aware, I am sure, of that debate. But we're going to come back to this in just a little bit. Now, to be clear, of course, Pope Leo has praised Pope Francis many times.
He's cited his works, he's quoted him, and that is to be expected. With popes. They will never trash her predecessor, no matter what they personally think of their predecessor.
Truly popes, out of respect and reverence, will simply never criticize their predecessor or not publicly. They will praise their predecessors. So you saw Pope Saint John Paul the Second praising Pope John Paul the first.
Of course, he was only on the throne for 33 days. Benedict praised John Paul the second, Francis praised Benedict, and of course Leo praises Francis. Absolutely normal and to be expected.
But like I said, pay attention to what Leo said in a Sunday homily as he is reaffirming the goodness of marriage between a man and a woman, saying that, quote, today's world needs the marriage covenant in order to know and accept God's love and to defeat, thanks to its unifying and reconciling power, the forces that break down relationships and societies, the forces that break down relationships and societies. What are those forces? Well, the forces that are in favor of non marriage forces in favor of breaking apart true marriage and the family.
And he makes clear he's always made clear for years as cardinal. As bishop is priest, the true marriage is only between a man and a woman. But this particular that's a finger in the eye to the message of Pride Month, which claims, of course, that marriage can be between two people of the same sex.
It cannot. That's not true marriage. But here, here really is the significant bit.
So a more, of course, is the post a notable apostolic exhortation that was released in 2016 after the Synod. It was the one that caused so much controversy. And there were other exhortations that caused controversy.
But this one caused major controversy in 2016. Because of that controversial little footnote 351 making it appear to open the door to Holy Communion for divorced and remarried couples who are objectively living in the state of adultery. That was the exhortation that inspired four cardinals to submit their dubia to Pope Francis.
Remember the dubia? Which Pope Francis basically ignored? You had Cardinals Carla Cafaro, Raymond Burke, Walter Van Mueller, Joakim Meissner.
Those were the four cardinals. Now, two of them have since gone on to their award. Cafaro and Meissner.
But this is what that controversial footnote 351 said essentially that in certain cases of divorced and remarried, this can include the help of the sacraments, meaning confession and Eucharist. Why? Because he specifically mentions confession and the Holy Eucharist in footnote 351.
So much controversy and confusion ensued because of that little footnote was even bishops and cardinals confused. It wasn't just laity. Bishops and cardinals were confused.
They didn't quite know how to implement a more Letizia in their diocese. And please note that you never heard a single word about Bishop Prevost implementing a more Letizia in his diocese, but there were some that were very loud about it very much. We have to start giving communion now.
We have to start being more open to giving communion to those in irregular unions. But because of all this confusion, even among our highest ranked clergy, the cardinals felt that they had to submit these dubia. These questions to Pope Francis.
That could easily be answered by a simple yes or no, because what a Letizia said seemed, it seemed to contradict what Pope Saint John Paul the Second had already set forth in familiarity, specifically section 84, which laid down three conditions for the admittance to Holy Communion of those living in a, quote, remarriage. So these were the three conditions the persons concerned could not separate without committing new injustices. For instance, let's say they've got young children and they're both responsible for taking care of the upbringing of their children, so they simply cannot just divorce and separate because that would cause greater injustices.
A second condition is they take upon themselves. And this is a very key. They take upon themselves the commitment to live according to the truth of their situation, that is, to cease living together as if they were husband and wife, basically abstaining from sex.
That's what that means. No sex. Because this is an objectively adulterous union.
It's not marriage. Third condition they avoid giving scandal meaning. They avoid giving the appearance of sin so as to avoid the danger of leading others into sin.
Because even though you might privately be leading a life, you know, abstaining from sex, if you're giving the impression to the public and everybody else that you're not, that can lead to scandal. That could lead to, you know, further sin. So those are the three conditions.
And the, the defenders of Letizia. And I think imbecility to itself lays this out in kind of a nuanced way, which did require further clarity, quite frankly, it did. Which is why the Cardinals submitted the dubia.
But a morsel, a teaser, a tease, a morsel. Tita basically says that we need to take a pastoral approach to divorce and remarriage. Now, some may differ.
Some may think this is actually not pastoral. It's very harmful. But a more or less Tita believes this, laying out a more pastoral approach to the to those who are in divorced and remarried relationships.
So that means that in some cases, there might be mitigating circumstances that decrease the culpability of a person living in an objectively sinful union. So what does that mean? So remember, for mortal sin to be mortal, there has to be not only grave matter, meaning the objectively sinful act, but there has to be full knowledge and deliberate consent.
You have to have full knowledge and deliberate consent. So you have all those, then it's a mortal sin. But if you have the objectively sinful act without full knowledge, without consent, then while the matter itself remains grave, it isn't necessarily mortally sinful.
So a more so is basically saying that in some cases of divorce and remarriage, circumstances might exist where, of course, you have the objectively sinful act, meaning there's sex in an adulterous union, but the knowledge may be lacking the consent. The full consent may be lacking, thus making it possible on a case by case basis with pastoral discernment, that the person might be able to have confession and might even receive Holy Communion. So I know, I know, I know, it's highly nuanced and it's and that's quite frankly, it's not really the way most people took a most Letizia, including some bishops.
A lot of them took it as a just blanket permission to start opening up communion to anyone and everyone in objectively sinful relationships. But, you know, canon, as Doctor Ed Peters made a really important note at the time when a morse letter was released, he said, quote, Holy Communion is to be withheld from divorced and remarried Catholics in virtue of canon 915, which does not require Catholic ministers to read the souls of would be communicants, but rather directs ministers to withhold Holy Communion from those who, as an external and observable matter, obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin. That's canon 915.
Now remember, Pope Leo, this is an important point. Pope Leo is a canon ist. He has a degree in canon law, and as Doctor Peters notes, canon law is clear on this point.
You don't have to look into the souls of an individual. You'll have to go through this whole pastoral discernment process. If they're living in an objectively, manifestly sinful union, you are to deny them Holy Communion.
And quite frankly, it was disappointing to me and many others that Pope Francis never bothered to respond directly to the four cardinals and their dubia because they submitted them respectfully. If you haven't read them, go read them again. These cardinals sought clarity, and they were the model of respect and the way that they sought it.
And the Vicar of Christ never gave them answers, at least not directly. Now, there was a response to the Czech Conference of Bishops in 2023 with regard to this question of whether we can give communion to the divorced and remarried. I mean, it only took them seven years to answer, which took seven years.
After all the confusion and frustration caused by this ambiguity and highly nuanced position of Maurice Letizia. Seven years. Why didn't the Vatican respond to the dubia immediately?
The same exact response they gave the Czech bishops, which was a reaffirmation that divorced and remarried, cannot receive communion unless they pledge to lead lives of chastity, but that Pope Francis recognizes that in some cases there may be difficulties in living that out. So there may it may call for some pastoral discernment. But back to this notion of marriage being an ideal.
In 2018, Cardinal Burke gave an interview to Catholic World Report, clearing up confusion caused by a Letizia, and he spoke about different interpretations of a mortality among clergy. But then he said this. Now listen closely.
Quote I suppose it was expressed in a way that may be helpful in understanding this problem of interpretation when, during the first session of the most recent Synod of Bishops on the family in which I took part, one prominent cardinal said that marriage is an ideal. We cannot hold people to the ideal. The truth of the matter is marriage is not an ideal.
It is a reality. It is a gift of divine grace to live in the love of the Holy Trinity and a faithful, indissoluble, life giving love. And therefore we are held those who enter into marriage, those who confer the sacrament of marriage on each other, are held to live in fidelity to that grace, even to a heroic degree.
Marriage is not an ideal father. Gerald Murray, the New York priest who frequently offers papal commentary with Raymond Arroyo, also explicitly rejected the concept of marriage as an ideal. In a 2018 article in The Catholic saying he opened his article with this the church has always taught that marriage is intrinsically indissoluble by the express will of God, that the unbreakable unity of marriage is not an ideal in the sense of an as yet unattainable goal towards which married couples strive, but rather it is the very reality, the very nature of marriage.
The church teaches that fidelity to marriage vows is not merely something that you should strive for. In seeking to arrive at the ideal of marriage, but rather is a serious obligation inherent in the nature of marriage, going on to say, ever since the publication of A more Letizia, doubts have been cast upon the necessity of adhering to this understanding of marriage. And he was actually criticizing Cardinal Blase, who was referring to marriage as an ideal, saying the voice of conscience could very well affirm the necessity of living at some distance from the church's understanding of the ideal, while nevertheless calling a person to new stages of growth and to new decisions which can enable the ideal to be more fully realized.
And here comes the apparent break between Leo and Francis and most. Letizia refers to marriage as an ideal repeatedly. In fact, the word ideal is mentioned 22 times in a more Letizia, and most of those times are in reference to marriage as an ideal, as the lofty ideal.
It's way up there, held up by the church, is what we ought to strive after. But here's a point of the more Letizia. Not everyone lives up to that ideal.
Many people don't. So how do we minister to those unions that don't live up to this lofty ideal of marriage? This is one more just an example of more, Letizia says.
Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the gospel. It can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what, for now, is the most generous response which can be given to God and come to see with a certain moral security, that it is what God Himself is asking? I mean the concrete complexity of one's limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal.
So do you see what they're trying to say here? They're trying to say that these people living in irregular unions, whatever those unions might be, divorced from marriage, cohabitation, same sex unions, whatever, it's the best that a person can give in that moment. And maybe that's all that God is asking from them in that moment.
It's not the ideal marriage for an man and a woman, but it's the most generous offer they can give at the moment. And maybe that's what God is asking of them in that moment. It's kind of controversial.
Elsewhere, in a more Letizia quote, without detracting from the evangelical ideal, there's a need to accompany with mercy and patience the eventual stages of personal growth as these progressively appear. Now, lots of other examples of using the word ideal in reference to marriage. Like I mentioned, a more Letizia is all about a more pastoral approach to those in objectively sinful unions.
Now, nothing wrong in and of itself was being pastoral, of course. I mean all priests, all clergy should be pastoral. But here's the problem.
I think there are a lot of divorced married couples who are not even aware that they're living in sin, not even aware of it, or if they are aware. You know, they don't know that they're not supposed to be receiving Holy Communion. So maybe these couples are, you know, divorced, remarried.
They know it's not what the church allows, but they march up to receive Holy Communion because they're not aware that they're not supposed to. How long is your confession line compared to the communion line? Do a comparison.
How long? Usually handful of people confession, if any at all. Whole army marching on to receive communion.
Many Catholics living in objectively sinful unions are poorly categorized. They have not been taught that this is wrong, or if they do know what's wrong, they're unaware that they actually can't receive Holy Communion in the state of mortal sin. That's a very clear teaching of the church.
You cannot receive Holy Communion in the state of mortal sin. You have to be in good standing in the church. Scripture makes it clear that when you eat and drink unworthily, you bring judgment upon yourself.
You bring damnation upon yourself. You are not allowed. Now here are some comments that people didn't really report on.
Not too much. I mean, people sort of didn't realize that Pope Francis actually did seem to clarify this point in 2016, before he actually issued a mortal, Letizia, he was on the papal airplane to Rome, and in response to a question by media, he said that Holy Communion is the last step in full integration into the church by the divorced remarried. But it's not necessary.
This is what he said, quote, I know married Catholics in a second union who go to church, who go to church once or twice a year and say, I want communion. As if joining in communion were an award. It's a work towards integration.
All doors are open, but we cannot say from here on they can have communion. This would be an injury also to marriage to the couple, because it wouldn't allow them to proceed on this path of integration. So he seems pretty clear.
Their question is why they would do that. Clear in a more Leticia. Why?
Any case, returning to my point, Pope Leo explicitly contradicted a more Letizia in a Sunday homily when he said, quote, marriage is not an ideal, but the canon of true love between a man and a woman. Total, faithful, fruitful love. Like I said, he directly contradicts immortality too.
And what it says, referring to marriage numerous times as an ideal. It's in the official Italian translation with the word ideal. It's in the official English translation.
Pope Leo says marriage is in fact not an ideal, but the canon, the standard, the principle, the criterion of true love between a man and a woman. Then he goes on to describe married love as total, faithful and fruitful. And that's actually a citation to what Paul the 60s Humanae Vitae.
So even though a Maltese, he refers to marriage numerous times, it's certainly something Pope could have cited in this homily on marriage and family. He chose to cite instead Humanae vitae. Doctor Jeffrey Mirus of Catholic Culture commented on the notion of marriage as an ideal.
Back in 2016, he wrote quote, but the Pope must also know from the controversies of the 70s and 80s that an emphasis on the ideal can often be taken to mean not that one understanding of marriage is right and others are wrong, or that one understanding of marriage is good and others are bad, but that one understanding of marriage is ideal, yet others are also acceptable and good. Mirus goes on to clarify that that's not the argument contained in Malta, but its language certainly could lend to confusion, and it did lend to confusion. So I'm not stating this as a definite break between Pope Leo and Francis, and to temper expectations just a little bit.
Leo did quote a Mors Letizia in his Monday message that a cast of lady family in life, but this was the section of the actually quoted quote. It is true that families today have many problems, but quote, the gospel of the family also nourishes seeds. They're still waiting to grow and serves as the basis for caring for those plants that are wilting and must not be neglected.
So there's nothing particularly controversial in that phrase from a more Letizia just restating basic church teaching. But like I said, I found this tidbit interesting. I believe it's significant, especially in the context of the debate swirling at the time, as well as in previous decades about marriage being an ideal versus a reality or a standard.
Now, this might not be good enough for some of you. You know, judging by some of the comments, it's not, you know, some of you wants you want to see Pope Leo take a slash and burn approach to his predecessor and reverse this and rebuke that and burn this down and cut this off. But as I've said before, Pope Leo just doesn't strike me as that sort of person.
From those who know him, they say he's thoughtful, he's quiet. He's a man of few words. He listens.
He asks, intelligent questions. He proceeds carefully and methodically. He's not a fly by the seat of your pants kind of man.
Neither does he seem short tempered or arbitrary. And from what many have said, he's humble. He's kind.
He's not going to humiliate or embarrass people when implementing changes, including his predecessor. He's not going to do that. Remember, he's a canonized.
He's methodical, thoughtful. He knows the law. So what I think is that we can expect incremental changes, slow changes, little things here and there, but changes that signify that are significant, that will show respect for his predecessor while charting his own path.
And we already saw that, saw him breaking with Francis and charting his own path from the very first moment he stepped out onto the loggia. He didn't choose the name Francis. The second, he didn't.
As to the papal, Lozada and other traditional papal attire, and he's doing things in the liturgy that his predecessor never did. For instance, chanting the Regina Charlie. That's a weekly occurrence now.
Now, I know, Pope Francis said the Regina Charlie. Pope Leo is chanting it. He's also encouraging crowds to chant the patron austere, absolutely beautiful.
And recall when he held his first meeting with the Cardinals just a couple of days after the election, this so began his address. He said this let us pray together in Latin the Our Father in the Hail Mary. He led all the cardinals in praying the Our Father in the Hail Mary in Latin.
And it's such that the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music has rolled out a new series titled Let's Sing with the Pope. It's rolling out new videos every week, and they're wonderful. So in light of all this, some are saying he's laying the groundwork for something.
Not sure what yet, but he's laying the groundwork for something he's clearly wanting to expose the church, the laity to the beauties of Latin chant. Another thing that I think is very interesting the return of bowing to the pontiff. You can see it here.
And this didn't happen as far as I know, during the pontificate of Francis, he didn't want that. He didn't want that. But here it is, returning under Pope Leo.
Now, whether Pope Leo asked for its return or whether people just decided, you know what, we're going to do this. And Pope Leo is not objecting to it, but it is a return to the tradition, something else that people have noticed. People can freely kiss the fisherman's ring.
They can kneel and kiss a fisherman's ring as a sign of reverence for the sacred office of the Pope. As we know, Pope Francis did not like that he would not allow people to kiss the papal ring. In fact, there is a what I consider a pretty tragic video of him yanking his hand away from all these individuals, these Catholics wishing to come up and show an act of reverence to the Sacred Office of the pontiff, any denying them that ability.
And now some people have said, oh, this is just funny. I didn't find it funny at all. I found it heartbreaking and I found it humiliating for the people coming up wishing to show an act of reverence.
Utterly humiliating. I couldn't believe it when I saw this. It was just shocking.
So it's a wonderful thing to see that Pope Leo understands that this is not a signification of his pride. In his pomp as the Vicar of Christ. It's a gesture of reverence towards the Sacred Office.
It's a gesture of reverence, of honor. And it's something that people love to show him. And he's giving them that chance in humility.
He's giving them that chance. It's a wonderful thing to see. So again, another break from his predecessor.
But isn't it ironic that while our Holy Father is reintroducing the beauty of Latin chant to his prayers and liturgies, encouraging the faithful to learn and to chant along that the Bishop of Charlotte, North Carolina, is trying to get rid of all the Latin in the mass. Now, I'm sure you've all heard about the leaked draft document by Bishop Martin. A draft that the pillar reports is being shelved for now.
But reading through it, my jaw was on the floor. It was on the floor repeatedly. I could not believe what I was reading because this wasn't about implementation of traditional custodians.
No, no, this goes much farther than that much, much, much farther. I mean, priest, I mean, reading commentary from priests were not trans at all, but they're reading through this. They're like, this is tyrannical.
This goes just beyond anything that bishops would normally do, because not only does it discourage light in the liturgy, which is, by the way, a direct contradiction of Vatican Two's sacrosanct tomb, Concilium, it also discourages priests from going traditional vestments or even praying prayers, while vesting, and the draft actually orders women who veil during mass ivill during mass, by the way, that they are forbidden from wearing veils if their electors or otherwise occupied on the altar during mass forbids them. Can anyone say micro-management? He even discourages people from praying the Saint Michael prayer at the end of mass, if you want.
If you have watched my episodes, you know that I have strongly encouraged pastors to start praying the Saint Michael prayer after mass if they are not. This was a pair composed by Pope Leo the 13th after a terrifying vision he had between Satan and God. I spoke about this in a prior episode of Pope Leo the Saint.
Michael prayer is a powerful prayer of spiritual warfare because, as we know, Saint Michael is the enemy of Lucifer. He is the one who cast Lucifer and a third of the angels out of the sky into hell. But here's but Bishop martin's reasoning for discouraging the Saint Michael prayer quote while the intention to defeat the power of Satan and other evil spirits is commendable, its recitation at the end of mass can lead to the unfortunate doubt that the Eucharistic liturgy is somehow insufficient to bring about the scattering of evil and motivation to do good.
In all my years of praying the Saint Michael prayer after mass, I have never once thought the Eucharistic liturgy was insufficient to scatter evil or motivate us to do good. Not once. In fact, I cannot even imagine anyone on earth coming away from mass thinking that because they prayed the Saint Michael prayer, I mean honest to goodness.
This is just absurd on the part of the bishop. I don't say that lightly. I don't throw those things around.
It is absurd, you know? And with all due respect, I don't wish to add to the pile on because he is really in the spotlight these days. But this is just absurd reasoning.
It makes no sense whatsoever. And because it makes no sense, I get the feeling he just making it up and he's just fundamentally hostile towards anything that smacks of tradition and therefore just he just wants to do away with it, using whatever absurd reasons. And you know what else he does?
In that leaked draft document, he dismissed the wearing of the fiddle back chasuble, which is the traditional beautiful chasuble, calling them overly ornate vestments. They put more focus on the ministers than the Eucharist. That's quite the judgment, really.
I encourage him to go visit the rectory of Saint John Vianney in the French town of Alps. I made a pilgrimage there years ago, and the first thing you notice when you walk into that rectory is just how poor it is. Incredibly poor, because Saint John Vianney, who is the patron saint of all parish priest because of his profound holiness, he spent literally hours and hours and hours in the confessional every single day.
He was called a wonder worker and he could read hearts and souls. This is the model parish priest. He chose to live in complete and abject poverty.
That's the first thing you'll notice when you're walking through that rectory in the little of. But what else stands out? There is a glass cabinet where his vestments are hanging on display, and you can see them, and they are so beautiful, beautiful French brocade, gold, absolutely beautiful.
And it contrasts with the poverty of this little rectory. You know, he he slept on a straw mat on the floor to do penance for sinners. He had a bed.
He slept on a straw mat on the hard stone floor in penance for sinners. But he wore the most beautiful, ornate vestments during mass. Why?
Was it because he was proud and wanted to show off and be the center of attention? Of course not. He specifically said it was because it was fitting to the Holy Sacrifice of the mass.
The liturgy, heaven on earth, where our Lord himself comes down and the priest is an altar. Christians, another Christ. It was fitting for the glory of what was happening in the Holy Sacrifice of the mass.
And that is why he wore the most beautiful and ornate vestments. And I would like Bishop Michael Martin to go take a look. You can probably find it online, and then tell me again that this ornate vestments are all about the minister wanting to draw attention to himself.
Bishop Martin might also want to take a look at what Pope Leo was wearing, Yes. Who wears ornate vestments for mass? Are you Bishop Martin?
Impugning the motives of our Holy Father. But your dismissive attitude towards visual vestments. Are you insulting him and claiming that he cares only about himself and focus on himself?
Quite frankly, I wonder if Bishop Martin is projecting. Anyway, some people are unhappy that the Pope has so far remained silent about Bishop Martin, saying all his silence speaks volumes. Why has he said anything?
Why hasn't done anything? This controversy is at most a couple weeks in the making. If you know how Rome works.
Rome is notoriously slow. Rome is notoriously slow on a lot of matters. They can take years to deliberate on things, and also their first course of action is almost always behind the scenes privately, because that's sort of the charitable way to do it.
Right? I mean, Scripture even says, if you see a brother sinning, go privately to him. And so that's the way that the Vatican usually chooses to respond, is they try to, resolve things privately behind the scenes.
So I am certain one, the Pope is very aware of what's going on in the Charlotte diocese because people have appealed to him. They have appealed to Rome. But I am also certain that he is taking steps behind the scenes.
We don't know what those steps are. We don't know if when they'll be made public. We're not entirely sure, but I do not think he's just sitting back saying and doing nothing at all.
But slightly switching topics back to Pride Month, some hopeful news. Target. Remember how heavily target used to promote pride?
They promoted pride gear and pride merchandise for kids. All of that. And I actually boycotted target for many years because of this.
But now it is apparently pivoting away from promoting pride and back to promoting more traditional values. There are a lot of people out there saying that they're going to their local target stores, and they're not seeing pride merchandise anywhere. Take a look at this tweet.
This woman, Caitlin Francis, she posted a picture my southern California target June 1st, 2024 versus target June 5th, 2025. Quite a remarkable difference. This is what I want you to do.
Please go to your local target store and see if you spot any pride gear. You don't have to buy anything there. If you're boycotting it, you have to buy anything.
Just go and see, walk around and see. Do you see any pride gear anywhere? And please let me know in the comments beneath this video what you find out, because I would be interested to see just how many target stores across the nation are discontinuing or downplaying pride.
If you go to the website target. com, you actually do not see pride at the top of the page. Are you, as you used to see in prior years?
In fact, you're seeing last time I checked a father and son wearing a USA sweater with American flag. I mean, that's pretty traditional. That's pretty conservative.
You have to actually scroll pretty far down the page to see any mention of pride at all, and it's actually pretty understated. So if you see no pride merchandise in your local target, leave a comment under this Neath this video and I also encourage you email or write. The manager of your local targets were saying thank you, thank you because you are not promoting pride.
I will shop here again or I will encourage other people to shop here again. Let them know that they need to hear from you. Because these people care about business, they care about making money.
And if they know that I'm going to lose money, then why push this LGBT garbage? Then they're going to be less likely to push it. So make your voices heard.
Do it in a respectful way, but let them know. Meanwhile, Sesame Street, on the other hand, is pushing LGBT propaganda to children as young as two. Check out their tweet from June 1st on our street.
Everyone is welcome. Together, let's build a world where every person and family feels loved and respected for who they are. Happy pride month and of course, you see the hands and rainbow colors reaching out, touching.
And then here's Sesame Street, featuring openly gay public figure Jonathan Van Ness promoting a fashion show. It's time to finally unveil Alan's monster makeover. Yeah.
Oh! Oh! It's uncanny.
Alan, look. Just like Jonathan Van Ness. Cookie monster.
That is Jonathan Van ness. Elmo. Cookie.
Are you ready to see my monster? He's ready. Mama bear some runway music, please.
Oh, yeah. People and monsters alike. A round of applause for the.
Not Too Late Show's. Newest monster. Alan.
Scott. Where's the hero? Alan.
Monster is wearing the latest and. Hi, monster. Bash with a set of sweet corn fluffy fuzzy.
Fur, all topped off with a monster honker. But in spite of that, there's some good news. A recent Gallup poll shows Republican support for gay marriage has dropped 14 points in the last three years.
14 points? That's pretty significant. And why do you think that support has dropped?
Some people think it's because of social media, because our news is no longer filtered through legacy media like ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc. , etc. , which is, as we know, outrageously biased.
And much of it's just propaganda, leftist propaganda. But now most of us get our news directly from social media, whether it's X or Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, whatever. That's where we're getting our news, and it's unfiltered.
So we're all seeing these viral videos of, for instance, repulsive drag queen story hours marketed to little children, or the half new drag shows in front of little kids and all this other filth. And we're sick of it. Why did America vote overwhelmingly for President Trump?
Partly because we are all sick of this woke LGBT crap app that's constantly being shoved in our faces. I've mentioned this before in his very first speech as president on the day of his election. Standing in the Capitol rotunda, Trump declared that moving forward, the government would only recognize two genders male and female.
The whole room erupted in applause and cheers. Policy of the United States government that there are only two genders, male and female. But those cheers were loudest among generation Z, Gen Z, the youth.
They cheered the loudest. Why? Because they're the ones who had to grow up with this shoved in their faces nonstop at school, on campus, everywhere.
And they are sick of it. All of us are sick to death of it, and we want an end to the insanity and a return to normalcy. The American people made that clear.
And businesses? Some businesses anyway. Not all of them, like Sesame Street and PBS and NPR, which, you know, there's a push to defund them.
And I hope that they do defund them. But some businesses are catching on and they're realizing this is losing us money. Again, I've reported this on Catholic News Roundup, but there are a number of companies now that are distancing themselves from Pride Month and realizing, you know what?
The American people, they gave a mandate to Trump and they made clear, we don't want this woke stuff anymore. And plus, it's losing us money. Why should we appeal to a tiny minority in the country?
That may be very vocal, but there's still a tiny minority when the vast majority of Americans are not interested in this. In fact, they're turned off by it, and it's hurting our business. So you'll see more and more companies just distancing themselves from that.
And that is a hopeful sign. So there are signs of hope, signs of hope in this pontificate. Signs of hope in this country and other countries as well, because Poland just elected a pro-life Catholic who actually is a former weightlifter, by the way.
But they just elected him as president. So signs of hope. Keep praying, my friends.
Keep praying. Pray for our church because as the church goes, so goes the world. Please pray for Pope Leo.
Whatever you may think of him, he needs our prayers. It's our duty to pray. So please, please pray for him.
Pray for all the cardinals and bishops of the church, all the clergy and all the laity. One of the messages that Pope Leo set forth in his homily, June 1st, as well as June 2nd, was the importance of marriage in the family. You know, a lot of us as Catholics, we spend time complaining about the bad state of the church hierarchy, the bad state of the clergy, how unfaithful clergy are.
We spend a lot of time spill a lot of ink criticizing, condemning the clergy. But, you know, those clergy came from somewhere. Those clergy were once little children in families and families that modeled the faith or not, in families where their parents set an example to them of the faith or not.
And they absorbed that environment, whatever that family environment was. If you model the faith, okay, it's going to be much more likely that you're going to raise sons who go on to be faithful, devoted Orthodox clergy. But if you didn't model the faith and it was a broken home, and there was infidelity and disobedience and disorder and chaos in the home, then you are much more likely to produce clergymen who are unfaithful, who saw chaos and confusion, and who were disobedient to the Magisterium.
So we need to ensure our own families are modeling truly the love and obedience, the courage, the sacrifice, the patience, the humility, and the meekness and self-control of Christ. Remember all this in this month of the Sacred Heart. Do honor to our Lord by loving him not just in the sacraments, but in your daily life.
How you model Christ in your heart and in your life. Thank you so much for watching and listening. And in the words of Saint Joan of Arc, in God's name, forward boldly!
