Current Catholic Controversies


Assisi Contrast: Archbishop Lefebvre and Benedict XVI

Explaining to Bishop Fellay supporters why the SSPX cannot oppose the intra-religious prayer meetings at Assisi because they have compromised essential first principles that make any opposition possible.


Lumen Gentium, the 1989 Profession of Faith, and the "Authentic Magisterium"

Explaining to Bishop Fellay supporters, before the SSPX meeting in Albano, what exactly the term "authentic magisterium" means, and why the Doctrinal Preamble containing the 1989 Profession of Faith is a betrayal of the Catholic Faith.  The discussion develops and ends with simple defense of Catholic dogma in its essence as the formal object of Divine and Catholic Faith.


Bishop Fellay and the traitor Judas 

Explaining to Bishop Fellay supporters that accepting the Vatican agreement, grounded in the "hermeneutic of continuity," that Bishop Fellay is willing to accept, is a betrayal of Catholic tradition that follows in the heritage of the greatest of all traitors.


critical Discussion concerning bishop williamson’s Elesion Comments CCCLXVI

A charitable critique addressing the relationship between the revealed truths of our faith and the authentic magisterium.


The Implication of the 1989 Profession of Faith, the nature of ‘Religious Submission, and the myth of mere Ecclesiastical Faith

Important points defended without which it is impossible to defend Catholic truth against its clerical enemies. Drew discusses this problem in the context of the special chapter meeting of the SSPX. 


Sedevacantists, conservative, and most traditional catholics share the same error in making the pope their “Rule of Faith”

This exchange details some of the problems with Sedevacantism and explains how Sedevacantists share a common error with Conservative Catholics.  It is unfortunately true that most Traditional Catholics share this same error.


Another discussion on the error of making the pope the “rule of faith”

This exchange begins with one example of several recent articles by a Catholics who hold that the pope is the “Rule of Faith” and therefore whatever Pope Francis teaches must be followed because he speaks for God.  The same argument has been repeated approvingly by numerous clerics such as Cardinal Blasé Cupich of Chicago.  The remote Rule of Faith is sacred Scripture and Tradition.  The proximate Rule of Faith is Dogma.  It is a serious error to hold the pope as the rule of faith.  Until this grave error is understood to be nothing but papolatry, there can be no effective defense of the revealed truths of our Catholic Faith against her enemies.


Debate and discussion on the errors of sedevacantism and sedeprivationism which necessarily lead to the overturNing of dogma

This debate took place on CathInfo Forum.  The exchange has received over 75,000 viewings and many have commented that the discussion was very helpful for them in understanding the nature of this problem and the proper course to follow. Only those who keep dogma as their proximate rule of faith will be able to keep their feet on the solid ground of revealed truth.  The substance of the arguments develops slowly but become well focused by the fourth page.