The article is actually insightful, albeit in a different way than NCR likely intended.

The problem with both "Catholic" presidents is that they reinforce a definition of the word in a way that discourages evangelization to the Faith. 🧵1/8 What immediately strikes me is the absence of any real description of the relationship of the President to God.
It discusses his relationship to the hierarchy and Francis. 2/8

In Genesis, Jacob's desire for the birthright and blessing, even if pursued imperfectly, is seen as a desire for the spiritual blessings of God. Esau, in contrast, despised his birthright, valuing earthly satisfaction over spiritual blessings. "He came unto His own and His own received Him not" in John 1, likewise was not only referring to 2,000 yr old Hebrews.

The question remains: is Mike Lewis a Catholic man, some sort of other Christian man, or something else?

It wouldn't be any of our business except he represents himself as a Catholic authority. 🧵 1/18

https://twitter.com/pluant/status/1783759249522274309

Whether he is a Catholic or not is not determined by self-selection, nor necessarily even by his "in communion with Rome" status.

Francis is "in communion." Rupnik, Coccopalmerio, Radcliffe, McCarrick, Wuerl, James Martin, Tucho, Paglia, Reese, Cupich, Tagle, etc. 2/18

"Bad reviews from bad people are good reviews."
(via @JoshuaLisec)
🧵 1/7 Ad hominem from bad people are compliments. 2/7

The most commonly exhibited charism across many Catholic communities and entities (Trad and postmodern) isn't baptism as you would suppose, but duplicity.

Let your "yes" be Yes and your "No" be No and remember where anything else come from. 🧵 1/7 As a Church, we are all on uncharted ground and it both normal and understandable that we will have both theological and strategic differences. These must be acknowledged openly (front-stab if you must, but never backstab) 2/6

I field inquiries from 1-2 novus ordo clergy a month. We're not a match for most, we quietly help some. 🧵 1/9 God will restore the Church and we are a very small part of that restoration.

Most who become aware of the extent of the Bergoglian apostasy will find a better fit with SSPX, CMRI etc. 2/9

If we lose Ecumenical Councils as a binding authority in all things de fide- on what basis does the post conciliar Church claim authority?

The same Council that prohibited the ordination of deaconesses defined the Holy Trinity.🧵 The Faith is like a jenga puzzle. Start pulling blocks at the base and it all collapses. 2/3

One of the interesting developments (accelerations?) of the past century is the change in language.
Take the words: freedom, tolerance, Catholic, love, democracy, even bishop.

They all mean something different than 70 years ago,
🧵 Some of you are more aware than others about how control can be exercised by changing definitions.

I just saw a Catholic youtuber say that Fr Altman and Bp Strickland's laicization is on the table.

Firstly, as a famous example @frfrankpavone is still a priest. A Bergoglian telling a priest he is "laicized" without due process or for political motive is unfortunate but done outside legitimate authority.

Secondly, laicization is a canonical process removing the public exercise of office. It cannot delete an ordination as some folks seem to think.

Thirdly, if a Bergoglian abuses their authority in this manner unjustly and you receive a decree: Enlarge it and frame it. God sees all. As the Dies Irae reminds us.
No wrong will go unavenged. Almost all of us agree the Church is: 1) In extremis; and 2) On uncharted ground.

Most of my priest friends are either novus ordo or "indult priests" in a novus ordo jurisdiction but saying only the Old Mass.

It seems many want to wait and see what follows Francis. Will God prevent a Francis 2.0?

I think a formal schism is more likely and have been saying so publicly since 2014.

God will sort it. He has already the Victory.