(Summary: Who created it, and what can be done to slay Blogger-Stein?)
Cardinal Víctor ‘Heal-me-with-your-mouth’ Manuel Fernández (Tucho) is back with a bang. Opening the plenary assembly of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith on Jan. 27, Tucho, the ‘Prefect of said Dicastery took a bit of a punt at us fellow bloggers. Here’s what he said:
“Today on any blog, anyone — even without having studied much theology — expresses an opinion and condemns as if speaking ex cathedra,”
My distinguished fellow bloggers have already dealt an ‘ex-cathedra’ ruling on poor Tucho (& Leo). Riaan from Radical Fidelity & Chris Jackson from Hiraeth in Exile had the nicest of things to say to, and of Tucho, which you can read here and here if you haven’t already.
Now for my two cents worth.
Appealing to false authority or bullying?
The claim (by those arguing for evolution) was that those arguing against evolution didn’t have credentials, or relevant qualifications, or they weren’t experts on the subject of evolution, as against those within the evolutionary camp who were certified experts (in their opinion). It was a different matter altogether that the goal-post was moved when someone who was relevantly qualified did argue against evolution; they would be silenced with the excuse that they should first publish their findings in a peer reviewed paper – which is a devious way of saying “get your paper reviewed by those who disagree with your critique or theory”. The argument by Tucho above (“…even without having studied much theology”) is similar. Here’s why.
Recall that ‘theologians’ of Sacred Heart Major Seminary (Dr.(s) Ralph Martin, Eduardo Echeverria, and Edward Peters) were fired by Detroit Bishop Weisenburger in July 2025. Were they also guilty of the same accusation by Tucho? No. They were thrown under the bus by the Bishop installed by Prevost himself, for being overtly critical of the papacy of Bergoglio, and importantly for speaking the truth. Yes, they weren’t actually bloggers per se, but if you examined the criteria for their dismissal, it wasn’t that they were ignorant of theology. Far from it, they were seasoned theologians from the papacies of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. In the case of the dismissal of the three theologians, this was a communist-styled silencing of the trail being blazed by the laity against Bergoglio – and Tucho is the complicit fruit of that ‘papacy’, who still continues to dictate terms to Catholics under the shade and protection of Leo.
While one could argue, that Tucho is a Cardinal, and therefore we are bound to obey him (or even Leo for that matter) note that Pope Leo XIII, the namesake of Prevost’s papal title, writing in the Encyclical Diuturnum Illud (paragraph § 15) in 1881, said (emphasis mine):
“The one only reason which men have for not obeying is when anything is demanded of them which is openly repugnant to the natural or the divine law, for it is equally unlawful to command to do anything in which the law of nature or the will of God is violated. If, therefore, it should happen to any one to be compelled to prefer one or the other, viz., to disregard either the commands of God or those of rulers, he must obey Jesus Christ, who commands us to “give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,”(18) and must reply courageously after the example of the Apostles: “We ought to obey God rather than men.”(19) And yet there is no reason why those who so behave themselves should be accused of refusing obedience; for, if the will of rulers is opposed to the will and the laws of God, they themselves exceed the bounds of their own power and pervert justice; nor can their authority then be valid, which, when there is no justice, is null.”
Note that while these words by Pope Leo XIII were written in regard to civil authority, they express a principle which has clear application even to ecclesiological authority especially in the times we are living in. Further note that even the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologiae (ST II-II, Q.33, Article 4) had this to say:
“It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly.”
One can add the historicity of John de Torquemada, St. Bellarmine, St. Cajetan, & Francis Suarez who voiced similar views on the (dis)obedience due to Popes who went against the faith.
Note that it is this same Cardinal Tucho who penned the document Fiducia Supplicans and Mater Populi Fidelis, and who is also rumoured to be the ghost writer for Amoris Laetitia (all while under the double auspices and blessings of the papacy of Bergoglio, & Prevost), who has introduced confusion & disorder into the Church.
It is true that the Catholic Church in days gone by would need an imprimatur and/or an Nihil obstat before a Tom, Dick, Harry or Concerned Catholic went about giving their two cents in public on theology. There also is the Index Librorum Prohibitorum which lists a prohibited list of books and/or authors that a Catholic is not allowed to refer to. The funny thing is that the Modernists after 1965 went about having such measures made redundant. While the imprimatur, Nihil obstat, and the Index… remain valid even today, they have been rendered impotent by those that came into power starting with Pope Paul VI. This sterile ecclesiological outlook was all the more evident in the ‘pastoral’ stance taken during the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) where zero condemnations were issued. It’s funny that the modernists who refused to condemn heresy, now want to condemn those who are upset about the harm that the modernists are doing to the church! The modernists only have themselves to blame for the backlash.
Who is responsible for the monster called ‘blogger-stein’?
I had no idea of the law of Salus animarum suprema lex or Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, the delimiters to Papal infallibility other than the conventional Catholic 101 on ex-cathedra rulings, the concept of the Deposit of Faith (Depositum Fidei) and what was the Pope’s role in preserving or defending this Deposit of Faith, or the ecu-menace-tic endeavours since Popes John Paul II in Assisi. The list could go on and on.
In summary, I was oblivious to pre-1965 Catholicism even until perhaps 2019. It took the onset of a ‘Pope’ like Bergoglio, for me to start noticing that things were starting to get very, err, queer. Apart from Bergoglio, it was also the sexual abuse crisis that made the Catholic Church lose credibility en masse and made me wake up.
And now I see the same Catholic Church, that lied and covered up for paedophile/homosexual priests, paying large swathes of hush money to abuse victims and their lawyers by shutting down churches, who are now telling us that bloggers (like myself) are issuing condemnations on their blogs of clerics – all while failing to realize that what led us to the point of expressing our helplessness on these blogs was the corruption and high handedness by those in Rome in dealing with the faithful. In other words, the ‘listening’ being preached by Rome was a façade; in reality, we were all alone in the injustice that was being heaped upon us (apart from recourse to Divine Providence). When questions to Bishops and priests go unanswered and Rome continues to devolve into downright apostasy, it is the duty and the concern of any Catholic to warn others.
It was Tucho’s Fiducia Supplicans, that allowed for blessings to homosexuals and lesbians, and that was defended by a priest which made me first write to a Bishop; and owing to the utter disregard & blind-eye to its contents, I took to commissioning my own website apart from writing on Substack. In summary, it was the crisis in Catholicism that led me deeper into exploring the truths of the faith. And it was the crisis in Catholicism that has created ‘Blogger-stein’.
How can Rome stop ‘Blogger-stein’?
- Defend the true faith and teach the fundamentals of this faith unhindered and unfettered,
- Punish heretics (modernists fall within this category) and dissidents like James Martin SJ, Reinhard Marx, and Tucho himself,
- Pursue swift and prompt justice for abuse survivors instead of dispensing them and playing fast and loose with legalities,
- Stop pursuing dangerous trends in blessing homosexuals and lesbians,
- Stop having lay people decide the course of the Catholic faith through committees and synods,
- Stop allowing the practice of women (religious or otherwise) running societies and departments meant for priests.
- Stop encouraging a false unity that abandons the entirety of the Depositum Fidei, and so on.(*This is not an exhaustive list and there could be more that other more worthy bloggers and influencers may be able to top it up with)Note that I haven’t even mentioned one of the main job descriptions: The Divine Commission given to the Bishops through their Apostolic mandate in Matthew 28:16–20, and note that I haven’t even mentioned anything about the TLM. It is my belief, that once the afore-mentioned steps which ought to be taken by Rome are taken, this will in and by itself lead to a desire for the holy, especially the TLM, and which will then offshoot into evangelization. Without amputating the gangrenous limb, and without severing the body from the poison, it is impossible to bring healing & holiness to the body. This is a job for a noble prelate(s), not for the blogger, the latter who can only assist in supplementing the role of raising red flags when they notice danger.
If Rome pursues the draconian task of outlawing the blogger, we will take it as a badge of honour. The alternative is true reform, which should put us bloggers out of business. The choices are simple. Give it your best shot Tucho.
Ave Maria
