Dr. K’s Weekly Roundup, January 24, 2026

A Book for Our Times

The Disastrous Pontificate continues to make waves.

Why is it important not to sweep the last pontificate under the rug with pious platitudes or coping mechanisms? Why do we need to seek redress for its many wrongs, and what tools have we got for doing so? Does the Francis pontificate “break” the papal system? Eric Sammons asks me these and other questions on the latest Crisis Point podcast.

GloriaTV published a highly informative interview with the author of the book, where “Dominic J. Grigio” explains why he had to write it under a pen name (and why that particular name was chosen), whether and when it is licit for a member of the faithful to critique the pope and why this isn’t a form of “Protestantism,” what he discovered in doing the research over a five-year period, and so forth. Very, very interesting.

South American decline

At Rorate, we hear about the “Francis-Collapse of Catholicism in Latin America”

Catholicism has been in collapse in Latin America since the aftermath of Vatican II—but it went into vertiginous tailspin in the pontificate of the Pope from Argentina....

The most credible research institute on religious trends, the Pew Research Center, has released a new study specifically dealing with the Bergoglian Pontificate: “Catholicism Has Declined in Latin America Over the Past Decade.” The results are nothing short of terrifying: during the Francis years, Catholicism became a minority religion in both Brazil (the largest nation in the region and the most populous Catholic country for decades) and in Chile, and declined everywhere. The collapse also accelerated in Francis’ own Argentina, though it was not as steep in Leo XIV’s adopted Peru.

One third of Brazilians are now Protestants—and we know the collapse in Catholicism was not caused by a lack of faith: vast majorities still believe in God. But, as Catholicism became identified with leftist ideologies and pagan practices (both indigenous and pseudo-African), the local bishops claimed to have a “preferential option for the poor”—while the poor themselves opted for Protestantism.

Go there for all the charts and stats.

Realistic expectations

I urge you to read this article by Dr. Gavin Ashenden: “Pope Leo, and The Problem with Exercising Power.” He is absolutely right about how authority structures and processes work and cuts through the naivete of certain traddy hyperpapalist views.

Complementing Dr. Ashenden’s perspective is that of Eric Sammons in “Is a Leonine Unity Even Possible?”

Leo’s desire for internal Catholic unity is a noble goal, and it’s one that all Catholics should work toward. But a goal—any goal—can be likened to preparing a dish for dinner: unless one knows the proper ingredients, it is doomed to failure. And a key ingredient of unity, the one that only follows charity in importance, is truth. Until all parties agree on what that is, we have as little chance of being united as did Pontius Pilate and Jesus.

In any case, I’m very glad Leo XIV has been meeting with such fine men as Burke, Sarah, Schneider, Zen, and now Fr. Bisig and Fr. Berg of the FSSP. While this doesn’t yet translate into specific actions or policies, it means he is not getting simply a one-sided narrative from the anti-trads at the Vatican or in the episcopal conferences.

Liturgical Lessons

Thomistic critique of Novus Ordo

A remarkable article appeared quietly on Substack the other day, from an author I have not read before. I recommend it. Her question: “Using Thomistic logic, as well as the history of how the Novus Ordo came to be and the reason declared for instituting it—can the Novus Ordo be reformed? Hence, would it be logical to reform it?”

Her analysis is extremely incisive and full of neat insights, such as the following:

To invoke “continuity” in order to deny novelty after a new rite has been explicitly acknowledged is not an argument—it is a semantic maneuver. Paul VI declared the promulgation of a new rite and simultaneously appealed to continuity with tradition, yet without specifying the metaphysical register (juridical, sacramental, historical, or formal) in which that continuity was to be understood. This unresolved ambiguity—especially striking given the papal office’s role as guardian of tradition—did not itself resolve the tension between novelty and continuity, but rather institutionalized it. And that unresolved ambiguity became the interpretive space in which later reformers could equivocate.

Catechesis and decatechesis

Been saying this for years: catechesis will never make up for a deficient liturgy, because the liturgy itself, simply by what it is (or isn’t), teaches more powerfully than anything else. That is Rebecca Hopersberger’s contention in her fine essay at Crisis.

Schneider weighs in

I’m glad we have a man of Bp. Schneider’s humility, holiness, confidence, and knowledge speaking to the Pope about the liturgical reform and the necessary of getting beyond false narratives, as we can see in his interview with Diane Montagna and his interview with Gavin Ashenden.

The Montagna interview is particularly thorough and persuasive, something that should be sent around to as many interested people as you can think of, especially anyone who is tempted to believe what Roche wrote in his 2-page note to the cardinals. Here are the bishop’s final words:

Cardinal Roche’s document is reminiscent of a desperate struggle of a gerontocracy confronted with serious and increasingly vocal criticism — arising primarily from a younger…

Please note that Thursday and Saturday articles are available for FREE at Pelican+. All you need to do is create a login with your email; and, if you then stay logged in at Pelican, a button like the one above will bring you straight into my full article. —Dr. K