[ 0 → 4] Tradcast Express [ 30 → 38] Father Frank Pavone. Frank Pavone is the founder and national director of an anti-abortion [ 38 → 44] organization in the United States called Priests for Life. He was ordained a priest for the Vatican [ 44 → 53] II Church in 1988 by Cardinal John O'Connor of New York, and now the Vatican has removed him [ 53 → 59] from the priesthood. He has been defrocked. Now, to avoid any confusion, [ 59 → 65] let me clarify something up front, and I will say it only once and then we'll get to the actual [ 65 → 75] issues. The ordination of Frank Pavone in 1988 was invalid. The reason is twofold. Number one, [ 75 → 83] because Pavone was ordained in the 1968 ordination rite of Paul VI, which is doubtful, but even more [ 83 → 89] so because the bishop who ordained him, John O'Connor, was not a valid bishop in the first [ 89 → 89] place. [ 89 → 97] And therefore was not capable of ordaining Pavone a priest. O'Connor was not a valid bishop because [ 97 → 103] he had been consecrated a bishop in 1979 in the new ordination rite of Paul VI, which, [ 104 → 110] unlike the priestly ordination rite, is not merely doubtful, but definitely invalid. [ 112 → 118] Therefore, Frank Pavone is neither a priest nor a deacon, since an invalid bishop can't ordain [ 118 → 119] a deacon either. [ 119 → 126] Now, I'm not saying this to slam or embarrass Pavone. It's not his fault. He's not to blame [ 126 → 132] for not having valid orders. I only want to mention this so candidly because in what follows, [ 132 → 139] I'm going to refer to Pavone as a priest, as Father Pavone, because as far as Pseudo-Pope [ 139 → 146] Francis and all the Novus Ordo authorities and the laws and the theology are concerned, he is [ 146 → 149] considered a valid priest. And what has happened is that he has been ordained a priest. And so, [ 149 → 155] what has happened since Saturday makes no sense unless you assume he was validly ordained in the [ 155 → 164] first place. So, having made that clear, I'm going to act now as if Pavone were a valid priest. [ 164 → 173] On Saturday, December 17, 2022, the Novus Ordo news site Catholic News Agency broke the story [ 173 → 179] that the Vatican had dismissed Father Pavone from the priesthood. Now, dismissing a priest from the [ 179 → 187] state and reducing him to the status of a layman is, as far as I know, the worst possible [ 187 → 195] vindictive punishment a priest can receive. Yes, there is also excommunication, but that's not a [ 195 → 202] vindictive punishment, which aims to make the offender pay for his crime. Excommunication is [ 202 → 208] a medicinal punishment, which only aims to get the offender to repent. And as soon as he does, [ 208 → 209] the excommunication is a medicinal punishment, which only aims to get the offender to repent. [ 209 → 216] Excommunication is lifted. Now, since priestly ordination is forever, though, because once [ 216 → 223] ordained, you cannot be unordained, just like once you're baptized, you can never be unbaptized again [ 223 → 230] because the sacrament conferred an unerasable mark on your soul. A priest can never become [ 230 → 238] a layman again in the proper ontological sense. So then, what does it mean to dismiss a priest [ 238 → 239] from the clerical state? [ 239 → 247] The proper term, by the way, is defrocking. It means that, although the priest in question [ 247 → 254] technically remains a priest and still possesses the sacramental powers that come with ordination, [ 255 → 263] nevertheless, he is to act and to be treated as if he were a layman. So, for example, he is [ 263 → 268] never again allowed to offer mass or hear confessions or to baptize except in the case of [ 268 → 269] the priest. [ 269 → 277] He is not allowed to present himself as a priest either. He is not allowed to wear priestly attire [ 277 → 285] or call himself father and so forth. So, this draconian punishment has apparently been imposed [ 285 → 294] on Father Pavone by the Vatican with the approval of Pope Francis. And I say apparently because [ 294 → 299] this is already where things get a bit odd. And I'll explain this in a moment. [ 299 → 306] But before I continue, let me say that in this whole drama about Father Pavone, I will assume [ 306 → 313] until there is evidence to the contrary that all parties are telling the truth, at least the truth [ 313 → 319] as they see it. I will assume that no one is lying, that no one is deliberately saying what [ 319 → 328] is false. Perhaps somebody is lying, but I don't know that and I cannot assume it. So, I will take [ 328 → 329] everything that is being said and take everything that is being said and take everything that is being [ 329 → 337] said at face value and not second guess it. All right. So, the day after Catholic News Agency [ 337 → 344] broke the story, the Associated Press provided a scanned copy of the nuncio's letter to the U.S. [ 344 → 351] bishops along with an attachment. And I'm going to read both now, which are not very long. The [ 351 → 357] letter is dated December 13th, 2022. Here's what it says. Quote, [ 357 → 359] Your Eminencies, [ 359 → 366] I have been informed by the Prefect of the Dicastery for the Clergy that on the 9th of [ 366 → 373] November, 2022, a Supreme Decision admitting of no possibility of appeal directed that [ 373 → 380] Reverend Frank Pavone be dismissed from the clerical state. As you will know, Father Pavone [ 380 → 385] was a very public and high-profile figure associated with the Right to Life movement [ 385 → 389] in the U.S. His dismissal from the clerical state may therefore be considered a very public [ 389 → 396] matter of interest among the faithful. In anticipation of that potential interest, [ 396 → 402] the attached statement regarding Frank Pavone is provided for your information and for release [ 402 → 409] within your diocese or archdiocese as and if you deem appropriate. The attached statement has been [ 409 → 415] approved by the Dicastery for the Clergy. With cordial regards and every best wish, I remain [ 415 → 419] sincerely yours in Christ, Archbishop Christophe Pavone. [ 419 → 426] Now, the attachment reads as follows. Quote, [ 426 → 428] Statement on Frank Pavone. [ 429 → 436] Reverend Frank Pavone, the founder of the organization Priests for Life, Inc., was dismissed [ 436 → 443] from the clerical state by the Holy See on November 9th, 2022. This action was taken [ 443 → 449] after Father Pavone was found guilty in canonical proceedings of blasphemous communications on the [ 449 → 456] social media and of persistent disobedience of the lawful instructions of his diocesan bishop. [ 457 → 462] Father Pavone was given ample opportunity to defend himself in the canonical proceedings, [ 462 → 469] and he was also given multiple opportunities to submit himself to the authority of his diocesan [ 469 → 475] bishop. It was determined that Father Pavone had no reasonable justification for his actions. [ 476 → 479] Since Priests for Life, Inc. is not a Catholic organization, [ 479 → 486] Mr. Pavone's continuing role in it as a layperson would be entirely up to the leadership [ 486 → 495] of that organization. Unquote. And that's it. So, the claims are that Father Pavone was found [ 495 → 502] guilty of blasphemous communications on social media and persistent disobedience to his diocesan [ 502 → 509] bishop. Unfortunately, the nuncio provided no further information. So, that means we do not [ 509 → 516] know what blasphemous communications in particular this is in reference to, and likewise, we don't [ 516 → 525] know what specific acts of disobedience are meant. In any case, it's best to be systematic about this [ 525 → 532] and keep separate things separate. The following issues all pertain to this, but they are separate [ 532 → 539] and therefore should not be mixed together. Number one, whether or not Father Pavone [ 539 → 545] is actually guilty of blasphemy and disobedience, and to what degree? [ 547 → 553] Issue number two, assuming he is guilty, whether or not dismissal from the priesthood [ 553 → 561] is a just and proportionate punishment for his offenses. Number three, whether there might be [ 561 → 567] an ulterior motive behind penalizing Father Pavone in such a severe manner. [ 567 → 574] Number four, regardless of his guilt or innocence, whether Father Pavone's response [ 574 → 582] to this draconian measure is itself morally right and legitimate. And issue number five, [ 582 → 589] whether or not Francis and the other Novus Ordo authorities involved in this are engaging in a [ 589 → 595] glaring double standard, considering what other priests and bishops get away with, including [ 595 → 597] heresy, blasphemy, and adultery. And issue number four, whether or not Francis and the other novus [ 597 → 597] order authorities involved in this are engaging in a glaring double standard, considering what other [ 597 → 597] priests and bishops get away with, including heresy, blasphemy, and adultery. And issue number five, [ 597 → 597] whether or not Francis and the other novus order authorities involved in this are engaging in a [ 597 → 597] glaring double standard, considering what other priests and bishops get away with, including heresy, [ 597 → 604] and sacrilege, and disobedience of the worst sort, beginning with Francis himself, of course. [ 605 → 612] All of these five things are important aspects of this drama, but they are all separate issues [ 612 → 620] and must be evaluated separately. For example, let's say that Pavone is being punished unjustly [ 620 → 627] and for an evil motive. That may be so, but even if it is, it still would not justify [ 627 → 635] how he's been responding to his alleged defrocking. Now, I say alleged because Pavone [ 635 → 642] says that he has not yet been personally notified by the Vatican of his dismissal from the clerical [ 642 → 650] state. He found out about it from Catholic News Agency, and that's very odd. If a judge hands you [ 650 → 656] a sentence, he needs to let you know about it. Pavone has not yet been notified, not even by [ 656 → 663] means of an intermediary. Instead, he simply heard the news that the nuncio had told this [ 663 → 668] to the American bishops, even though the decision was handed down on November 9th. [ 669 → 676] And so, I think that he is totally within his rights to continue calling himself father and [ 676 → 682] acting as a priest in the meantime, since he has not yet been properly notified of his punishment. [ 682 → 686] He basically just overheard other people talking. [ 686 → 697] Now, how has Pavone himself responded to the news of his dismissal? Well, first, he doesn't doubt [ 697 → 703] that it's true. Even though he hasn't been notified by the Vatican, he isn't surprised at [ 703 → 708] the news and claims that the real reason that they're going after him is because they don't [ 708 → 714] want him to continue his work against abortion. And so, he says that the charges against him are [ 714 → 715] just being exaggerated. [ 716 → 726] Second, from everything I've read and heard, and Pavone has been giving interview after interview, [ 726 → 733] you can check the show notes for our blog post with all the links, it's very clear that [ 733 → 741] Father Pavone has absolutely no intention of obeying any authority, including his own bishop [ 741 → 745] and including even the person he believes to be the pope. [ 745 → 746] If obeying, he is not going to be able to continue his work against him. So, I think that he has [ 746 → 754] to stop his pro-life work and do something else. And that is shocking for someone who [ 754 → 757] considers himself a faithful Catholic priest. [ 758 → 764] Now, don't misunderstand. Of course, fighting against the horrific crime of child murder [ 764 → 773] is a very noble, laudable, and important thing in itself. However, if you're a priest, you're [ 773 → 775] under obedience to your local bishop. [ 776 → 784] And more so, you're under obedience to the pope. Obedience demands a sacrifice of your own will. [ 785 → 792] And that is very difficult. There's no question about that. And, of course, obedience does have [ 792 → 798] its limits. You are not, for example, bound to obey an order that is absurd or completely [ 798 → 804] unreasonable. For example, if your bishop were to say you have to do a thousand push-ups every day. [ 804 → 805] Right? [ 806 → 813] Of course, you are not permitted to obey if you're being ordered to commit a sin. The bishop [ 813 → 818] couldn't tell you to, you know, steal money from a parishioner's home so he can renovate [ 818 → 826] the chancery office. But it really has to be a genuine sin. Nowadays, people think you don't [ 826 → 832] have to obey if you don't agree that what you're being told is a good idea. Well, that's not how [ 832 → 836] it works in the Catholic Church. Even if you foresee that you're being ordered to do a thousand [ 836 → 840] push-ups every day, you're not allowed to do it. You're not allowed to do it. You're not allowed [ 840 → 840] to do it. You're not allowed to do it. You're not allowed to do it. You're not allowed to do it. [ 840 → 848] It's not a sin for you to do it. You have to obey. Now, for a bishop to say that one of his priests [ 848 → 855] needs to stop being involved in a particular ministry is entirely legitimate. He can say, [ 856 → 860] hey, thanks for your pro-life work, but now I want you to be a hospital chaplain, [ 860 → 864] for example. The bishop can do that, and you have to obey him. [ 864 → 866] But Frank Pavone isn't doing that. He's not doing that. He's not doing that. He's not doing that. [ 866 → 873] He wants his will to be done, not the will of his lawful superiors. He's claiming, [ 873 → 878] and you can see this in the linked videos in the show notes, he's claiming that it is God's [ 878 → 884] will for him to be doing what he's doing with priests for life, and he will not let any human [ 884 → 891] authority tell him otherwise. Effectively, then, he is the final authority in judging [ 891 → 895] what he should be doing with his priesthood, and that is wrong. [ 896 → 902] Now, Pavone seems to think that God himself gave him a mission to do his pro-life work, [ 903 → 908] and that that is basically independent of the authority and jurisdiction of his superiors. [ 909 → 914] In a way, you could say that Pavone thinks that regardless of what his bishop and the pope say, [ 914 → 923] God has already overruled them, and Pavone is simply obeying God instead. Now, that is insane. [ 924 → 926] That is a totally Protestant, [ 926 → 930] non-Catholic attitude. It's kind of like Martin Luther saying, [ 930 → 935] I don't care what the pope decrees against me. God told me to reform the church, [ 936 → 942] and that's what I'm going to do. It's absurd. Now, of course, I'm not saying that Pavone's [ 942 → 949] pro-life work is like the heretical claptrap of Martin Luther. Not at all. But the principle [ 949 → 956] that's being invoked to justify it is the same. God told me. I obey God. [ 956 → 964] I do what God wants me to do, and you cannot interfere. Well, ordinarily, when you're a [ 964 → 971] priest or religious, God's will is discerned, first of all, through the orders of your superior, [ 971 → 978] whom you must obey. And sure, obedience is difficult, but then that is what makes it [ 978 → 985] virtuous. Virtue is never easy. And even if one receives a penalty, [ 985 → 986] and the penalty is not a penalty, then it is a penalty. And if one receives a penalty, [ 986 → 992] the penalty is actually unjust if the pope has given his final judgment on the matter. [ 993 → 1001] Even if it is an unjust sentence, you are not allowed to rebel. Instead, you must suffer the [1001 → 1009] injustice and offer it up to our Lord. Throughout church history, it's happened again and again that [1009 → 1016] a cleric was punished unjustly, either because of a mistake or even because of the malice of [1016 → 1016] the Lord. And so, if you're a cleric, you must suffer the injustice and offer it up to our Lord. [1016 → 1025] And yet, the good clerics obey. It is the bad ones that don't. Consider Padre Pio. He was [1025 → 1034] disciplined unjustly and obeyed. Or Father Charles Coghlan, the fiery radio preacher of the 1930s in [1034 → 1043] the United States. He was silenced in the early 40s, and he obeyed. The Jesuit order was suppressed [1043 → 1046] by Pope Clement XIV in the 18th century. And so, if you're a cleric, you must suffer the injustice [1046 → 1046] and offer it up to our Lord. And so, if you're a cleric, you must suffer the injustice and offer it up to our Lord. [1046 → 1046] And so, if you're a cleric, you must suffer the injustice and offer it up to our Lord. And so, if you're a [1046 → 1056] and the Jesuits obeyed. The Cristeros, fighting in Mexico in the late 1920s, Pope Pius XI ordered [1056 → 1067] them to lay down their arms, and they obeyed and were slaughtered. Now, look at who didn't obey. [1067 → 1075] People like George Tyrrell, the English modernist excommunicated by St. Pius X. Leonard Feeney, the [1075 → 1076] American preacher. And so, if you're a cleric, you must suffer the injustice and offer it up to our Lord. [1076 → 1082] The Christian priest excommunicated by Pope Pius XII. And of course, Martin Luther. And we could [1082 → 1089] go on and on. By the way, I should probably point out, just for the record, that Father Frank Pavone [1089 → 1096] is a man of Vatican II. He is Novus Ordo through and through. I saw some people on Twitter already [1096 → 1101] commenting that, oh, hopefully Father Pavone will now be ordained validly by a Sedevacanus bishop. [1101 → 1106] But folks, it takes more than being zealous in fighting a [1106 → 1113] abortion to be a Catholic, especially a Catholic priest. So, don't confuse being conservative on [1113 → 1120] issues that concern the Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Commandments with being theologically sound all [1120 → 1129] around. For instance, Pavone has happily endorsed Francis' exhortation Amoris Laetitia. That's the [1129 → 1134] blasphemous document that allows unrepentant public adulterers to receive the sacraments, [1134 → 1136] saying that sometimes, [1136 → 1143] it may just be God's will for them to commit adultery. Pavone called the document, [1144 → 1151] this is a quote, a beautifully written pro-life affirmation of the church's wisdom, unquote. [1152 → 1156] So, let's maybe not canonize him just yet. [1156 → 1163] All right, summing up. Yes, it may be that Father Pavone is really being punished [1163 → 1166] because the Novus Ordo authority, [1166 → 1172] especially Francis, want him to stop fighting abortion. And if they can't achieve that, [1172 → 1178] then they want to at least hurt his credibility as much as possible. I am not saying it is so, [1179 → 1186] but I can't rule it out either. Nevertheless, even if it is unjust, how Frank Pavone is [1186 → 1193] responding to this persecution is not right either. Under the supposition that Francis is the Pope, [1193 → 1195] which is what Pavone believes, [1196 → 1202] the Catholic attitude is to simply obey, pray, and suffer this injustice. That is the Catholic [1202 → 1210] attitude. Sometimes, God simply wants you to suffer. Remember, if any man will follow me, [1211 → 1218] let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me, says our Lord in Mark 8, 34. [1220 → 1226] The general Catholic attitude is that what your lawful superior orders you to do, [1226 → 1232] as long as it's not a sin or impossible or whatever, is God's will for you at that moment. [1233 → 1240] Yes, I know that is very hard to accept sometimes, but that is what is required of the priest who [1240 → 1246] promises obedience to his bishop and his successors. And it is required even more so [1246 → 1255] of the religious who takes a vow of obedience. A religious, meaning a monk or a nun, a brother or [1255 → 1256] sister, is a religious who takes a vow of obedience. A religious, meaning a monk or a nun, [1256 → 1264] typically takes vows of obedience, chastity, and poverty. And out of those three, [1264 → 1272] obedience is by far the most difficult, because it means a surrender not merely of one aspect [1272 → 1279] of your life, as is the case with chastity and poverty, but of your entire will, which [1279 → 1286] potentially concerns everything. Now, before I conclude, let me just be absolutely clear, [1286 → 1292] so that there is no misunderstanding. Francis, Jorge Bergoglio, is not a true pope. [1293 → 1299] But as far as this controversy goes, that's beside the point, because Father Pavone believes [1299 → 1305] Francis to be a true pope, and his actions have to be evaluated with that belief in mind. [1306 → 1313] In other words, Pavone is willingly refusing to be subject to the completely lawful orders [1313 → 1316] of the person he thinks is the vicar. [1316 → 1324] On earth. In at least two interviews with Pavone that I've seen, he explained that he's not [1324 → 1331] terribly worried about the papal judgment being final, because it could still be overturned by a [1331 → 1339] future pope, see? Or he could just take it, as he said, to the people of God, and then they can, [1339 → 1345] I guess, pressure Francis to rescind the defrocking or something. It, [1345 → 1353] it is insane. Yes, abortion is a great evil, a horrendous mortal sin, and it must be fought. [1354 → 1362] Defeating abortion, however, is not the highest good. The highest good is the beatific vision, [1362 → 1368] everlasting happiness in heaven, seeing and knowing God face to face for all eternity. [1368 → 1374] If you miss that, nothing else you did in life matters. [1375 → 1382] Unfortunately, Frank Pavone is idolizing the fight against abortion. He's putting it above [1382 → 1390] all else, even above the demands of the Catholic faith and the salvation of his own soul. [1390 → 1397] Because if Francis is the pope, as he believes, and Pavone refuses him submission, he is committing [1397 → 1404] a mortal sin, objectively. Which, by the way, is one of the reasons why it's so important to [1404 → 1413] recognize that Francis is not the pope. See, for some, it's all about the mass. For others, [1413 → 1419] it's all about abortion. But actually, it's all about the authentic Catholic faith, [1420 → 1426] first and foremost. Meaning that you can have the mass without the faith, [1426 → 1433] and it will profit your soul nothing. You can save every single baby from abortion, [1433 → 1440] but without the faith, it will profit your soul nothing. Always, objectively speaking. [1441 → 1446] That's because in order for you to be able to merit anything before God for eternal life, [1446 → 1452] you must first have sanctifying grace in your soul, which is the pure gift of God. And that [1452 → 1461] grace cannot exist in your soul without the supernatural virtues of faith, hope, and charity. [1462 → 1462] So, [1463 → 1470] to say that Pavone is totally wrong here is not to say that abortion isn't a great evil that must [1470 → 1476] be fought, or that the Vatican is justified in stripping him of his priesthood. It's obviously [1476 → 1482] a horrific punishment that a great number of other noble sordid clerics deserve much more [1482 → 1490] than Father Pavone. It's simply making clear that the end does not justify the means, and that [1490 → 1492] obedience to one's lawful superiors is not a good thing. It's simply making clear that the end does [1493 → 1501] is not dependent on whether we agree with what's being commanded. The work each Catholic has, [1501 → 1509] priest or layman, is, first and foremost, the salvation of his own soul. In other words, [1509 → 1515] whatever noble thing someone may be doing, what's more important than that work is the [1515 → 1522] sanctification and salvation of the worker. Look at St. Thomas Aquinas, for example. His [1523 → 1530] greatest work was the Summa Theologica. And you know what? He died before he could finish it. [1531 → 1539] It's an unfinished work. God did not want him to complete it. God didn't need him to complete it. [1540 → 1546] St. Thomas is a saint not because he wrote such great theological and philosophical works, [1546 → 1552] but because he was personally holy. He didn't just speak eloquently about the virtues, [1553 → 1561] he excelled at practicing them. Same with St. Pius X. He's a saint not simply because he fought [1561 → 1567] modernism, although that was, of course, a part of it, but because he led a holy life and died [1567 → 1576] in heroic virtue. He didn't just teach the faith, he lived it to the full. And consider also St. [1576 → 1582] Therese of the Child Jesus. She died at age 24 and never did any great work, [1583 → 1587] in the sense that she never did anything that is considered great by the world. [1588 → 1592] She didn't convert the masses. She didn't miraculously heal the sick. [1593 → 1598] She didn't prophesy the future. She didn't bilocate. She didn't raise people from the dead. [1599 → 1606] But she loved God with an immense supernatural charity, doing and suffering everything for love [1606 → 1612] of him. There's a lot more that could be said about this Fr. Frank Pavone, [1613 → 1618] but I'm going to end it here or else this podcast will never get done. [1620 → 1622] May you have a blessed Christmas. [1623 → 1630] Tradcast Express is a production of Novos Ordo Watch. Check us out at Tradcast.org. And if you [1630 → 1636] like what we're doing, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution at NovosOrdoWatch.org.