
CRITICAL CATHOLIC COMMENTARY
in the Twilight of Reason

Mary, Conceived without
Sin,
pray for us who
have recourse to thee
___________________________________________________________________________
Editor’s
note: There are
5,430 Catholic bishops in the world as of this writing on February
15, 2026.
In only two do we hear the voice of the first
Apostles.
Bishop Joseph Strickland and Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
If there are more, we do not hear them ...
A Line in the Sand

Bishop Joseph Strickland
and the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X
the Vindication of Truth and the Perpetuation of Lies
[Bishop Strickland]:
“Every
Texan knows this story:
Long before we knew
about politics, before we knew the arguments, before we knew how to
quibble over details, we were taught something in school that shaped
our bones. At the Alamo, there came a moment when there were no more
letters to send, no reinforcements coming, no negotiations left to
try. The enemy was at the gates. Surrender had been demanded. And
everyone knew what surrender would mean.
So the commander –
William Barrett Travis – gathered his men – not to inspire them, not
to give a pep talk, but to tell them the truth. He drew a line in
the dirt. On one side of that line was safety – at least for the
moment. On the other side was almost certain death. And he said, in
effect: “Choose.” Only one man stepped back. The rest stepped
forward.
That line in the
sand was not drawn to start a rebellion. It was drawn to end
illusions. Crossing it did not guarantee victory – it guaranteed
fidelity. And whether we like it or not, that is where the Church
stands right now.
The Church is in an
emergency. Not an emergency invented by commentators, not a mood
manufactured by social media, not hysteria.
A real emergency –
measured not in feelings, but in facts. An emergency
measured by silence where there must be answers. In tolerance where
there must be correction. In shepherds who refuse to name wolves,
while those who simply want to guard the flock are treated as a
problem.
Let me be very
clear: this is not about personalities. It is not about preferences.
It is not about clinging to the past. It is about survival – not of
an institution, but of the priesthood, the sacraments, and the
Catholic Faith as it has been received, handed down, and guarded for
centuries.
When men who openly
contradict Catholic teaching are tolerated, promoted,
even celebrated – while those who hold fast to tradition are
restricted, sidelined, or ignored – something is upside down.
When confusion is
indulged and fidelity must beg to survive, authority has stopped
doing what authority exists to do.
And there comes a
point when silence itself becomes an answer
When a crisis is
acknowledged, when a plea is made soberly and respectfully, and when
that plea is met with silence, delay becomes a decision. Inaction
becomes a judgment. Refusal to act becomes abdication.
This is not theory.
This is history.
The Church has faced
moments like this before – moments when men were forced to act not
because they wanted confrontation, but because the alternative was
surrendering what had been entrusted to them. That is why the name
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre still provokes such strong reactions. Not
because the moment was comfortable, but because it was clarifying.
No one claims those
decisions were light. No one claims they were painless. But they
were made under the conviction that necessity had arrived,
that waiting longer would mean watching something essential die.
And today, we are
standing in another moment of necessity.
This is not about
one group. It is not about one society. It is not about one bishop,
or one letter, or one unanswered request. It is about a pattern – a
pattern where orthodoxy is treated as dangerous, tradition is
treated as suspect, and fidelity is portrayed as rigidity while
error is praised as pastoral sensitivity.
It is about a moment
when the things the Church once defended without apology must now
justify their existence. When the preservation of the priesthood is
treated as optional. When the formation of priests is obstructed.
When the ordinary means of apostolic continuity are quietly denied.
And at that
point, the line is already being drawn. Not by agitators. Not by
rebels. But by reality itself.
At the Alamo, one
man stepped back. His name was Moses Rose. History does not mock
him. It simply records the choice. That is what lines do. They do
not condemn. They reveal. The line does not create courage or
cowardice. It exposes it.
And the line the
Church faces today is not asking who is angry, who is loud, or who
is popular. It is asking who is willing to remain faithful when
fidelity costs something. Because there are things worse than
defeat. There are things worse than being crushed. There are things
worse than dying.
There is surrender
Our Lord did not
draw His line in sand. He drew it in blood. He stood silent before
Pilate not because truth was unclear, but because truth does not
negotiate with lies. He did not promise safety. He did not promise
comfort. He did not promise success.
He promised the
Cross
And He warned his
disciples plainly what fidelity would cost them.
So when we speak
today about lines being drawn, we are not inventing something
new. We are standing where Christians have always stood, when
obedience to God and submission to confusion finally diverge.
Today, I am asking
who is honest. I am not asking who feels secure. I am asking who is
faithful.
Because the line is
already there
It has been drawn by
silence. It has been drawn by inversion. It has been drawn by the
refusal to act when action is required. And the only question left –
the only honest question – is whether we are willing to cross it.
Not with triumphalism. Not with rebellion. But with fidelity.
The Church survives
by saints
And saints have
always known what to do when the line appears.
And now I am going
to say some things plainly, because the hour for careful phrasing
has passed.
There are people who
will say that naming realities like this is divisive. They are
wrong. What is divisive is tolerating error while punishing
fidelity. What is divisive is demanding silence from those
who believe what the Church has always taught, while applauding
those who contradict her openly. What is divisive is calling
confusion “pastoral,” and clarity “dangerous.”
And we have seen
this pattern long enough now that pretending otherwise is no longer
honest.
There are priests
and bishops who publicly undermine Catholic teaching on marriage, on
sexuality, on the uniqueness of Christ, on the necessity of
repentance – and nothing happens. They are praised for their
“accompaniment.” And we are told this is mercy.
But when
priests want to offer the Mass as it was offered for centuries, when
they want to be formed according to the mind of the Church that
produced saints, when they want bishops so the priesthood itself
does not die out – they are treated as a problem to be managed.
That is not mercy.
That is inversion.
And when this
inversion is brought directly to Rome – calmly, respectfully,
without threats – and the response is silence, we are no longer
dealing with misunderstanding. We are dealing with refusal.
I am speaking here
of the Society of St. Pius X.
They are not asking
for novelty. They are not asking for power. They are asking for
bishops – because without bishops there are no priests, and without
priests there are no sacraments, and without sacraments the Church
does not survive in any meaningful way.
They asked. They
waited. They received no answer that addressed the reality.
And I will say this
plainly: when heresy is tolerated but tradition is strangled,
something has gone terribly wrong. When those who break with
doctrine are welcomed, and those who cling to doctrine are treated
as suspect, authority has turned against its own purpose.
That is not
rebellion speaking. That is fact.
Some will say, “But
you must wait.”
Some will say, “But
you must trust.”
Some will say, “But
you must be patient.”
Patience is a
virtue. But patience does not mean watching the priesthood die
while those responsible refuse to act. Trust is necessary. But trust
does not mean pretending silence is wisdom when it is not. Obedience
is holy. But obedience has never meant cooperating in the erosion
of the Faith.
There is a moment
when continuing to wait becomes a form of surrender.
That moment has
arrived
And I know some
people will recoil when they hear that. They will say this language
is too strong. They will say it unsettles people.
Good
Because a Church
that is never unsettled by truth is already asleep.
Our Lord unsettled
people constantly. He overturned tables. He named hypocrisy. He
warned shepherds who fed themselves instead of the flock. He did not
speak gently to those who distorted the truth while claiming
authority.
And I am not
interested in a peace that is purchased by silence. I am not
interested in unity that requires lying to ourselves. I am not
interested in stability that comes at the price of surrender.
The line has been
drawn
It is being drawn
every time a faithful priest is punished for doing what saints did.
It is being drawn every time error is tolerated because correcting
it would be uncomfortable. It is being drawn every time Rome chooses
silence when clarity is required.
And here is the part
that must be said out loud: lines like this are never drawn by those
who want conflict. They are drawn by reality when authority refuses
to act.
At the Alamo, the
men who crossed the line did not think they would win. They knew
they would likely lose. They crossed because surrender would have
meant denying who they were and what they had been entrusted to
defend.
That is the choice
facing the Church now.
Not between victory
and defeat.
But between fidelity
and surrender.
Between truth and
managed decline.
Between saints and
administrators.
I am not calling for
rebellion. I am calling for honesty. I am not calling for chaos. I
am calling for courage. I am not calling anyone to abandon the
Church. I am calling the Church to remember herself.
Because if we will
not defend the priesthood, if we will not defend the sacraments, if
we will not defend the Faith when it costs something – then we are
already stepping back from the line.
And history will
record that choice too.
The Church does not
need more silence. She does not need more delay. She does not need
more careful statements that say nothing. She needs men who will
stand, speak, and if necessary, suffer – without illusions.
Because the line is
no longer theoretical.
It is here
And each of us –
bishop, priest, layman – is already deciding where we stand.
And now I am going
to stop explaining.
Because there comes
a moment when explanation becomes avoidance, and words become a way
of delaying obedience.
The line is no
longer in history books. It is no longer theoretical. It is no
longer something we debate at conferences or behind closed doors.
It is here
And it is not asking
what position you hold, or how many followers you have, or how
carefully you word your statements. It is asking one thing only:
whether you will stand with the truth when standing costs you
something.
Because this is what
must finally be said without ornament or apology: a Church that will
not defend her priesthood will not survive. A Church that treats
fidelity as dangerous and error as pastoral has already begun to
surrender. A Church that answers emergencies with silence is
choosing decay over courage.
That is not an
insult. That is not a threat. That is a diagnosis. And diagnoses are
meant to wake people up and call people to action.
There is no neutral
ground here. There is no safe middle space where one can quietly
wait and hope someone else acts. Silence itself has become a
position. Delay itself has become a decision.
The line is
drawn every time truth is asked to wait. Every time error is
excused. Every time courage is punished. Every time a shepherd looks
away.
And the most
terrifying thing about moments like this is not that some will
choose wrongly. It is that many will choose quietly – and tell
themselves they chose nothing at all.
History will not
agree with them
Neither will Christ
Because our Lord
does not ask whether we were comfortable. He asks whether we were
faithful. He does not ask whether we preserved our standing. He asks
whether we carried our cross. He does not ask whether we survived.
He asks whether we loved the truth more than our own safety.
So I will end this
where I must.
Not with a strategy.
Not with a program. Not with another conversation.
But with a call to
kneel
If you are listening
to this and your heart is unsettled, do not numb it. If you are
angry, examine why. If you are afraid, admit it. And then pray – not
for the Church to become easier, but for her to become holy again.
Pray for bishops who
will speak even when it costs them everything. Pray for priests who
will remain faithful even when abandoned. Pray for Rome – not that
it will manage this crisis, but that it will answer it.
And pray for
yourself
Because the line is
already there.
And when the noise
stops, and the chairs have finished hitting the floor, and there is
nothing left to hide behind, each of us will have to answer the only
question that matters:
Where were you
standing?
May Almighty God
bless you and keep you, in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.”
Bishop Joseph E.
Strickland
February 2026
Bishop Emeritus
Printable PDF Version
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Comments? Write us:
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
___________________________________________________________________________
The Most Urgent Question
of Our Time:
“When
the Son of Man Comes, will He Find Faith on Earth?”
(St. Luke 18.8)
No
more stunning,
no more frightening, and perhaps no more ominously portentous
words are spoken in all the Gospels, in fact, in the entire
New Testament — perhaps even in the entirety of Sacred Scripture
itself; words that have become increasingly fraught with
significance with every passing year of the most unfortunate
papacy of Francis — a papacy not just likely … but
I believe with certainty … will be understood not simply
as among the worst … but the worst … the most destructive
to the Faith and to the Church in the annals of 2000 years
of Church history.
Indeed, with every generation following that devastating
Second Vatican Council — that scorched earth assault on
Tradition and historical Catholicism — the question increasingly
verges on an implied and obvious answer.
Indeed, we must wonder if the question that Christ poses
… “When the Son of Man comes will He find Faith on earth?”
… is, in fact, spoken of this generation, or of one soon
— very soon, to come.
As with so many of Christ’s teachings, this troubling question
is too often and too deftly explained away — especially
by the overwhelming number of the liberal theologians and
bishops who have proliferated and multiplied since 1962
— which is to say, by “the learned
and the wise”. If we heed them, it would appear that
either Christ does not know what He is saying, or
we do not know what He is saying — although we all
agree that He said something ... that sounds
suspiciously clear.
We must, however, pay careful attention to these twelve
words, …. perhaps more now than at any
other time in Church history.
“When the Son of Man comes
will He find Faith on earth?”
These are twelve words, however,
to which we must pay careful attention, perhaps more now
than at any other time in Church history.
However reluctant we are to
take Christ at His word — which becomes increasingly inconvenient
to us — we must recognize that Jesus never spoke idly: His
words, His teachings — and yes, His Commandments
— were always uttered to one explicit end: the salvation
of souls — attaining to Heaven and everlasting happiness
and to avoiding Hell and eternal misery.
The Jewish religious authorities
— “the learned” of His own
time — had scornfully dismissed Christ’s warning that not
so much as stone would remain standing in the great Temple
1 ... the
very Temple within which, 70 years later, these words were
fulfilled when Rome laid waste in days what took 46 years
to build.
We tend to view such alarming
statements made by Jesus — and there are many — with the
same scorn and disdain today.
Indeed ... what has become of the “Faith
of our Fathers?”
A mere fifty years ago we
ourselves would have instinctively replied “Of course
He will find faith! There simply must be some deeper,
some obscure and less evident meaning to this that we do
not presently understand — and what He appears to
be saying, He is not really saying at all. Surely
the “learned” of our own day can deftly explain the answer
to this troubling question. In the end, they will conclude,
Jesus is really asking something entirely different from
what He appears to be asking and that it has
nothing to do with our very real defection from the Faith.”
It is likely that many Jews
of Jesus’ time — both the learned and the unlearned — had
replied in much the same way. In fact, they did.
In other words, to us, our
faith, the Faith of the Catholic Church for two millennia,
could no sooner disappear than ... well, the stones of the
great Temple 2000 years ago!
If, however, we take a careful
inventory of our present and undeniably dismal and increasingly
scandalous situation in the Church — especially as it has
unfolded in the last five decades — Jesus does not quite
appear as ... “perplexing” ... as so many apparently make
Him to be.
Candidly
Ask yourself the following:
Has the Faith — the Catholic
Faith — flourished in the last 50 years, or has it
withered?
Are vocations to the Priesthood
and Religious life growing or dwindling?
Are Catholics having more
children or are they having fewer children?
Are Missionary efforts,
to the end of (dare we say it?) “conversion” as mandated
by Christ
encouraged
as intrinsic to Catholicism — or are they discouraged
as impolite, obtrusive, culturally imperialistic and inherently
inimical to the “Ecumenical spirit of Vatican II” — especially
as interpreted by Pope Francis for whom “proselytism is
solemn nonsense,” to use his own words, words that mock
the sacrifices of countless missionary saints through the
2000 years preceding Vatican II’s
“more enlightened”
understanding of the
Great Commission*?
Rather, we find that “conversion”
to Christ and His Church is actively discouraged
— that especially under Pope Francis it is no longer
understood as a holy and inherently necessary endeavor
— instead, it is disdained, even dismissed, as “socially
and culturally incorrect” — indeed, we find that promoting
our Catholic Faith — as Christ has commanded us to—
has been forbidden by Francis and his “progressive”
coterie of feckless and disaffected cardinals and bishops!
What pope, prior to Vatican II, could ever have envisioned
this?
Is our understanding of the
Catholic Church, as an absolutely unique institution
indispensable to the ordinary means of salvation, emphasized
as urgently today (if it is emphasized at all) as it was
a hundred years ago? Fifty years ago? Indeed, is the concept
itself — of the singularity and indispensability of the
Holy Catholic Church — still deemed an actual dogma
and a viable concept at all?
For all our insolence and
equivocation, we know the answers, and we are uncomfortable
with them, for they fly in the face of Christ and all that
He taught — to say nothing of Sacred Scripture, Holy Tradition,
and the Sacred Deposit of the Faith entrusted to the Catholic
Church by God Himself.
Indeed, Christ’s question
takes on a greater sense of urgency still, for the sheep
are scattered and confused as never before. The papacy of
Francis has been disastrous for the Church. Why? Precisely
because he has taken Vatican II to its logical conclusion:
the irrelevance of the Church.
Ubi est Pastor?
Where is the Shepherd?
Who is earnestly addressing this spiritual malaise and religious
decay due to the indolence and dereliction of the vast majority
of American and European bishops who appear far more eager
for secular plaudits than the now quaint and discredited
notion of “the salvation of souls.” Pope Francis has effectively
declared this mandate defunct in favor of the rehabilitation
of bodies, societies, economies, and “the environment”.
That the passing material environment of man is infinitely
less important than the eternal abode of his soul,
often appears to elude Francis. Indeed, it appears to elude
most Catholics whose mantra increasingly coincides with
the world’s: Social activism! ... not interior
conversion away from this world ... and to Christ.
Shame! Shame on us!
By our silence, our fear of being disparaged by
“other Catholics” for the sake of Christ, we condone this
travesty — are complicit in it ... even promote it!
What will motivate
us to recognize, and to redress, this frightful and ultimately
deadly state of affairs?
There are, after all, other
contenders in this world for the souls of men ... seen and
unseen! As our own wick smolders, others blaze! The burning
Crescent of Islam, poised like a scimitar, and every bit
as deadly, glows and grows in the east, and with it, not
an ethnic, but a Religious Cleansing
to which the world remains indifferent — an expunging of
every vestige of Christianity in partibus infidelium.
And even Islam has its secular collaborators: the European
Union — once a continent raised up from utter barbarism
to a civilization formed and ennobled by its Catholic heritage
— will no longer tolerate the inclusion of its indissoluble
Christian heritage within its Constitution. Not only does
it thoroughly repudiate its own Christian cultural heritage
— it prohibits it — even banishes it! This
is nothing less than self-loathing. And perhaps it ought
to be.
Surely, then, in our effort
to remedy this impending state of dissolution, we will first
turn to our bishops, since they are, preeminently, the “Teachers
and Guardians of the Faith”. But more often than not — much
more often than not — in the well-appointed office at the
end of the corridor we do not find a shepherd of souls but
a deeply sequestered, occasionally avuncular, and predictably
remote ... “administrator.”
Relegating his prime responsibility
as Teacher and Promoter of the Faith ... to others, in the
form of Lay committees and subcommittees largely “chaired”
by liberal Catholics more concerned with social issues than
the salvation of souls, are we confident that the patrimony
of our faith will somehow percolate through this strata
of already contaminated soil and reach our children authentically
and intact? Is our fear mitigated ... or further exacerbated
... by our bishops’ resolute lack of diligence in being
attentive to what Catholic colleges and theologians in their
own dioceses are really teaching — and who are teaching
the teachers ... who, in turn, are teaching our children?
Do you think that your bishop
actually — that is to say, cognitively — is aware of, or
even concerned with — what the teachers themselves are actually
teaching?
Not in this diocese. Not in
Boston. In fact, the former Cardinal Sean Patrick O’Malley
had routinely feted, praised, and held up as exemplary,
the clueless “Catechists” who churn out our children to
the Sacrament of Confirmation — with no clue whatever of
that in which they are being confirmed. By comparison, even
the dismal failure of our public schools in Boston must
be deemed a stunning success.
For most of us — especially
in the Archdiocese of Boston, but no less elsewhere — the
answer is, as they say, a “no-brainer:” it is a universally
resounding no. Most of us find, to our growing dismay
and deepening cynicism, that our bishops appear to have
“more important,” more ... “pressing” things to do ... than
to communicate the Faith to the faithful ... especially
the children.
Really, we beg the question:
if no one teaches the teachers — who, then, teaches the
children? If they are not brought the faith by those to
whom it has been entrusted — the bishops, the episcopacy
— who will bring it to them?
Will they — how can they — acquire the Faith ...
if no one brings it to them? Saint Paul is very clear about
this:
“How then shall they call
on him, in whom they have not believed? Or how shall
they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And
how shall they hear, without a preacher? And how
shall they preach unless they be sent ...?”
(Romans 10.14-15)
Ask yourself candidly: do you know more ... or less ...
of your Catholic faith than your children? Very likely more
— although, in all honesty, it is probably little. You politely
assent to the now quaint Catholic notion that “parents are
the primary teachers of their children,” but knowing little
of your own Faith, you simply shell out $175.00 per child
and pan off this grave responsibility to others of whom
you know nothing, and who themselves largely know nothing
of the faith they presume to teach. You go through the motions
as careless of what your children are taught in their 10
years of “Religious Education” as your bishop is of what
the teachers teach. 10 years later, and $1500 poorer per
child, you scratch your head and wonder why Johnny still
does not know God, and why Judy never goes to Mass — and
yet we have agreed that you know more than your children
...
What, then, we must ask — with growing apprehension — will
your children teach their children ...?
What will they — who know even less than you
— teach those who know nothing?
Total Ignorance
The momentum, as we see, is
inexorable — until it culminates in total ignorance: every
generation knows less of their faith than the generation
preceding it. It is, in the end, the devolution from doctrine
to legend, from legend to fiction, and from fiction to myth.
That is not just a poor, but
a stultifying and ultimately deadly patrimony.
This default — at every level
— in transmitting the authentic Catholic faith intact ...
leaves Jesus’
question very suddenly very real.
“Recently,
a Gallup poll was taken on Catholic
attitudes toward Holy Communion. The
poll showed serious confusion among
Catholics about one of the most basic
beliefs of the Church. Only 30 percent
of those surveyed believe they are actually
receiving the Body and Blood, soul and
divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ under
the appearance of bread and wine.”
The problem is more than mathematical;
as we have seen, it is exponential. 70% of Catholics do
not possess this most fundamental, this most essential understanding
of the core article of genuine Catholic doctrine: that
“Unless you eat of the flesh of the
Son of Man, and drink His Blood, you have no life in you.”
Heavy stuff!
It is not just a matter of the greatest concern, but nothing
less than a matter of the gravest dereliction that most
Catholics do not realize — do not know — that the very
Mass itself is an abbreviation of “The Most Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass”, and that it is really a Sacrifice,
the actual re-enactment of Calvary before their very eyes!
This failure of understanding ... culminates in a failure
in Faith. It possesses, in significant ways, the remorseless
characteristics of mathematical certainties. Not understanding,
grasping — having never been taught — the most elementary
features of the faith, how can they be understood to possess
what they have not acquired, and how can they transmit,
pass on, what they do not possess? It is inescapable.
Prognostication, of course,
is for fools.
But the words of Christ are
certainties that will come to pass.
“Weep
not for Me, but for your children,” 5
Christ told the sorrowing
women on the road to Calvary.
Jesus’ question, then —
“When the Son of Man comes will He
find faith on earth?”— is not a “rhetorical
question” at all; it is a question fraught with enormous
significance ... the frightful answer to which appears to
be unfolding before our very eyes ... but that is if you
take Christ at His word — and given Jesus’ track record
on things yet to come, we would do well and wisely to give
pause for more than thought.
Are you worried now ...? Not nearly enough.
And this is all the more frightening still.
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
Comments? Write us:
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
Printable PDF Version
___________________________________________________________________________
The Holy Catholic Faith
Where is it And Who is Keeping
it?

Has the
Post-Conciliar Church
Lost Custody
of the Faith?
All
indications are that is has
The “Dark Ages” — that disdainful
term for the period in history following the collapse of
the Roman Empire in 476 A.D. until the 15th century
(a period correctly described as the Middle Ages)
is understood by the secular world to have lasted
roughly 1000 years, beginning in Florence, Italy.
Within the post-Conciliar
Catholic Church, however, it appears that the term extends
well beyond the 15th century; indeed, some 500
years beyond it! According to contemporary Catholic thought
articulated within the past five papacies, the “Dark Ages”
really ended in 1965 at the conclusion of the Second
Vatican Council. All the doctrines and teachings prior
to that Council were only imperfectly, deficiently, and
insufficiently articulated or defectively understood.
The 1000 Years of Darkness
Only
the Second Vatican Council finally attained to enlightenment
in the divine economy, and after 1,965 years of suspension,
it alone has provided the final, sufficient, and correct
understanding of God and Church, man and nature. Prior to
that, according to post-Conciliar thought, Catholics had
essentially lived in darkness, specifically the darkness
of the “pre-Conciliar Dark Ages.” It may be said that where
the Rational Enlightenment “saved the world from religion,”
Vatican II saved the Church from Catholicism.
Continue reading
___________________________________________________________________________
Martyrology for Today
Semen est sanguis Christianorum (The
blood of Christians is the seed of the Church) Tertullian,
Apologeticum, 50
2004 Roman Martyrology
by Month
2004 Roman Martyrology

Monday, February 16th in the Year of Grace 2026
This Day, the Sixteenth Day of February
1. In Campania, Saint Juliana,
virgin and martyr.
2. Caesarea in Palestine,
the holy martyrs Elias, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Samuel, and
Daniel, who were Egyptian Christians. When they had
voluntarily ministered to confessors of the faith who were
condemned to the mines in Cilicia, they were arrested and,
under the governor Firmilian during the reign of the emperor
Galerius Maximian, were most savagely tortured and finally
struck down by the sword. After them, there also received
the crown of martyrdom: Pamphilus, priest; Valens, deacon
of Jerusalem; and Paul, originally from the city of
Jamnia, who had spent two years in prison; and also Porphyrius,
the servant of Pamphilus; Seleucus, a Cappadocian,
promoted in military rank, Theodulus, an old man
from the household of Governor Firmilian; and finally
Julian, a Cappadocian, who, arriving at that very hour
as a traveler, kissed the bodies of the martyrs and was
reported as a Christian, and the governor ordered him to
be burned with a slow fire.
3. In the Persian kingdom,
Saint Maruthas, bishop, who, after peace was restored
to the Church, presided over the Council of Seleucia, restored
churches of God that had collapsed during the persecution
under King Shapur, and placed the relics of Persian martyrs
in his episcopal city, which was thereafter called Martyrópolis.
4. Borgo San Pietro in
the Abruzzi, blessed Philippa Mareri, virgin, who,
scorning riches and the pomp of the world, embraced in her
native place the way of life recently begun by Saint Clare.
5. Perugia in Umbria,
the commemoration of blessed Nicholas Paglia, priest
of the Order of Preachers, who received the habit and mission
of preaching from Saint Dominic himself.
6. Turin in Italy,
blessed Joseph Allamano, priest, who, burning with tireless
zeal, founded two Missionary Congregations of the Consolata,
for both men and women, for the spreading of the faith.
__________________________________________________________________
And elsewhere in divers places, many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
Omnes sancti Mártyres, oráte pro nobis.
(“All ye Holy Martyrs, pray for us,” from the Litaniae Sanctorum, the Litany of the Saints)
℟. Thanks be to God.
|
The 1956 edition below, issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII, is a revision of the typical edition of 1749, which had been promulgated by Pope Benedict XIV remained the foundational text for later updates throughout the 18th–20th centuries up to 2004 — the English translation of which remained the sole source of the Martyrology until the present translation of the 2004 Roman Martyrology by the Boston Catholic Journal in 2025.
|
|
1959 ROMAN MARTYROLOGY

Monday, February 16th in the Year of Grace 2026
This Day, the Sixteenth Day of February
The birthday of blessed Onesimus,
concerning whom the Apostle St. Paul wrote to Philemon.
He made him bishop of Ephesus after St. Timothy, and committed
to him the office of preaching. Being led a prisoner to
Rome, and stoned to death for the faith of Christ, he was
buried in that city; but his body was afterwards carried
to the place where he had been bishop.
At Cumae, in Campania, the Translation
of St. Juliana, virgin and martyr. Under the emperor
Maximian, she was first severely scourged by her own father,
Africanus, then made to suffer many torments by the prefect,
Evilasius, whom she had refused to marry. Later being thrown
into prison, she encountered the evil spirit in a visible
manner. Finally, as a fiery furnace and a caldron of boiling
oil could do her no injury, she terminated her martyrdom
by decapitation.
In Egypt, St. Julian, martyr, with
five thousand other Christians.
At Caesarea, in Palestine, the holy
martyrs Elias, Jeremias, Isaias, Samuel, and Daniel, Egyptians,
who of their own accord served the confessors of Christ
condemned to labor in the mines of Cilicia, but were arrested
on their return, and after being cruelly tortured by the
governor Firmilian, under the emperor Galerius Maximian,
were put to the sword.
After them, St. Porphyry, servant
of the martyr Pamphilus, and St. Seleucus,
a Cappadocian, who had been victorious in several combats,
being again exposed to torments, won the crown of martyrdom,
the one by fire, the other by the sword.
At Arezzo, in Tuscany, blessed Gregory
X, a native of Piacenza, who was elected Sovereign
Pontiff while he was archdeacon of Liege. He held the second
Council of Lyons, received the Greeks into the unity of
the Church, appeased discords among Christians, made generous
efforts for the recovery of the Holy Land, and governed
the Church in the most holy manner.
At Brescia, St. Faustinus, bishop
and confessor.
And elsewhere in divers places, many other holy martyrs,
confessors, and holy virgins.
Omnes sancti Mártyres, oráte pro nobis. (“All ye Holy Martyrs, pray for us,” from the Litaniae Sanctorum, the Litany of the Saints)
Response: Thanks be to God.
|
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1959 Roman Martyrology by Month
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Why the Martyrs Matter
Each
day we bring you a
calendar, a list really, of the holy Martyrs who had suffered
and died for Christ, for His Bride the Church, and for our holy
Catholic Faith; men and women for whom — and well they knew
— their Profession of Faith would cost them their lives.
They could have repudiated all three (Christ, Church, and Catholic
Faith) and kept their lives for a short time longer (even the
lapsi * only postponed their death — and
at so great a cost!)
What would motivate men, women, even children and entire families
to willingly undergo the most evil and painfully devised tortures;
to suffer death rather than denial?
Why did they not renounce their Catholic Faith when the first
flame licked at their feet, after the first eye was plucked
out, or after they were “baptized” in mockery by boiling water
or molten lead poured over their heads? Why did they not flee
to offer incense to the pagan gods since such a ritual concession
would be merely perfunctory, having been done, after all, under
duress, exacted by the compulsion of the state? What is a little
burned incense and a few words uttered without conviction, compared
to your own life and the lives of those you love? Surely God
knows that you are merely placating the state with empty gestures
…
Did they love their wives, husbands, children — their mothers,
fathers and friends less than we do? Did they value their own
lives less? Were they less sensitive to pain than we are? In
a word, what did they possess that we do not?
Nothing. They possessed what we ourselves are given in the Sacrament
of Confirmation — but cleaved to it in far greater measure than
we do: Faith and faithfulness; fortitude and valor, uncompromising
belief in the invincible reality of God, of life eternal in
Him for the faithful, of damnation everlasting apart from Him
for the unfaithful; of the ephemerality of this passing world
and all within it, and lives lived in total accord with that
adamant belief.
We are the Martyrs to come! What made them so will make us
so. What they suffered we will suffer. What they died for, we
will die for. If only we will! For most us, life will be
a bloodless martyrdom, a suffering for Christ, for the sake
of Christ, for the sake of the Church in a thousand ways outside
the arena. The road to Heaven is lined on both sides with Crosses,
and upon the Crosses people, people who suffered unknown to
the world, but known to God. Catholics living in partibus
infidelium, under the scourge of Islam. Loveless marriages.
Injustices on all sides. Poverty. Illness. Old age. Dependency.
They are the cruciform! Those whose lives became Crosses because
they would not flee God, the Church, the call to, the
demand for, holiness in the most ordinary things of life made
extraordinary through the grace of God. The Martyrology we celebrate
each day is just a vignette, a small, immeasurably small, sampling
of the martyrdom that has been the lives of countless men and
women whom Christ and the Angels know, but whom the world does
not know.
“Exemplum enim dedi vobis”, Christ
said to His Apostles: “I have given you an example.” And His
Martyrs give one to us — and that is why the Martyrs matter.
-
A Martyr is
one who suffers tortures and a violent death for
the sake of Christ and the Catholic Faith.
-
A Confessor
is one who confesses Christ publicly in times of persecution
and who suffers torture, or severe punishment by secular
authorities as a consequence. It is a title given only
given to those who suffered for the Faith —
but was not killed for it —
and who had persevered in the Faith until the
end.
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
editor@boston-catholic-journal.com
Boston Catholic Journal
Note:
We suggest that you explore our newly edited and revised
“De
SS. Martyrum Cruciatibus — The Torments and Tortures of the
Christian Martyrs”
for an in-depth historical account of the sufferings of the
Martyrs.
____________________________
*
Those early Christians who renounced their Catholic Faith
in times of persecution. When confronted with the prospect
of torture and death if they held fast to their faith in
Christ, they denied Him and their Faith through an act of
sacrificing (often incense) to the pagan Roman gods and
in so doing kept their lives and/or their freedom and property.

Totally
Faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith entrusted
to the Holy See in Rome
“Scio
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti verbum
Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum”
“I
know your works ... that you have but little power, and
yet you have kept My word, and have not denied My Name.”
(Apocalypse 3.8)
Copyright © 2004 - 2026 Boston
Catholic Journal. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise
stated, permission is granted by the Boston Catholic Journal
for the copying and distribution of the articles and audio
files under the following conditions: No additions,
deletions, or changes are to be made to the text or audio
files in any way, and the copies may not be sold for a profit.
In the reproduction, in any format of any image, graphic,
text, or audio file, attribution must be given to the Boston
Catholic Journal.
|
|