Weekly Summary: 5/16/26
The week in review, from the perspective of a veteran Catholic journalist
A policy change for readers who are not paying subscribers:
The bad news: Once a twice a week, I’m going to be putting an essay behind a paywall— my way of passing the hat.
The good news: But on Saturday, when I put out this Weekly Summary, I’m going to remove the paywall(s)— my way of making sure that everyone eventually has access.
Articles
I call it The government’s war on romance. A perceptive op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by Rob Henderson notes that Norwegian social scientists have correctly identified a serious problem— women marrying later, and having fewer children than they want— and proposed a spectacularly wrongheaded solution— subsidizing single motherhood.
In the latest disturbing development from the Synod on Synodality, a report from one of the “study groups” contained fulsome praise for same-sex marriage. This has become a regular feature of the Synod: a sympathetic treatment of homosexuality, presented in a working paper so that it’s not an official Vatican statement, but still sure to attract headlines. The “lavender mafia” at work.
The tension mounts within the Catholic Church as the traditionalist Society of St. Pius X moves forward with plans to ordain new bishops in defiance of the Vatican. Does the SSPX want a schism? I ask— pointing to a crucial ambiguity in the latest public statement from the group.
This week on the Home Front podcast:
- Is there a “state of necessity” in the Catholic Church today? I argue that the Vatican, not the Society of St. Pius X, has the authority to make that discernment. But if the Vatican would acknowledge that some things— such as the radical of the German hierarchy— are seriously wrong, we could still avert a schism.
- Then Leila exposes the “information op” designed to persuade young mothers that they can’t stay home with their children. And I follow up by observing that the government seems hostile to romance.
Notes
Did Vatican II cause a decline in Catholicism? In a response to a reader, I suggest that although we can’t prove a causal link, we should at least be able to agree that the Council didn’t provide the solution.
Noted in passing: The Trump administration seemed successful in ousting Venezuela’s President Maduro, but the country’s Catholic bishops testify that not much has changed.
You shouldn’t miss Leila’s essay in The Federalist, thoroughly debunking the idea that daycare is an absolute necessity. The judgment that taxpayer-funded programs are “doing for childcare what the government has already done to healthcare” is right on the money.
The indispensable Cardinal Sarah calls for clarification of Catholic doctrine, to dispel the mistaken impression that Vatican II discarded traditional teachings. (You’ll notice that I make a similar argument on the Home Front.)
Sure enough, the Vatican assured us that the controversial report from Study Group #9 (see above) was only a report of what had been discussed, not an endorsement of radical ideas. It’s called plausible deniability, and it’s getting old.
For 45 pleasant minutes, I broke away from polemics for a delightful conversation with Kiki Latimer of The Catholic Bookworm about my novel, Ghost Runner. She loved the book; I loved the conversation.
Add Cardinal Willem Eijk to the list of those who were appalled by the report from Study Group #9— which the Dutch cardinal saw as “a clear attempt to weaken the proclamation of Catholic moral teaching.”
