‘Unprofitable Servant’ by Margaret Coats The Society January 3, 2022 Culture, Poetry 25 Comments . Unprofitable Servant Bergoglio clarifies his views on the Latin Mass A treasure was mine, but it’s too long ago For me to recover what now I despise. Fearful and sickened and sadly too slow I was to suppress it, and new catechize Against all allurements that cause it to grow. Why didn’t it die? Why proselytize? In years as the Rock, I’ve shown negligency. The Faith I can’t trust; just one talent I hold. The Council gave bishops the pope’s primacy, But liturgical changes must smother what’s old. I’m confused about doctrine and morals, you see, But Tradition I grasp—I can bury that gold. Who says there’s no profit in digging I’ve done? The divisive are saved from my crude paganism. They’re hid underground, far removed from what’s fun, And muzzled and shunned to prevent holy schism. Having stopped their contagion from spreading, I’ve won! What fear need I have of divine cataclysm? . . Margaret Coats lives in California. She holds a Ph.D. in English and American Literature and Language from Harvard University. She has retired from a career of teaching literature, languages, and writing that included considerable work in homeschooling for her own family and others. NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets. The Society of Classical Poets does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or commentary. Trending now: 25 Responses Karen Darantière January 3, 2022 Amen, dear Margaret. How sadly true your poem rings. Thank you. We will not relinquish our Faith, but will hold fast to our Sacred Liturgy. Reply Margaret Coats January 4, 2022 Thanks for your encouraging response, Karen. Our sacred liturgy is attracting even more persons, because it embodies the truth and beauty of the Faith. It became much more widely available via livestream when churches were closed. More especially since the pronouncement directed against it last summer, Latin Mass congregations have been growing. December’s extremely restrictive “clarification” is important only in clearly showing the intent to abrogate it completely, something never done before. But we will hold fast! Reply Joseph S. Salemi January 3, 2022 Bergoglio has a hell of a lot to fear. And I don’t use the word “hell” as a mere emphatic epithet in that sentence. Reply Margaret Coats January 4, 2022 To use a customary Catholic expression, Bingo! You get the main point of the serious situation and of the poem. Reply C.B. Anderson January 3, 2022 This was no easy read, Margaret, but in the end I think I’ve understood it. Your use of the term “Bergoglio” in the epigraph implies that you are already a Sedevacantist, and I am entirely sympathetic, though it’s really none of my business. Yet I wonder, in line 4 of the first stanza, whether “new” was meant to be “now,” for otherwise I have a hard time determining what part of speech “new” was actually meant to be. Whatever be the case, this poem is another powerful indictment of an election gone wrong. Reply Margaret Coats January 3, 2022 From the time of that election, it has been difficult for Catholics and others to find a name for the man who occupies the papal chair. “Bergoglio” has become the most acceptable word, as it identifies the person without causing too much friction. It doesn’t imply that the speaker is a sedevacantist, and I don’t wave that flag. Being Catholic is what’s vital, and as you can easily imagine, many Catholics find it hard to speak of a confusion-mongering prelate who abuses authority and often shows contempt for our Faith in the terms we might ordinarily use for the pope. “New” as an adverb is considered obsolete by dictionaries, but its meanings “newly” and “anew” have a long history in English. The modern language has some relics of this in compound words such as “newfound” and “newborn.” The poem has its challenges, because it echoes the Parable of the Talents, and because my speaker with the single talent does not think straight, just as the corresponding individual in the Gospel story did not. Thanks for taking the time and trouble to figure it out! Reply Joseph S. Salemi January 4, 2022 I’m glad to see Margaret’s use of “new” as an adverb, no matter what those modern dictionaries try to dictate. Besides “newfound” and “newborn,” I have seen these also (with or without the hyphen): new-baked in reference to bread; new-minted in reference to coins or used metaphorically; new-mown in reference to freshly cut hay; and new-bought in reference to a recent purchase. Since the “new” in these compounds functions precisely as “newly” or “lately,” to modify an adjective or a past participle functioning adjectivally, then “new” in such cases is an adverb. The committees who control dictionary usage panels today are fixated on eliminating any irregularities or idiomatic curiosities that cannot be shoehorned into existing general patterns. They have fought ferociously to compel speakers never to say “The Argentine” or “The Ukraine” or “The Bronx,” but only “Argentina” and “Ukraine” and “Bronx.” They’re also desperate to eliminate “lest” (since it demands a subjunctive). It’s a low-level fanaticism, but it’s dangerous. Brian Yapko January 3, 2022 I approach your fine poem, Margaret, from another denomination but with the deepest respect for Catholicism, which is parent to my church. Your very fine poem shines a glaringly unflattering spotlight on a man who seems patently unqualified to be pope. I appreciate (alas without enjoyment due to the subject matter) the dramatic monologue you have spun for a man who veers between feebleness, ignorance and corruption. The irony when he obliviously misdiagnoses why he should be accused of “negligency”! That he would consider divine tradition “contagion” is just plain bonkers. Of course he doesn’t fear “divine cataclysm” when he’s probably an atheist! I’m glad you wrote this painful poem. I always appreciate your pro-religious advocacy. Well done! Reply Margaret Coats January 5, 2022 Brian, your analysis is extremely perceptive. This character piece presents what seems to be the confused thinking of a person who is supposed to be the Head of Christ’s Church, and who is certainly the best known religious leader in the world. From his age (85 years), we know that he was among Catholics who went through The Changes of the 1960s and 1970s as an adult. This generation either chose to leave the Church, or to alter everything they once held as sacred. It is too painful for them to contemplate its flourishing survival. They fail to acknowledge the chaos they’ve created, and they develop a feeling of impotence in some areas. This leads to hostility, not only against persons who think otherwise, but against God Himself. One carefully written book, “Destructio Dei,” points out that progressive theologians try to demolish the view of God as absolute, transcendent, and personal. That is, they divest God of nearly everything He is–and come up with varying systems to explain what’s left. This takes away their fear of God, while making them brutal and scornful toward “divisive” traditional believers. The recent “clarification” about the Latin Mass is an unprecedented abuse of power directed especially at bishops, who must be the enforcers. If they want to be archbishops or cardinals instead of saints, some of the faithful are in for a rough ride. But we have much more knowledge and experience than we did back in the bad old days when The Changes began. Let’s hope it is useful against the feebleness, ignorance, corruption, and atheism I seem to see, and that you saw in my poem. Reply Satyananda Sarangi January 5, 2022 Greetings ma’am! What a lovely and truthful poem! Best wishes. Reply Margaret Coats January 5, 2022 Many thanks, Satyananda! Let’s pray that we do not see the bad fruits unashamedly planted in the recent “clarification.” Reply R M Moore January 5, 2022 Thanks, Margaret. Reply Margaret Coats January 6, 2022 And thank you for being here! Reply Joseph S. Salemi January 6, 2022 It’s clear that Bergoglio hates the Latin Mass and wants to cancel it permanently, but let’s not forget that a great deal of the pressure and support for Traditionis Custodes came from the bishops themselves. Most of these creeps viscerally loathe traditionalist Catholics and can’t stand having to provide them with the opportunity to hear the Latin Mass. What has happened can be understood politically. Both the Antipope and the bulk of the Novus Ordo hierarchy hate the old liturgy, and have had to tolerate it because of Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum and earlier indults. But both Bergoglio and the hierarchy are gung-ho for “synodality” (which basically means the unquestioned authority of local ordinaries to run their dioceses in whatever way they like). So this move against not just the Latin Mass itself, but also against all Ecclesia Dei communities, is a blast from a double-barreled shotgun. The Antipope gets what he wants; the Novus Ordo bishops get what they want. This is sheer, naked, and unrestrained lust for power. Traditionalist Roman Catholics expecting sympathy or support from a Novus Ordo bishop in this matter would be as if anti-Hitler groups in 1940 expected sympathy or support from the local Nazi Gauleiter. Reply Margaret Coats January 6, 2022 Joe, I think the December clarification is a test for bishops, most of whom did little or nothing to enforce Traditionis Custodes after it was issued in July. And I doubt that bishops cared enough to submit the dubia in the new document. Bergoglio and Vatican official Roche put together stringent rules (like existing Latin Masses not to be considered parish Masses), to which compliance can be checked. It’s now been sixty years since Catholics were able to live a life faithful to our immemorial traditions with the support and sympathy of the hierarchy. The presently increasing number of persons who want to be good Catholics in the old way, with daily Mass and pious devotions and good sermons and catechesis at a parish church, must scare and perplex them. Their whole careers are built on another business plan. Still, the most ridiculous thing about the “clarification” is that it seems to think a little instruction in the “riches” of the new liturgy will satisfy traditionalists. Every Catholic has had opportunities to participate in these “riches,” and many have had decades of experience. Why is anyone still hungry? I agree with you that we cannot expect sympathy and support. We can request it, demand it and pray for it, and make our volunteer and monetary contributions wisely. I don’t know a single bishop well enough to tell what he feels viscerally. I have recently been convinced by a civil law professional investigating Church corruption that things are far, far worse than we thought. But the nature of the Church is hierarchical, and I don’t agree with whoever said the laity will save the Church. The renewed expansion of the Latin rite has been permitted by helpful bishops (one of whom confirmed my children in the old rite) and supported by faithful priests. I think it was G. K. Chesterton who said, “The Church has gone to the dogs at least five times, and every time it was the dog that died.” Synodality is a related problem, but crazier than you think. I attended the opening liturgy of Synod 2021-2023 in the San Bernardino diocese, and I have some indications of how this worldwide synod applies to you and me–and it is intended for every one of us. But that’s another poem if I could ever put it into verse. Like Vatican II, it starts with ambiguity. Reply Joseph S. Salemi January 6, 2022 Margaret, there’s one thing in your second paragraph I’d like to comment on. All liberals, leftists, and religious modernists reflexively assume that what they are offering to us is inherently excellent and desirable, and only pathological ignorance and malice on our part explains our refusal to accept it. This is true whether these people are religious, agnostic, atheistic, or utterly secular. They always have the right answers, and — as they see the world — under no circumstances could anyone possibly argue with them, much less refute them. This colossal self-regard and narcissism are granitic in density. So you are quite correct about the unspoken assumption of Bergoglio and Roche that we traditionalists will all just jump right in and celebrate this new liturgical crap once we get a taste of it. It is a glaring sign of their stupendous conceit and lack of awareness. What kind of an idiot thinks that we (who have been fighting this war since 1969) will happily embrace Vat 2 heresy and synodality if we are forced to take part in its garbage? Yes, there are genuinely orthodox bishops, and helpful ones, and even ones who have the testicular fortitude to speak out against Bergoglio. But what percentage are they of the great mass of timeserving careerists who will say or do anything to climb the hierarchical ladder? Aren’t most of them bending over backwards to honor LGBT perverts, and to support Planned Parenthood, while giving Communion to Biden and Pelosi as they take big government payoffs for handling illegal immigrants? One minor point: Have you ever seen photographs of the worst bishops (Dolan, Cupich, Gregory, and all of their disgusting clones and toadies) without seeing a HUGE AND PATRONIZING SMILE on their faces? It’s infuriating. These scum know that they are in power, and that with the right Antipope at the helm they can browbeat, lecture, and silence real Roman Catholics everywhere. Reply Margaret Coats January 8, 2022 Joe, I’m not sure modernists always think that their ways are inherently excellent and desirable. Think of Paul VI more than once referring to the old liturgy as “silken garments.” He used this imagery to state that the new Mass is more comprehensible, more suitable for the present time, or simply that it’s practical and necessary. That doesn’t mean more excellent and desirable. I agree with your main point that modernists always think what they want is better, but their reasons are not always that it is intrinsically superior. You are correct to say that they “reflexively assume” their course is the correct one. But when we leave aside the general modernist procedure, and refer specifically to the old Mass, I believe one reason they want it to be as invisible as they can possibly make it, is because they know it is in fact better than the new. It is intrinsically attractive to anyone with Catholic faith, and indeed to many others as well. If it is visible and available, it is an overwhelming opponent to the Novus Ordo and all the accompanying baggage. They fear its counterrevolutionary power. Over and over again, I’ve heard Catholics of our generation and younger ones come to the conclusion, “We’ve been robbed.” But as you also say, the prelates do have that dominant smile, knowing our powerlessness. I hate the idea that what is worse has dominated my lifetime, and that we can’t see the way out of this situation. The percentage of faithful bishops and priests is less than what it was during the years of Vatican II. But I would rather live here and push the limits of what is possible than live in Japan during the 250 years when they had no priests. Reply Joseph S. Salemi January 8, 2022 Margaret, I agree with you in almost every respect. But I’d like to mention here, in public, something that I experienced back in 1968 at Fordham University , when the Vat 2 steamroller was revving up to wreck Catholicism as we know it. Fordham’s faculty back then was still heavily Jesuit, with most of these priests born around 1905. They were traditional Irish Jesuits with a strong loyalty to orthodox Catholicism and Thomistic philosophy, and although they were elderly they provided us with a fine education, both on religious and secular subjects. But they were slowly being replaced by lay faculty at Fordham — some good, and some not so good. The head of the Romance Languages department at that time was Dr. Anthony J. Mottola, who was fine as a teacher but utterly devoted to the entire “Spirit of Vat 2.” He and I would discuss things outside of class, where I mentioned my dislike of the recent liturgical changes, and of the entire atmosphere of freakiness and harebrained innovation that was corrupting Catholic belief and practice. Mottola of course was totally in love with the changes, and defended them. In the course of our discussion I mentioned that a great many Roman Catholics (friends, acquaintances, fellow parishioners, and family members) were just as upset and angry as I was, and some of them seemed disheartened enough to think of giving up on the Church altogether. At that time I was an avid reader of TRIUMPH magazine, the lone publication that gave voice to these feelings from some Catholic intellectuals, and I mentioned to Mottola that numerous Catholic academicians and writers shared the dissatisfaction of many laypersons. Here’s what Mottola answered: “It’s a good thing if those people leave the Church. We don’t need them. One great result of Vat 2 is that we are getting A BETTER CLASS OF PEOPLE in the Church now. We don’t have to be ashamed of whom we’re sitting with in the pews.” I can’t describe the sheer horror, revulsion, and insult that I felt upon hearing this. Mottola thought of the Catholic Church as a kind of country club where only “our kind of people” should be permitted membership, and Vat 2 was deliberately purging the Church of any undesirable members, much to his delight. And this purge included both simple laypersons, and any writer or intellectual who had the temerity to question the idiocies of Vat 2. I found out that this attitude was fairly common among the new lay faculty at Fordham, many of whom had a snobbish, elitist, fashionista mentality towards ordinary Roman Catholics, and anyone who questioned current trends. The idea that Vat 2 was designed to make the Church more open to the needs of common people is, in my view, one of those spectacularly horrendous lies that sometime gain traction for some reason. Vat 2 was all about exclusion, class-consciousness, and the impulse to treat some people as inferiors unworthy of pastoral concern. This has been a common trait among pro-Vat 2 partisans, whether clerical or lay, since this massive dumpster-fire started sixty years ago. And the prejudice has permeated the thinking of most bishops and cardinals, and a large number of ordinary priests. They simply DON’T LIKE ordinary Roman Catholics, and want them replaced by a totally different kind of parishioner: preferably educated, left-liberal, trendy, affluent, LGBT, and hopefully non-white. (Sort of like a faculty cocktail party.) It was not just Mottola. I could tell you a horror story of the open, vicious contempt that Helen and I and a group of young engaged couples experienced from the two lay leaders of our “Pre-Cana Conference.” (It was so blatant and disgusting that I and the Monsignor who performed our Latin Rite wedding ceremony wrote to the Chancery to complain.) The attitude seemed to be this: “What’s wrong with you stupid white working-class Catholics — getting MARRIED? Are you for real? You probably don’t know a thing about sex.” If I remembered the name of those two scumbags I would have typed them here, along with Mottola’s, just to immortalize them as specimens of Vat 2 thinking. At the time, in my Sicilian rage, I wanted to go up to those creeps and spit in their faces, but Helen restrained me. She’s Neapolitan. Reply R M Moore January 8, 2022 Dear Joseph, Although I’m not of Sicilian roots, I share your fire. But it is time to develop a strategy similar to the enemy. Be calm, Jesus already went through this with the Temple leaders of His time. I appreciate both you and Margaret for writing so clearly on this matter. God love you both. Reply Margaret Coats January 11, 2022 Joe, thank you for taking the trouble to place important remembrances here. And I thank Mrs. Moore for letting you know that you are heard. I assure you both that others beside myself are paying attention to this discussion. Joe, you are right to describe Vatican II novelties as leading to desire for a purge. A disastrous loss of souls then took place. But the desire for the new, country-club style church remains unsatisfied. The young, educated, trendy, left-liberal, affluent coterie didn’t need the Church. The ones who stayed were often Catholics who held on by their fingernails, convinced that the Faith and the Church are necessary for salvation, and that obedience to authority is vital. Here’s one example of how an unlikely prospect comes to conform to new ways. My elderly aunt was a faithful Catholic all her life, as others were leaving the Church, and most of the numerous parishes in her area were closing. During her last years she was homebound, receiving Communion weekly from a laywoman. The priest visited once a year. At her side she kept a leaflet of “Healing Prayers.” It had a beautiful picture of the compassionate Jesus on page 1. Page 2 spoke of many ills that an elderly person might experience, and expressed confidence that God would heal them. Pages 3 and 4 prayed for the healing of the world through the triumph of socialism and globalism. My aunt read these prayers every day. She mailed a monthly check to the parish, and yearly absentee ballots to vote in accord with what the leaflet taught. Catholics determined to persevere in their Faith have no choice but to be divisive, even if they do no more than complain. If they tend toward separatism, they too may undertake purges, trying to guarantee that all others in their group share their views and practices. Some of the best priests harangue the faithful about how much stronger a smaller Church could be. There is an obsession not with converting the world, but with getting rid of deadwood. One thinker believes this has happened because the “welcoming” and supposedly “unifying” outlook of Vatican II places great emphasis on equalizing saints and sinners. There should be individuals at all levels, if the Church is truly in the process of teaching the whole world all that Our Lord Jesus Christ taught. Formerly, those striving hardest for sanctity were admired as models. Now they are embarrassments because they make others look bad. This translates into getting rid of whatever is most Catholic to demonstrate openness. Rather than invest a talent to offer the gains to God, bury it. The speaker in my poem does that, and justifies himself. Reply Joseph S. Salemi January 11, 2022 It’s very sad to read about your elderly aunt. Something similar happened (but with different reactions) in my wife’s family after Vat 2. The house we now live in was owned by Helen’s Uncle Chuck, a very devout Catholic and old bachelor who attended Mass every morning at 7 A.M., before going to work. When the new mass was introduced, Uncle Chuck was dumbfounded and appalled. After a few month of tolerating the stupid absurdities of folk songs and gesticulating laypersons in the sanctuary, he simply stopped going, permanently. He could see, as many glib Novus Ordo apologists cannot, that the new mass was NOT THE REAL MASS AT ALL. Reply Margaret Coats January 14, 2022 I must acknowledge that you present the fundamental question on this topic. Uncle Chuck answered “no” with his “sense of the faithful.” Others said “yes” with various arguments, not worth listing. Some Catholics, in some local churches, may be able to continue a devout, sacramental life, while risking weakened faith or gradual conversion to modernism. That’s supposing the modernized ritual has minimum validity. The practical question is how to live. The Mass is the sole way God provided for human beings to worship Him; other services are manmade. Taking the time and expense to find the traditional Mass is not possible for most Catholics. I have been one of the “roamin’ Catholics” spending time and travel to find what’s best. I admit the goal is a moving target. I can hardly blame anyone who worships as best he can, either with prayer and reading at home, or in a church where he judges the rite acceptable. Neither is the divine treasure of Catholic worship that God gave us and rightly demands of us. I can’t agree that we must be “with Jesus” wherever He is, if that means suffering with Him by participating in liturgical abuses. I think I’ve said just enough to call the matter an insoluble problem! But that’s why the new attempt at suppressing authentically Catholic worship deserves satirical treatment, as mild as my poem may be. Reply Tamara Beryl Latham January 20, 2022 Margaret, you’ve so eloquently given us a summary (in poetic form) of what is currently occurring in the Catholic church. Brilliant! I gave up when the Mass was changed from Latin to English. Further, I resented the fact that Pope Gregory turned Mary Magdalene into a prostitute, when neither of the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, indicated she was such. And although Hollywood continues to paint Mary Magdalene as the woman of the night, not any of the Popes (current or former) to my knowledge, have ever addressed the producers and demanded that inaccuracy be stripped from their movies. As well, why are some Catholics excommunicated from the church and others, the more powerful politician types, allowed to remain even though their actions are antithetical to church doctrine? Great job, Margaret! 🙂 Reply Margaret Coats January 21, 2022 Tamara, all Catholics and the whole world lost an inestimable treasure when the Mass was changed. It still belongs to us, as it is God’s gift, but it takes effort to reclaim, and that effort is beyond the power of many. I hope you can find a Latin Mass near enough to attend at least occasionally. As Joseph S. Salemi remarked above, with the story of his Catholic college professor, the problem is that persons in favor of The Changes actually want others to leave the Church. They do not consider Holy Mass the way God gave us to worship Him. Instead, it is a manmade community ritual, and men can never surpass God (or satisfy His faithful) by their substitutes. Rather, souls whom God made to be happy with Him forever are being lost because they cannot find His graces, and then they stop looking. I think that includes both the politicians who are happy as non-practicing Catholics, and the prelates who are happy not to convert them to real faith and practice. About Mary Magdalene, you are right that none of the Gospels, nor sacred Tradition, say that she was a prostitute. She is often identified with “the woman who was a sinner,” who anointed Jesus at the home of Simon the Pharisee. But even if someone makes that identification, he or she need not dishonor a saint far greater than ourselves by focusing on her unknown sin. The moviemakers would do better to follow the example of Gabrielle de Coignard, French Renaissance poet, some of whose sonnets I have translated. As I haven’t published any, let me offer one here. Hope you like it. FOR THE MAGDALEN’S DAY O happy friend of God, Saint Magdalen, Who so well served your Master and your Lord, And not a shadow of His grief ignored That on the Cross He bore to gladden men, You made of tears a fountain crystalline To bathe the feet of Him whom you adored, And on them rich ambrosial liquor poured, Which greedy Judas thought a wasteful sin. Then thirty years upon high cliffs you passed, Sustained by mercies that forever last, Because your friendship proved its perfect zeal. True penitence to us you demonstrate; Pray, if you will, that we assimilate The love and sacrifice of your ideal. Reply Margaret Coats January 20, 2022 Thank you, Jerry. We are glad to have discovered you, as we all appreciate attentive reading and comment. And if you write poetry, send in some poems too! Reply Leave a Reply Cancel ReplyYour email address will not be published.CommentName* Email* Website Δ This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Karen Darantière January 3, 2022 Amen, dear Margaret. How sadly true your poem rings. Thank you. We will not relinquish our Faith, but will hold fast to our Sacred Liturgy. Reply
Margaret Coats January 4, 2022 Thanks for your encouraging response, Karen. Our sacred liturgy is attracting even more persons, because it embodies the truth and beauty of the Faith. It became much more widely available via livestream when churches were closed. More especially since the pronouncement directed against it last summer, Latin Mass congregations have been growing. December’s extremely restrictive “clarification” is important only in clearly showing the intent to abrogate it completely, something never done before. But we will hold fast! Reply
Joseph S. Salemi January 3, 2022 Bergoglio has a hell of a lot to fear. And I don’t use the word “hell” as a mere emphatic epithet in that sentence. Reply
Margaret Coats January 4, 2022 To use a customary Catholic expression, Bingo! You get the main point of the serious situation and of the poem. Reply
C.B. Anderson January 3, 2022 This was no easy read, Margaret, but in the end I think I’ve understood it. Your use of the term “Bergoglio” in the epigraph implies that you are already a Sedevacantist, and I am entirely sympathetic, though it’s really none of my business. Yet I wonder, in line 4 of the first stanza, whether “new” was meant to be “now,” for otherwise I have a hard time determining what part of speech “new” was actually meant to be. Whatever be the case, this poem is another powerful indictment of an election gone wrong. Reply
Margaret Coats January 3, 2022 From the time of that election, it has been difficult for Catholics and others to find a name for the man who occupies the papal chair. “Bergoglio” has become the most acceptable word, as it identifies the person without causing too much friction. It doesn’t imply that the speaker is a sedevacantist, and I don’t wave that flag. Being Catholic is what’s vital, and as you can easily imagine, many Catholics find it hard to speak of a confusion-mongering prelate who abuses authority and often shows contempt for our Faith in the terms we might ordinarily use for the pope. “New” as an adverb is considered obsolete by dictionaries, but its meanings “newly” and “anew” have a long history in English. The modern language has some relics of this in compound words such as “newfound” and “newborn.” The poem has its challenges, because it echoes the Parable of the Talents, and because my speaker with the single talent does not think straight, just as the corresponding individual in the Gospel story did not. Thanks for taking the time and trouble to figure it out! Reply
Joseph S. Salemi January 4, 2022 I’m glad to see Margaret’s use of “new” as an adverb, no matter what those modern dictionaries try to dictate. Besides “newfound” and “newborn,” I have seen these also (with or without the hyphen): new-baked in reference to bread; new-minted in reference to coins or used metaphorically; new-mown in reference to freshly cut hay; and new-bought in reference to a recent purchase. Since the “new” in these compounds functions precisely as “newly” or “lately,” to modify an adjective or a past participle functioning adjectivally, then “new” in such cases is an adverb. The committees who control dictionary usage panels today are fixated on eliminating any irregularities or idiomatic curiosities that cannot be shoehorned into existing general patterns. They have fought ferociously to compel speakers never to say “The Argentine” or “The Ukraine” or “The Bronx,” but only “Argentina” and “Ukraine” and “Bronx.” They’re also desperate to eliminate “lest” (since it demands a subjunctive). It’s a low-level fanaticism, but it’s dangerous.
Brian Yapko January 3, 2022 I approach your fine poem, Margaret, from another denomination but with the deepest respect for Catholicism, which is parent to my church. Your very fine poem shines a glaringly unflattering spotlight on a man who seems patently unqualified to be pope. I appreciate (alas without enjoyment due to the subject matter) the dramatic monologue you have spun for a man who veers between feebleness, ignorance and corruption. The irony when he obliviously misdiagnoses why he should be accused of “negligency”! That he would consider divine tradition “contagion” is just plain bonkers. Of course he doesn’t fear “divine cataclysm” when he’s probably an atheist! I’m glad you wrote this painful poem. I always appreciate your pro-religious advocacy. Well done! Reply
Margaret Coats January 5, 2022 Brian, your analysis is extremely perceptive. This character piece presents what seems to be the confused thinking of a person who is supposed to be the Head of Christ’s Church, and who is certainly the best known religious leader in the world. From his age (85 years), we know that he was among Catholics who went through The Changes of the 1960s and 1970s as an adult. This generation either chose to leave the Church, or to alter everything they once held as sacred. It is too painful for them to contemplate its flourishing survival. They fail to acknowledge the chaos they’ve created, and they develop a feeling of impotence in some areas. This leads to hostility, not only against persons who think otherwise, but against God Himself. One carefully written book, “Destructio Dei,” points out that progressive theologians try to demolish the view of God as absolute, transcendent, and personal. That is, they divest God of nearly everything He is–and come up with varying systems to explain what’s left. This takes away their fear of God, while making them brutal and scornful toward “divisive” traditional believers. The recent “clarification” about the Latin Mass is an unprecedented abuse of power directed especially at bishops, who must be the enforcers. If they want to be archbishops or cardinals instead of saints, some of the faithful are in for a rough ride. But we have much more knowledge and experience than we did back in the bad old days when The Changes began. Let’s hope it is useful against the feebleness, ignorance, corruption, and atheism I seem to see, and that you saw in my poem. Reply
Satyananda Sarangi January 5, 2022 Greetings ma’am! What a lovely and truthful poem! Best wishes. Reply
Margaret Coats January 5, 2022 Many thanks, Satyananda! Let’s pray that we do not see the bad fruits unashamedly planted in the recent “clarification.” Reply
Joseph S. Salemi January 6, 2022 It’s clear that Bergoglio hates the Latin Mass and wants to cancel it permanently, but let’s not forget that a great deal of the pressure and support for Traditionis Custodes came from the bishops themselves. Most of these creeps viscerally loathe traditionalist Catholics and can’t stand having to provide them with the opportunity to hear the Latin Mass. What has happened can be understood politically. Both the Antipope and the bulk of the Novus Ordo hierarchy hate the old liturgy, and have had to tolerate it because of Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum and earlier indults. But both Bergoglio and the hierarchy are gung-ho for “synodality” (which basically means the unquestioned authority of local ordinaries to run their dioceses in whatever way they like). So this move against not just the Latin Mass itself, but also against all Ecclesia Dei communities, is a blast from a double-barreled shotgun. The Antipope gets what he wants; the Novus Ordo bishops get what they want. This is sheer, naked, and unrestrained lust for power. Traditionalist Roman Catholics expecting sympathy or support from a Novus Ordo bishop in this matter would be as if anti-Hitler groups in 1940 expected sympathy or support from the local Nazi Gauleiter. Reply
Margaret Coats January 6, 2022 Joe, I think the December clarification is a test for bishops, most of whom did little or nothing to enforce Traditionis Custodes after it was issued in July. And I doubt that bishops cared enough to submit the dubia in the new document. Bergoglio and Vatican official Roche put together stringent rules (like existing Latin Masses not to be considered parish Masses), to which compliance can be checked. It’s now been sixty years since Catholics were able to live a life faithful to our immemorial traditions with the support and sympathy of the hierarchy. The presently increasing number of persons who want to be good Catholics in the old way, with daily Mass and pious devotions and good sermons and catechesis at a parish church, must scare and perplex them. Their whole careers are built on another business plan. Still, the most ridiculous thing about the “clarification” is that it seems to think a little instruction in the “riches” of the new liturgy will satisfy traditionalists. Every Catholic has had opportunities to participate in these “riches,” and many have had decades of experience. Why is anyone still hungry? I agree with you that we cannot expect sympathy and support. We can request it, demand it and pray for it, and make our volunteer and monetary contributions wisely. I don’t know a single bishop well enough to tell what he feels viscerally. I have recently been convinced by a civil law professional investigating Church corruption that things are far, far worse than we thought. But the nature of the Church is hierarchical, and I don’t agree with whoever said the laity will save the Church. The renewed expansion of the Latin rite has been permitted by helpful bishops (one of whom confirmed my children in the old rite) and supported by faithful priests. I think it was G. K. Chesterton who said, “The Church has gone to the dogs at least five times, and every time it was the dog that died.” Synodality is a related problem, but crazier than you think. I attended the opening liturgy of Synod 2021-2023 in the San Bernardino diocese, and I have some indications of how this worldwide synod applies to you and me–and it is intended for every one of us. But that’s another poem if I could ever put it into verse. Like Vatican II, it starts with ambiguity. Reply
Joseph S. Salemi January 6, 2022 Margaret, there’s one thing in your second paragraph I’d like to comment on. All liberals, leftists, and religious modernists reflexively assume that what they are offering to us is inherently excellent and desirable, and only pathological ignorance and malice on our part explains our refusal to accept it. This is true whether these people are religious, agnostic, atheistic, or utterly secular. They always have the right answers, and — as they see the world — under no circumstances could anyone possibly argue with them, much less refute them. This colossal self-regard and narcissism are granitic in density. So you are quite correct about the unspoken assumption of Bergoglio and Roche that we traditionalists will all just jump right in and celebrate this new liturgical crap once we get a taste of it. It is a glaring sign of their stupendous conceit and lack of awareness. What kind of an idiot thinks that we (who have been fighting this war since 1969) will happily embrace Vat 2 heresy and synodality if we are forced to take part in its garbage? Yes, there are genuinely orthodox bishops, and helpful ones, and even ones who have the testicular fortitude to speak out against Bergoglio. But what percentage are they of the great mass of timeserving careerists who will say or do anything to climb the hierarchical ladder? Aren’t most of them bending over backwards to honor LGBT perverts, and to support Planned Parenthood, while giving Communion to Biden and Pelosi as they take big government payoffs for handling illegal immigrants? One minor point: Have you ever seen photographs of the worst bishops (Dolan, Cupich, Gregory, and all of their disgusting clones and toadies) without seeing a HUGE AND PATRONIZING SMILE on their faces? It’s infuriating. These scum know that they are in power, and that with the right Antipope at the helm they can browbeat, lecture, and silence real Roman Catholics everywhere. Reply
Margaret Coats January 8, 2022 Joe, I’m not sure modernists always think that their ways are inherently excellent and desirable. Think of Paul VI more than once referring to the old liturgy as “silken garments.” He used this imagery to state that the new Mass is more comprehensible, more suitable for the present time, or simply that it’s practical and necessary. That doesn’t mean more excellent and desirable. I agree with your main point that modernists always think what they want is better, but their reasons are not always that it is intrinsically superior. You are correct to say that they “reflexively assume” their course is the correct one. But when we leave aside the general modernist procedure, and refer specifically to the old Mass, I believe one reason they want it to be as invisible as they can possibly make it, is because they know it is in fact better than the new. It is intrinsically attractive to anyone with Catholic faith, and indeed to many others as well. If it is visible and available, it is an overwhelming opponent to the Novus Ordo and all the accompanying baggage. They fear its counterrevolutionary power. Over and over again, I’ve heard Catholics of our generation and younger ones come to the conclusion, “We’ve been robbed.” But as you also say, the prelates do have that dominant smile, knowing our powerlessness. I hate the idea that what is worse has dominated my lifetime, and that we can’t see the way out of this situation. The percentage of faithful bishops and priests is less than what it was during the years of Vatican II. But I would rather live here and push the limits of what is possible than live in Japan during the 250 years when they had no priests. Reply
Joseph S. Salemi January 8, 2022 Margaret, I agree with you in almost every respect. But I’d like to mention here, in public, something that I experienced back in 1968 at Fordham University , when the Vat 2 steamroller was revving up to wreck Catholicism as we know it. Fordham’s faculty back then was still heavily Jesuit, with most of these priests born around 1905. They were traditional Irish Jesuits with a strong loyalty to orthodox Catholicism and Thomistic philosophy, and although they were elderly they provided us with a fine education, both on religious and secular subjects. But they were slowly being replaced by lay faculty at Fordham — some good, and some not so good. The head of the Romance Languages department at that time was Dr. Anthony J. Mottola, who was fine as a teacher but utterly devoted to the entire “Spirit of Vat 2.” He and I would discuss things outside of class, where I mentioned my dislike of the recent liturgical changes, and of the entire atmosphere of freakiness and harebrained innovation that was corrupting Catholic belief and practice. Mottola of course was totally in love with the changes, and defended them. In the course of our discussion I mentioned that a great many Roman Catholics (friends, acquaintances, fellow parishioners, and family members) were just as upset and angry as I was, and some of them seemed disheartened enough to think of giving up on the Church altogether. At that time I was an avid reader of TRIUMPH magazine, the lone publication that gave voice to these feelings from some Catholic intellectuals, and I mentioned to Mottola that numerous Catholic academicians and writers shared the dissatisfaction of many laypersons. Here’s what Mottola answered: “It’s a good thing if those people leave the Church. We don’t need them. One great result of Vat 2 is that we are getting A BETTER CLASS OF PEOPLE in the Church now. We don’t have to be ashamed of whom we’re sitting with in the pews.” I can’t describe the sheer horror, revulsion, and insult that I felt upon hearing this. Mottola thought of the Catholic Church as a kind of country club where only “our kind of people” should be permitted membership, and Vat 2 was deliberately purging the Church of any undesirable members, much to his delight. And this purge included both simple laypersons, and any writer or intellectual who had the temerity to question the idiocies of Vat 2. I found out that this attitude was fairly common among the new lay faculty at Fordham, many of whom had a snobbish, elitist, fashionista mentality towards ordinary Roman Catholics, and anyone who questioned current trends. The idea that Vat 2 was designed to make the Church more open to the needs of common people is, in my view, one of those spectacularly horrendous lies that sometime gain traction for some reason. Vat 2 was all about exclusion, class-consciousness, and the impulse to treat some people as inferiors unworthy of pastoral concern. This has been a common trait among pro-Vat 2 partisans, whether clerical or lay, since this massive dumpster-fire started sixty years ago. And the prejudice has permeated the thinking of most bishops and cardinals, and a large number of ordinary priests. They simply DON’T LIKE ordinary Roman Catholics, and want them replaced by a totally different kind of parishioner: preferably educated, left-liberal, trendy, affluent, LGBT, and hopefully non-white. (Sort of like a faculty cocktail party.) It was not just Mottola. I could tell you a horror story of the open, vicious contempt that Helen and I and a group of young engaged couples experienced from the two lay leaders of our “Pre-Cana Conference.” (It was so blatant and disgusting that I and the Monsignor who performed our Latin Rite wedding ceremony wrote to the Chancery to complain.) The attitude seemed to be this: “What’s wrong with you stupid white working-class Catholics — getting MARRIED? Are you for real? You probably don’t know a thing about sex.” If I remembered the name of those two scumbags I would have typed them here, along with Mottola’s, just to immortalize them as specimens of Vat 2 thinking. At the time, in my Sicilian rage, I wanted to go up to those creeps and spit in their faces, but Helen restrained me. She’s Neapolitan. Reply
R M Moore January 8, 2022 Dear Joseph, Although I’m not of Sicilian roots, I share your fire. But it is time to develop a strategy similar to the enemy. Be calm, Jesus already went through this with the Temple leaders of His time. I appreciate both you and Margaret for writing so clearly on this matter. God love you both. Reply
Margaret Coats January 11, 2022 Joe, thank you for taking the trouble to place important remembrances here. And I thank Mrs. Moore for letting you know that you are heard. I assure you both that others beside myself are paying attention to this discussion. Joe, you are right to describe Vatican II novelties as leading to desire for a purge. A disastrous loss of souls then took place. But the desire for the new, country-club style church remains unsatisfied. The young, educated, trendy, left-liberal, affluent coterie didn’t need the Church. The ones who stayed were often Catholics who held on by their fingernails, convinced that the Faith and the Church are necessary for salvation, and that obedience to authority is vital. Here’s one example of how an unlikely prospect comes to conform to new ways. My elderly aunt was a faithful Catholic all her life, as others were leaving the Church, and most of the numerous parishes in her area were closing. During her last years she was homebound, receiving Communion weekly from a laywoman. The priest visited once a year. At her side she kept a leaflet of “Healing Prayers.” It had a beautiful picture of the compassionate Jesus on page 1. Page 2 spoke of many ills that an elderly person might experience, and expressed confidence that God would heal them. Pages 3 and 4 prayed for the healing of the world through the triumph of socialism and globalism. My aunt read these prayers every day. She mailed a monthly check to the parish, and yearly absentee ballots to vote in accord with what the leaflet taught. Catholics determined to persevere in their Faith have no choice but to be divisive, even if they do no more than complain. If they tend toward separatism, they too may undertake purges, trying to guarantee that all others in their group share their views and practices. Some of the best priests harangue the faithful about how much stronger a smaller Church could be. There is an obsession not with converting the world, but with getting rid of deadwood. One thinker believes this has happened because the “welcoming” and supposedly “unifying” outlook of Vatican II places great emphasis on equalizing saints and sinners. There should be individuals at all levels, if the Church is truly in the process of teaching the whole world all that Our Lord Jesus Christ taught. Formerly, those striving hardest for sanctity were admired as models. Now they are embarrassments because they make others look bad. This translates into getting rid of whatever is most Catholic to demonstrate openness. Rather than invest a talent to offer the gains to God, bury it. The speaker in my poem does that, and justifies himself. Reply
Joseph S. Salemi January 11, 2022 It’s very sad to read about your elderly aunt. Something similar happened (but with different reactions) in my wife’s family after Vat 2. The house we now live in was owned by Helen’s Uncle Chuck, a very devout Catholic and old bachelor who attended Mass every morning at 7 A.M., before going to work. When the new mass was introduced, Uncle Chuck was dumbfounded and appalled. After a few month of tolerating the stupid absurdities of folk songs and gesticulating laypersons in the sanctuary, he simply stopped going, permanently. He could see, as many glib Novus Ordo apologists cannot, that the new mass was NOT THE REAL MASS AT ALL. Reply
Margaret Coats January 14, 2022 I must acknowledge that you present the fundamental question on this topic. Uncle Chuck answered “no” with his “sense of the faithful.” Others said “yes” with various arguments, not worth listing. Some Catholics, in some local churches, may be able to continue a devout, sacramental life, while risking weakened faith or gradual conversion to modernism. That’s supposing the modernized ritual has minimum validity. The practical question is how to live. The Mass is the sole way God provided for human beings to worship Him; other services are manmade. Taking the time and expense to find the traditional Mass is not possible for most Catholics. I have been one of the “roamin’ Catholics” spending time and travel to find what’s best. I admit the goal is a moving target. I can hardly blame anyone who worships as best he can, either with prayer and reading at home, or in a church where he judges the rite acceptable. Neither is the divine treasure of Catholic worship that God gave us and rightly demands of us. I can’t agree that we must be “with Jesus” wherever He is, if that means suffering with Him by participating in liturgical abuses. I think I’ve said just enough to call the matter an insoluble problem! But that’s why the new attempt at suppressing authentically Catholic worship deserves satirical treatment, as mild as my poem may be. Reply
Tamara Beryl Latham January 20, 2022 Margaret, you’ve so eloquently given us a summary (in poetic form) of what is currently occurring in the Catholic church. Brilliant! I gave up when the Mass was changed from Latin to English. Further, I resented the fact that Pope Gregory turned Mary Magdalene into a prostitute, when neither of the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, indicated she was such. And although Hollywood continues to paint Mary Magdalene as the woman of the night, not any of the Popes (current or former) to my knowledge, have ever addressed the producers and demanded that inaccuracy be stripped from their movies. As well, why are some Catholics excommunicated from the church and others, the more powerful politician types, allowed to remain even though their actions are antithetical to church doctrine? Great job, Margaret! 🙂 Reply
Margaret Coats January 21, 2022 Tamara, all Catholics and the whole world lost an inestimable treasure when the Mass was changed. It still belongs to us, as it is God’s gift, but it takes effort to reclaim, and that effort is beyond the power of many. I hope you can find a Latin Mass near enough to attend at least occasionally. As Joseph S. Salemi remarked above, with the story of his Catholic college professor, the problem is that persons in favor of The Changes actually want others to leave the Church. They do not consider Holy Mass the way God gave us to worship Him. Instead, it is a manmade community ritual, and men can never surpass God (or satisfy His faithful) by their substitutes. Rather, souls whom God made to be happy with Him forever are being lost because they cannot find His graces, and then they stop looking. I think that includes both the politicians who are happy as non-practicing Catholics, and the prelates who are happy not to convert them to real faith and practice. About Mary Magdalene, you are right that none of the Gospels, nor sacred Tradition, say that she was a prostitute. She is often identified with “the woman who was a sinner,” who anointed Jesus at the home of Simon the Pharisee. But even if someone makes that identification, he or she need not dishonor a saint far greater than ourselves by focusing on her unknown sin. The moviemakers would do better to follow the example of Gabrielle de Coignard, French Renaissance poet, some of whose sonnets I have translated. As I haven’t published any, let me offer one here. Hope you like it. FOR THE MAGDALEN’S DAY O happy friend of God, Saint Magdalen, Who so well served your Master and your Lord, And not a shadow of His grief ignored That on the Cross He bore to gladden men, You made of tears a fountain crystalline To bathe the feet of Him whom you adored, And on them rich ambrosial liquor poured, Which greedy Judas thought a wasteful sin. Then thirty years upon high cliffs you passed, Sustained by mercies that forever last, Because your friendship proved its perfect zeal. True penitence to us you demonstrate; Pray, if you will, that we assimilate The love and sacrifice of your ideal. Reply
Margaret Coats January 20, 2022 Thank you, Jerry. We are glad to have discovered you, as we all appreciate attentive reading and comment. And if you write poetry, send in some poems too! Reply
