Receive, Do Not Invent: Old Romans Unscripted confronts the crisis of Catholic transmission
In the sixth episode of the second season of Old Romans Unscripted, HE ✠Jerome Lloyd and Fr Stanislaus FMCD take the Nuntiatoria motto Accipere, non fingere — to receive, not to invent — as the measure of liturgy, doctrine, Catholic identity, ecclesiastical authority and the Church’s prospects for renewal. What emerges is not chiefly an argument about nostalgia, but about transmission: what exactly has this generation of Catholics received, and what will it hand on?¹
The most important question raised in this week’s Old Romans Unscripted was also the simplest: what does fidelity look like when the inheritance itself has become contested? Beginning with the motto of the current edition of Nuntiatoria, Accipere, non fingere, HE ✠Jerome Lloyd and Fr Stanislaus returned repeatedly to a distinction which lies beneath almost every contemporary dispute in the Church. Christianity is something received before it is something expressed. Revelation is received. Scripture is received. The Sacraments are received. The apostolic ministry is received. The liturgy is received. Even the language, gestures, customs and instincts by which Catholic life becomes recognisably Catholic are inherited before they can be explained. The Catholic does not begin with a blank sheet of paper and ask what sort of Christianity he would like to construct. He begins with what has been handed down.²
That is why the liturgical question occupied so much of the discussion. For both speakers, the contrast between the traditional Roman Rite and the post-conciliar liturgy is not reducible to Latin against the vernacular, chant against guitars, incense against informality, or one aesthetic preference against another. The deeper question is one of continuity and authorship. The ancient Roman liturgy bears upon it the accumulated marks of centuries during which generations received, preserved and sometimes gradually developed what their predecessors had received before them. This is precisely the principle articulated by Sacrosanctum Concilium itself: legitimate development must preserve sound tradition, innovation must be genuinely required by the good of the Church, and new forms must “grow organically from forms already existing.”³ Whatever judgement one makes about the post-conciliar reform, that conciliar principle remains an unavoidable standard by which the reform and its implementation may legitimately be examined.
Here ✠Jerome’s digression into Tenebrae, the O Antiphons and seemingly inexplicable monastic customs was more significant than it first appeared. The Catholic inheritance contains practices whose precise historical origin may be obscure while their meaning has become luminous through centuries of use. Tradition is not rendered meaningless merely because the first person who extinguished a candle at Tenebrae, adopted a particular chant or established a local observance can no longer be identified. G. K. Chesterton supplied the principle ✠Jerome was trying to recall: before removing the fence, the reformer must first understand why it was erected.⁴ The point is not that every historical custom is immutable. It is that ignorance is a very poor qualification for iconoclasm.
The same insight appears almost wordlessly in Philip Gröning’s Into Great Silence, his extraordinary study of the Carthusians of the Grande Chartreuse. A community can preserve wisdom through a discipline whose meaning is embodied long before it is verbalised.⁵ That is organic tradition at its most recognisable: not arbitrary antiquarianism, but the accumulated memory of a body which has lived long enough to know that not everything worth preserving originated in a committee memorandum.
The discussion consequently moved from liturgy into Scripture and Tradition. Fr Stanislaus observed how readily modern Christianity invites the individual to approach Scripture as though revelation were simply a text awaiting his private interpretation. ✠Jerome’s response returned to Catholic first principles: the New Testament did not descend from heaven as a completed volume. The apostolic preaching preceded the completed canon; the Scriptures were proclaimed, copied, received, discerned and authenticated within the living Church. Scripture and Tradition therefore cannot simply be placed in competition with one another. Both belong to the Church’s reception of divine revelation, whose fullness is not ultimately a book or a proposition but the incarnate Word, Jesus Christ.
This gave the conversation one of its most fruitful movements: from Scripture to Incarnation, from Incarnation to Eucharist, and from Eucharist to the Rosary and the devotional life by which supernatural truths enter the daily experience of ordinary Catholics. The Faith is not transmitted merely when propositions remain printed correctly in a catechism. It is transmitted when those propositions become worship, prayer, instinct, habit and life.
This is where the episode’s argument became considerably more demanding than a defence of the Traditional Latin Mass. The contention was that the Catholic crisis becomes visible precisely when Catholicism ceases to shape life beyond Sunday worship. The old sequence lex orandi, lex credendi naturally extends into lex vivendi: how one worships forms what one believes, and what one believes eventually determines how one lives. The Rosary, grace before meals, fasting, sacramentals, the observance of feasts, Catholic family customs, the moral law, devotional reading and the ordering of the household around the liturgical year are not ornamental extras added to “real” Catholicism. Collectively they constitute a Catholic culture of life.
Fr Stanislaus’s point was particularly acute: Catholics formed within a genuinely traditional milieu often cease to think of these things as unusual because they have become habitual. That is what successful formation looks like. The Faith has passed from proposition into instinct. It has been received so completely that it can be handed on almost without self-consciousness.
The programme was at its strongest when it applied the same criterion to talk of a contemporary Catholic “revival” or “Third Spring”. There are encouraging signs. New interest among young adults, conversions, pilgrimages, Eucharistic devotion and Catholic gatherings in Britain are real phenomena. But Old Romans Unscripted asked the necessary second question: a springtime of what? As Nuntiatoria has already argued in its examination of the WeBelieve phenomenon, England does not principally require Catholicism to become more attractive, culturally resonant or aesthetically interesting; England requires conversion.⁶
Attendance, enthusiasm and curiosity are good things, but Catholic renewal cannot finally be measured by festival numbers, social-media engagement or even baptismal statistics alone. A genuinely Catholic renewal must eventually produce Catholics who know the Faith, believe what the Church teaches, receive the Sacraments worthily, marry, raise Catholic families, foster vocations, evangelise and persevere. A spring which produces blossom but no fruit is not yet a harvest.
The discussion of politics made the same point in a more contentious register. Governor Maura Healey’s recent signing of legislation strengthening abortion protections in Massachusetts provided the immediate example. Here one factual qualification to the live discussion is important: the Catholic bishops of Massachusetts did publicly oppose the late-term abortion provision before the legislation was enacted, describing it as a grave moral wrong. Healey nevertheless signed the legislation on 10 August.⁷ The stronger criticism, therefore, is not that there was literally no episcopal statement, but the wider question Nuntiatoria has subsequently examined: what does Catholic ecclesiastical discipline mean when politicians may publicly identify themselves with the Church while championing policies directly contrary to fundamental Catholic moral teaching, yet continue to enjoy conspicuous proximity to Catholic institutions and senior churchmen?⁸
The contradiction between identity and belief is itself evidence of a failure of transmission. When “Catholic” becomes merely an inherited cultural adjective, its theological content becomes negotiable. One may belong without believing; identify without obeying; receive the social recognition attached to the name while rejecting the doctrines by which the name has meaning. That cannot continue indefinitely without hollowing Catholic identity from within.
The SSPX crisis brought the argument from transmission to authority. Both speakers returned to ✠Athanasius Schneider, whose recent interventions have been striking precisely because he has argued that the dispute cannot finally be resolved by treating Vatican II as though every formulation in its documents possessed identical doctrinal weight, or by treating fidelity to the post-conciliar settlement as though it were itself the definition of communion with the Church. As Nuntiatoria has since argued, **the Society may not finally be the thing on trial: the deeper question is whether the settlement established after the Council can continue demanding acceptance without adequately answering the objections which have followed it for six decades.**⁹
Following the 1 July consecrations at Écône, Old Romans Unscripted therefore situated the SSPX controversy within a much larger question: when Catholics are accused of disobedience for retaining what previous generations were commanded to receive, where precisely does rupture lie? That does not make every action undertaken in the name of Tradition correct. It does mean that “obedience” cannot be allowed to end an argument which is fundamentally about the object to which obedience itself is ordered.
This led naturally to one of the most important ecclesiological distinctions of the programme. Neither ✠Jerome nor Fr Stanislaus accepted the conclusion that corruption among churchmen entails the disappearance of the Catholic Church. Quite the opposite. The programme explicitly rejected the temptation to identify the indefectible Church wholly with the conduct of those presently occupying positions within her visible administration. Bad popes do not disprove the papacy; bad bishops do not abolish the episcopate; institutional corruption does not invalidate the divine constitution of the Church.
That distinction is crucial to the Old Roman “recognise and resist” position articulated during the programme. The answer to ecclesiastical disorder is not to invent another Church, another revelation or another principle of authority. It is to remain attached to the Catholic Church while refusing to pretend that everything done by Catholics in authority is therefore Catholic. As Nuntiatoria has repeatedly argued in its treatment of Écône, sedevacantism and supplied jurisdiction, resistance without rupture is harder than either institutional positivism or private ecclesiological reconstruction — but it is precisely the difficulty which must be faced.¹⁰
Joseph Ratzinger’s much-discussed reflection about the Church becoming smaller consequently assumed a darker significance. Ratzinger foresaw a Church stripped of many buildings, adherents and social privileges, becoming smaller but more demanding of those who remained.¹¹ Old Romans Unscripted did not treat that prospect sentimentally. ✠Jerome suggested that the institutional contraction of Western Catholicism may already be well advanced and that the eventual remnant will necessarily be composed of people for whom Catholicism is more than inherited cultural identification.
Whether one accepts every part of that diagnosis, the underlying principle is difficult to contest. Nominal Catholicism cannot perpetuate itself indefinitely. A Church whose members neither know nor transmit what she teaches eventually possesses little except the name.
That is why ✠Rob Mutsaerts’s recent questions about the fruits of synodality are so pertinent. Has faith been strengthened? Has Christ been proclaimed more clearly? Has Catholic identity deepened? Have conversions increased? Has Sunday Mass attendance risen? Are there more vocations? Is catechesis more effective? Is reverence for the Eucharist deeper? Has Catholic moral teaching become clearer? Has missionary courage grown? Nuntiatoria has already pressed precisely this point: processes may be elaborate, consultations extensive and institutional language sophisticated, but the evangelical test remains the fruits.¹²
The same diagnosis informed the programme’s discussion of vocations and formation. Perhaps the most challenging proposition of the evening was that the celebrated “vocations crisis” may not consist simply in God ceasing to call. The possibility must at least be considered that vocations have also been discouraged, redirected or extinguished by defective systems of formation. The young man who discovers older theological manuals and asks why their teaching appears different from what he now hears; the aspirant told that his attraction to traditional religious life is immature; the candidate instructed to acquire more “life experience” before responding to a persistent vocation — these are not inherently evidence that no vocation existed.
Formation is never neutral. Whoever controls formation exercises enormous influence over what the next generation will understand Catholicism to mean. Seminaries and religious houses do not merely impart information; they create ecclesiastical instincts. If a generation is taught that inherited theology is embarrassing, traditional piety psychologically suspect, inherited worship obsolete and previous discipline pastorally primitive, it should hardly surprise anyone when that generation emerges unable to transmit the thing it was taught to distrust.
It was in this connection that ✠Jerome tried to recall a group of Council Fathers who had signed a document in the Roman catacombs. The reference was to the Pact of the Catacombs, signed at the Catacombs of Domitilla on 16 November 1965 by a group of bishops committed to an ideal of a poor and servant Church.¹³ Its relevance to the discussion is revealing. The post-conciliar settlement did not emerge only from conciliar constitutions promulgated in St Peter’s. It also emerged from theological movements, pastoral programmes, seminaries, religious houses, commissions and influential clerics who interpreted what the Council was supposed to mean.
Hence the distinction made repeatedly in the episode between Vatican II and the “spirit of Vatican II”. One may argue endlessly about individual conciliar passages; the historical phenomenon which transformed sanctuaries, seminaries, catechesis, religious life and clerical culture often went considerably beyond what the Council’s texts themselves expressly commanded. Nowhere is this clearer than in the almost universal assumption that Vatican II required the priest to celebrate Mass facing the congregation. It did not. Sacrosanctum Concilium contains no such command, and the modern Roman Missal itself continues to contain rubrical language perfectly intelligible in an ad orientem celebration.¹⁴
This matters because historical mythology eventually acquires pastoral force. Once everyone is told that something was “what Vatican II required”, resistance to it can be represented as resistance to an Ecumenical Council, even when the Council never required it at all. Nuntiatoria has therefore insisted upon separating conciliar text, post-conciliar implementation, subsequent custom and later ideological interpretation.¹⁴ To receive history is also an act of accipere, non fingere. The past is not ours to rewrite for the convenience of present arrangements.
The programme’s criticism of the post-conciliar liturgical reconstruction belongs within the same framework. The issue is not simply whether Paul VI possessed jurisdiction over liturgical discipline. He plainly did. The more searching question is whether authority can transform deliberate reconstruction into organic development merely by promulgating the result. As Nuntiatoria has argued in Authority Is Not Alchemy, Catholic authority is ministerial rather than magical. A Pope can legislate; that does not mean every legislative decision is prudent, beneficial or historically continuous merely because a Pope made it.¹⁵
This is why the episode’s criticism of clericalism was particularly pointed. Much of what later came to be defended as the liberation of the laity was not demanded by the laity at all. Altars were removed by clergy and commissions. Sanctuaries were reordered by clergy and commissions. Seminaries were restructured by clergy and academics. Catechetical experiments were introduced by professional ecclesiastical classes. Whatever one thinks about the motives of those involved, the post-conciliar revolution was very often clerically administered while simultaneously developing a rhetoric hostile to “clericalism”.
That irony has not disappeared. Contemporary synodality speaks relentlessly about listening and participation, while simultaneously generating increasingly specialised structures, vocabularies, facilitators, synthesis groups and experts. Pope Leo XIV’s recent call for religious to become “experts in synodality” makes the question especially acute. Nuntiatoria has already identified the paradox: an ecclesiastical culture ostensibly intended to overcome exclusion risks becoming intelligible principally to the very class of specialists who administer it.¹⁶
That observation also explains why the episode returned to Paul VI’s anguished 1972 remark that “the smoke of Satan” seemed to have entered the temple of God.¹⁷ It is tempting to turn the phrase into a slogan. In context, however, Paul VI was speaking of doubt, uncertainty, dissatisfaction and the loss of confidence within the Church. That makes his words more rather than less relevant.
The crisis described by Old Romans Unscripted is not ultimately solved by discovering a conspiracy, identifying a villain or constructing an alternative ecclesiology. It is solved by recovering confidence that Catholic truth is objectively true, that it can be known, that it has been revealed by God, and that the Church exists to receive, guard, worship, teach and transmit it.
That was ultimately where the episode ended. Not with institutional strategy, demographic speculation or ecclesiastical politics, but with the ordinary Catholic life. Pray. Attend the traditional Mass. Read the Missal. Learn the Faith. Say the Rosary. Receive the Sacraments. Form children. Foster vocations. Refuse to surrender Catholic habits merely because they have become unfashionable. And when access to Mass is impossible, unite oneself as fully as circumstances permit to the Church’s worship. For almost two decades the Daily Mass Online apostolate has existed precisely for the elderly, housebound, sick and geographically isolated faithful for whom such access is otherwise impossible.¹⁸
Accipere, non fingere is therefore not a slogan for antiquarians. It is a programme for survival. The decisive question facing Catholicism is not whether the Church can devise something sufficiently attractive to modern man. She has conducted that experiment for sixty years. The question is whether Catholics still possess sufficient faith, courage and humility to receive what they themselves inherited and hand it on intact.
For if Christianity becomes whatever each generation chooses to make of it, Christianity disappears. But if what was received is faithfully transmitted — in doctrine, liturgy, prayer, morals, family life, religious formation and apostolic witness — then even a smaller Church need not be a defeated Church.
It may instead be the beginning of recovery.
¹ Old Romans Unscripted, Season II, Episode VI, transcript.
² Nuntiatoria, “16.08.26 Nuntiatoria CXIX: Accipere non Fingere”, 14 August 2026; Nuntiatoria, “ACCIPERE, NON FINGERE ~ To Receive, Not to Invent: A Spiritual Conference for Nuntiatoria CXIX”, 18 August 2026.
³ Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, 4 December 1963, §23; Nuntiatoria, “Authority Is Not Alchemy: The New Mass, the Long Reform and the Limits of Liturgical Obedience”, 14 August 2026.
⁴ G. K. Chesterton, The Thing, “The Drift from Domesticity”, 1929.
⁵ Philip Gröning, Into Great Silence, 2005.
⁶ Nuntiatoria, “England Must Be Converted — Not Merely Re-Enchanted”, 14 August 2026.
⁷ Catholic Bishops of Massachusetts, “Statement Against Late-term Abortion Bill”, 29 July 2026; Commonwealth of Massachusetts, “Governor Healey Signs Legislation Strengthening Abortion Protections in Massachusetts”, 10 August 2026.
⁸ Nuntiatoria, “When Proximity Becomes Compromise: Maura Healey, the Vatican, and the Cost of Blurred Catholic Boundaries”, 18 August 2026; Nuntiatoria, “Proud Catholic, Public Defiance: Maura Healey answers critics”, 17 August 2026.
⁹ Nuntiatoria, “The SSPX Is Not Really on Trial — The Post-Conciliar Settlement Is”, 18 August 2026.
¹⁰ Nuntiatoria, “Attendance Is Not Schism: Rome, the SSPX and the Canonical Rights of the Laity”, 3 July 2026; Nuntiatoria, “Bread, Stones and the Rock of Peter: The SSPX Answers Rome”, 3 July 2026; Nuntiatoria, “Roma Locuta Est, Causa Finita Est? The Decree, the Note and the Papalism That Swallowed the Law”, 7 July 2026.
¹¹ Joseph Ratzinger, Faith and the Future, reflections originally broadcast in 1969.
¹² Nuntiatoria, “By Their Fruits: ✠Mutsaerts Puts Synodality to the Test”, 18 August 2026.
¹³ “The Pact of the Catacombs of the Poor and Servant Church”, Catacombs of Domitilla, Rome, 16 November 1965.
¹⁴ Nuntiatoria, “Vatican II Never Turned the Priest Around”, 14 August 2026.
¹⁵ Nuntiatoria, “Authority Is Not Alchemy: The New Mass, the Long Reform and the Limits of Liturgical Obedience”, 14 August 2026.
¹⁶ Nuntiatoria, “Experts in Synodality: Leo XIV and the Rise of the Church of Process”, 14 August 2026; Nuntiatoria, “Synodality for the Initiated: How Collegiality Became Permanent Process”, 14 July 2026.
¹⁷ Paul VI, Homily for the Solemnity of SS Peter and Paul, 29 June 1972.
¹⁸ Nuntiatoria, “For Many, This Is Their Only Mass: Help Keep the Daily Mass Online”, 5 June 2026.
RELATED ARTiCLES
LATEST ARTICLES
- Today’s Mass: August 23 St. Philip BeniziSaint Jane Frances de Chantal, born in 1572, became a widow after her husband’s death in 1601. Inspired by Saint Francis de Sales, she founded the Congregation of the Visitation to support young girls and widows in religious life. Canonised in 1767, her order spread throughout France. She died on December 13.
- The Book of the Crucified: St Philip Benizi, Confessor, August 23St Philip Benizi, remembered on 23 August, epitomises humility, not as weakness but as a profound Christian freedom. A physician, priest, and peacemaker, he shunned ambitions, even fleeing the papacy. His life exemplified detachment from worldly honours, focusing instead on serving God and others, embracing the Crucifix as his ultimate guide.
- Today’s Mass: August 22 The Immaculate Heart of MarySaint Jane Frances de Chantal, born in 1572, became a widow after her husband’s death in 1601. Inspired by Saint Francis de Sales, she founded the Congregation of the Visitation to support young girls and widows in religious life. Canonised in 1767, her order spread throughout France. She died on December 13.
- 23.08.26 Nuntiatoria CXX: Depositum CustodiThe editorial underscores the Church’s duty to safeguard the Faith, emphasising that it must be received and protected, not altered or created anew. It critiques contemporary ecclesiastical trends that risk undermining this custodial responsibility, urging faithful adherence to tradition while engaging with modernity. The overarching message is to guard the entrusted deposit of Faith.
- ORDO w/c 23.08.26The content outlines a liturgical calendar for a series of days in August, detailing specific saints’ commemorations, masses, and associated rituals. It highlights variations in the mass types and colours assigned for these days, including references to the Assumption of Mary and other significant feasts, while also noting a prior occurrence affecting scheduling.
CURRENT EDITION
Today’s Mass Propers
- Today’s Mass: August 23 St. Philip Benizi
Saint Jane Frances de Chantal, born in 1572, became a widow after her husband’s death in 1601. Inspired by Saint Francis de Sales, she founded the Congregation of the Visitation to support young girls and widows in religious life. Canonised in 1767, her order spread throughout France. She died on December 13.
Leave a Reply