Contraception does not only block new life, but changes the nature of the act itself. What was ordered toward continuity becomes ordered toward experience.
The fruitfulness not merely becomes absent, but is structurally prevented while everything on the surface appears intact.
The same inversion happened to the faith, and our society as a whole. And it did not do so by accident.
Monsignor Goldade, one of the new SSPX bishops, spoke of the Church as something that brings forth life, and of the modern Church as a desert.
A desert is not a place where nothing exists, but where the conditions for normal life have been removed. Nothing grows, because the soil that made growth possible was taken.
In the Archdiocese of Milan, which serves 4.9 million faithful across 1,107 parishes, only one church has an indult for the Traditional Ambrosian Rite.
The traditionalist revival, for all its beauty and conviction, is largely reproducing this desert in a nicer room. And the diocesan bishops defending access to The Latin Mass©™, the media figures building audiences on Catholic identity, and the converts drawn by aesthetics are not asking the question that matters: not whether it looks beautiful, but whether anything is being transmitted inside of it.
What was taken
The mechanism is not unique to the Church. It ran through every institution that once understood itself as a guardian of something received.
The school replaced the transmission of a fixed body of knowledge with the facilitation of a child’s self-expression. The university replaced professors who professed something with curators of multiple perspectives (as long as they are not rightwing). The company replaced managers who held standards with the coaches who support personal growth. The family replaced the father figure who formed his children with co-parenting and validating a child’s ignorant choices.
None of these changes were announced as the revolutionary acts they truly are. Because each arrived as a pedagogical update, a new management insight, a new sensitivity to a child’s needs, or a desire to meet people where they are at. The words slowly changed underneath people. Their roles changed. And the capacity to transmit what was previously normal went with them.
The Catholic Church followed the same pattern, in every language simultaneously. In The Netherlands it adopted the Protestant text of the Our Father. The French Catholics changed the Ave Maria. The English filed the fear off the third Person of the Trinity by replacing ‘Holy Ghost’ with ‘Holy Spirit.’
The specific words differed by country. But the lack of mechanism was identical everywhere: the sharper, more demanding term was replaced with a new one, the change slowly settled into the language, and the generation that remembered the original disappeared.
‘The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect. Newspeak is Ingsoc and Ingsoc is Newspeak.’
-George Orwell
‘Sin’ became ‘brokenness.’ The Sacrifice of Holy Mass became a celebration. The priest as guardian became the priest as entertainer. The teacher as authority became the teacher as guide. The craftsman accountable became ‘the creative’. Each redefinition might felt like liberation at the time, yet removed a transmission structure and replaced it with subjective ‘experience’ and anecdotal evidence. But experience and anecdotes do not transmit. They consume, they are feel good emotions.
A child who grows up knowing exactly where he will be at seven in the morning, at noon, and on Sunday does not experience it as a restriction, like boomers would tell you. A child experiences it as the world having a shape. And that shape is what gets transmitted to him.
There is no ‘indoctrination’ of belief system, as atheists might say. It are also not the values discussed over dinner, but the daily order he inhabited for eighteen years without being asked whether he preferred it. You cannot hand a child a preference, or force him to do what you think is right on paper. You can only hand him a structure, because that forms him more than any amount of explanation ever achieves.
But here we are… the structures were not passed on to us. The vocabulary that justified them was emptied of meaning. The daily order that embodied these values was abandoned or deliberately destroyed... So logically a person that arrives at a traditional Mass in 2026, will be moved by its aesthetics and might even be convinced by its logic. But without transmission of eternal truth, it remains just a 1950-esque hobby.
The trad revival is a decorated desert
In my view Dubai is a work of art. Not because I particularly like it, but because it summarises the state of the world. Our choices is either Disney-like traditionalism, or hyper-degenerate futurism. Dubai has both.
Because you are reading this, I assume you are on the traditionalist side. We are in a vacuum left by failed transmission, and the only revival truly happening is an aesthetic one.
In secular life the ‘revival’ arrived as self-care, craft beer, vinyl records, linen shirts and sourdough bread. It is a performance of slowness by people who never actually slow down. In Catholic life it arrived as the traditionalist movement: the Latin Mass, the smoking of pipes, tweed jackets, Chesterton quotes, and the obsession with marrying as soon as possible.
A revival that produces people who feel everything and can do nothing is not a transmission. It is only the performance of transmission. And the institutions driving it have largely failed to notice the difference.
For me that is the real difference between people who are actual traditionalists, and people just pretending to be. Both sit next to each other at a Latin Mass, but one passes it on to his children, while the other stays stuck in a syncretism of secular politics and trad-larping.
Taylor Marshall built one of the largest Catholic audiences in the world on identity, conspiracy framing, and the intoxicating feeling of being among the remnant who know what is really happening. His readers feel like participants in something important. Very few of them could tell you what transmission of the faith requires on a normal Tuesday. His book Infiltration names the enemy with great precision and leaves the reader with no framework for building anything. Knowing who the infiltrators are does not form your children. Yet now he is calling SSPX to ‘submit’ to Rome.
Christine Niles and Church Militant devoted significant resources to investigating the Society of Saint Pius X while remaining largely silent on the Rupnik case, on the documented pattern of mainstream clergy misconduct, and the scale of abuse cases across ordinary dioceses worldwide.
The selectivity is not accidental. It serves a positioning strategy. An outlet that trains its aggression on ordinary traditionalists, while leaving the mainstream undisturbed is not pursuing truth. It is pursuing an audience. That is Catholic media as a business model dressed as Catholic journalism. She is nothing but a secular journalist who covers culture war stories because they perform well, and calls it a defense of Catholic values.
The irony: If any of her points will ever be proven, than Catholicism is nothing but a cult.
The grifters are knowingly, or unknowingly working towards the dissolution of the Catholic faith
Eric Sammons of Crisis Magazine is the most serious of the three, but the ‘Crisis’ approach remains primarily diagnostic. An enemy is named, the analysis is often correct, but the reader finishes the article knowing more about what is wrong and no more about what to do with his Wednesday. It is monetisable rage bait, but helps no one spiritually.
Mgrs. Cordileone, Burke, and the Bishop of Oslo call now for ‘more Traditional Latin Masses!’
These are men who say the right things, but stop short of the right diagnosis.They defend the aesthetic without addressing the crisis in faith and doctrine.
Liturgy alone is not enough to transmit a faith. If so, Vatican II never happened. It was because the priesthood weakened, the theology became lacking and transmission of faith became worse. People love to glorify the 1900-1950s, but for most part people went to Church out of habit.
The Latin Mass celebrated by a priest formed in the new theology, inside a diocese that sold its tabernacles to developers and replaced its catechesis with accompaniment, is not transmission.
The theatrics is not what transmits. What transmits is the daily structure, the vocabulary, the theology of priesthood, the understanding of what the father owes his household and the household owes its dead. None of the bishops calling for more TLMs are addressing any of that. Their congregations leave the beautiful Mass and return to the same paralysis, now decorated with a nicer liturgical aesthetic and friends who share the same political views.
It mirrors exactly what has happened in secular institutions. The company that hires a chief culture officer and prints its values on the office wall while hollowing out every structure that once produced accountability.
The school that introduces classical education as an aesthetic programme without restoring the authority of the teacher or the fixed content of the curriculum.
The family that buys the linen tablecloth and the good wine and eats together on Sundays without any of the members knowing what they owe each other or why.
People are becoming Catholic because it looks and feels good. Because the aesthetics are coherent, the people are like them, the identity is clear, and the Latin Mass is genuinely beautiful. Nothing is wrong with that per se, but it once again does not address the elephant in the room.
Likewise people are buying quality goods, cooking from scratch, moving to small towns, and homeschooling their children because it feels like recovery. But none of that is transmission. It is the performance of transmission, borrowed and worn, separated from every condition that once made it possible to hand something from one generation to the next intact.
This is the desert Monsignor Goldade named: Not a place where nothing exists, but a place where the conditions for life have been removed, and where the people inside it have grown accustomed to thinking the sand is the garden.
What spiritual contraception produces
We are left with institution that kept the form of transmission while removing the conditions that made transmission possible does not merely fail to transmit.
Every rightwing project fails to address exactly this. It is always a nostalgic version of what it could be. People call me a sectarian for only going to mass at SSPX, but for now it is the only institute that authentically transmits, without having to larp, pretend or overcompensate.
Almost every other conservative, or pseudo-traditionalist initiative actively prevents transmission while producing a feeling that transmission is occurring.
It misleads, and conservative politicians, podcasters and grifters know this. That is why they sellout so easily. A person inside their project receives the experience of belonging to something ancient and serious without receiving the thing itself. He feels formed, but is not formed. And because his feeling feels so real, he does not notice the absence until he tries to hand something to his children or friends and truly has nothing to give them besides critique.
This is not personal weakness. It is the precise and predictable result of the spiritual contraception operating across three generations. The vocabulary was emptied, theology was softened, daily structures were abandoned, and the institutions that should have transmitted the framework now only offer aesthetics instead.
So people need a lifeboat, like the SSPX can offer, without compromising on truth, doctrine or tradition. Is it ideal? No. But is it necessary. Yes.
The contraception hurts the man that wants to form his children but has no framework for what formation requires.
The woman who attends Mass every Sunday hoping to feel something passed between the altar and her life.
It hurt the person who buys the right things, reads the right books, attends (in his view) the right parish or school, yet still cannot act on any of it.
The void one feels has no word, nor ritual. And the desire to pass on something to the next generation, without knowing what or how the handing-over works is extremely painful. It is either choosing between: ‘all is over’ and ‘all comes good’.
This what spiritual contraception has given us structurally, and predictably in every generation it runs through unchallenged.
The traditionalist revival, at its worst, is reproducing this mechanism in a slightly more beautiful way. But offers nothing but the aesthetic of tradition without the structures.
It produces people who are convinced, moved, and Catholic, and who go home on Sunday afternoon with no Catholic framework for the other six days.
The spiritual contraception fills gyms, farmers markets, and artisan coffee shops with people who have chosen the signals of a slower, more grounded life without any of the obligations that once made The Slow Life©™ possible.
Our soil is taken, and planting seeds in sand will not restore it.
The Norbert Framework
The soil is recoverable, but not by reading diagnosis after diagnosis. That is just procrastination pretending to be productive.
The Norbert Framework is the mechanism that will help out. It contains five questions derived from the one holy man who transmitted his mission across 800 years.
A framework applicable to your household, your week, and your children. A structure that keeps on running when you are not at your best.
-Robbert
OMGOSH!!!! I don’t know WHO you are…. But your writing is so beautifully poignant it fills my heart!
Your words describe EXACTLY what has happened and is happening and exactly the remedy!
We have been affiliated with the SSPX for 38 years and you are completely correct… through the actions and example of their priests and bishops which give voice to what the Catholic Faith is, one learns respect, reverence and the sacredness of not only the Mass and sacraments but the realization that SALVATION COMES ONLY THROUGH THE ONE TRUE FAITH!
Thank you Robert, May God bless you and your catholic insight and wisdom!
From 1984 (I may comment later as I’m not finished reading but the quote reminded me of another quote:))
1984-“His mind slid away into the labyrinthine world of doublethink. To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. That was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious”