Revolt of the Janitors: On the Detroit Massacre

"One hopes that this would be a wake-up call to those Catholics who, for whatever reason, still deny that such a revolution is taking place."

From Crisis

By Darrick Taylor, PhD

This is not a gentlemanly dispute that can be resolved by gestures of charity and humility. The Church is divided between people who have long ceased to believe in anything resembling the Catholic Faith, and those who still adhere to it. 

My father grew up in Florida, and most of his friends were Cuban. He often heard from them how wonderful Cuba had been before Fidel Castro’s revolution. My father once asked one of his friends how Castro managed to take over the country. He told him it was simple: first they would take over a factory. Then, they would remove the manager of the factory and replace him with the janitor. The reason for this was that the janitor could never become the manager in normal times but only because of the revolution. Thus, the janitor would defend the revolution to the death, so as to keep his new position of power at all costs. 

This is how the Castro regime has survived in Cuba. There is only one problem, however. Revolutionaries are a rare breed. Disciplined, high-functioning, cunning, and, above all, fanatically devoted to the cause for its own sake, they are simply too few in number. True revolutionaries are always few in number. A handful can make a revolution, but they cannot see it to fruition.

Instead, they have to pass on the job to the former janitors, who will never abandon the cause but are incapable of ruling competently. The revolution inevitably collapses. Or, if they somehow manage to keep power, as in Cuba, they condemn those under their control to a sort of living death of malicious incompetence.

Readers of Crisis Magazine have likely heard that the new archbishop of Detroit has terminated professors Eduardo Echeverria, Ralph Martin, and Edward Peters from Sacred Heart Major Seminary in that diocese. You may recall that earlier this year he also decimated the diocesan Latin Masses in Detroit, which were the most numerous in the country. This comes on the heels of revelations that at least one of the official reasons for banning the Latin Mass was based on a patently false claim. These professors were no traditionalists, but they were well-known “conservative” theologians clearly opposed to the theological tendencies of the last pontiff. 

The “Detroit Massacre” is a sign that the Catholic Church has entered the janitorial phase of its own revolution. This began in the 1960s, and the original Progressive faction in the Church that began it has largely passed from the scene. Perhaps the only remaining member of the original cohort is Cardinal Kasper. But the days when a true revolutionary, such as Hans Küng, at least had a brain and some level of competence are long gone. 

Instead, we have nonentities such as “Tucho” Fernández and whoever ghostwrote Traditionis Custodes raised to positions for which they are wholly unqualified. But they are willing to do whatever it takes to advance the revolution, which is why they were raised up in the first place. That is why men such as James Martin are promoted and protected while three distinguished professors are fired from their positions with no explanation and no warning. No doubt, more “janitors” will soon replace them. 

Such is almost certainly the case with the archbishop of Detroit. It is clear he was chosen with a mandate to put an end to the “rigid” tendencies, theological and otherwise, in that diocese. The new bishop of Detroit once suggested, when he was bishop of Tucson, Arizona, that canonical penalties be used against Catholic federal agents who enforced the current administration’s immigration policies. I do not mean he actually cares about the issue of immigration. Rather, he knew who was in power and what kind of signal he needed to send to be promoted. 

And he is delivering. What strikes one about this is how brazen an exercise of power it is. A couple of sites have confirmed the bishop fired these three men without notifying either the rector of the seminary or the board of directors about his decision. My guess is that they would have tried to prevent the dismissal of the professors, so he bypassed them. This tracks with the method of Traditionis Custodes, which resorted to an outright lie to get the desired result. The ends justify the means because the revolution takes precedence over everything—that and remaining in power.

One hopes that this would be a wake-up call to those Catholics who, for whatever reason, still deny that such a revolution is taking place. To those who find this idea too shocking to contemplate, I would urge you not to be taken in by the usual suspects, the midwit Internet Torquemadas who attack anyone who dares question this ongoing demolition of the Catholic Faith. A person on 𝕏 wrote that the firing of these professors was fine because some seminaries purged professors under John Paul II. My response is that those seminaries did not purge enough of them. Seminary professors should be fired if they teach anything approaching heresy. 
Do not get sidetracked concerning arguments about authority. This conflict isn’t about authority. It is about what authority is for: the service to divine, unchanging truth revealed once for all in Jesus Christ and handed on to be guarded by the Church, or protean diktats subject to the whim of whoever holds power. The battle is between those who think that truth is something authority can only safeguard, not create, and those who believe authority can transmute heresy into orthodoxy by fiat (or those who want everyone else to believe this, as to forward their designs).

The bishop fired Echeverria, Peters, and Martin because they objected, however politely, to the toying with heresy that characterized the reign of Pope Francis. Francis was quite explicit that he wanted to alter the Church’s fundamental beliefs. This is the obvious implication of the constant refrain that Vatican II’s reforms are “irreversible,” as everyone knows the Progressive interpretation of that council is a revolutionary one. Lest we forget, the last pontiff issued or approved documents which suggested that

1) sex outside marriage is sometimes not sinful for subjective reasons,

2) homosexual couples can be “blessed,” 

3) all religions are willed by God, and

4) the old Mass is somehow intrinsically harmful.

I find it hard to believe a person sincerely convinced of these sentiments is a Catholic Christian in any meaningful sense of the term.

I fear many still refuse to understand how dire the situation is, even now. Ralph Martin sent a message to those in his ministry in which he said he did not want to elaborate on the details of his dismissal because it might inflame the “polarization in the Church.” I admire Martin, but this attitude is delusional. It reminds me of when Benedict XVI invited Hans Küng to the Vatican for lunch, as a sort of peace offering. The next day, Küng trashed Benedict in the press. There is no reasoning with these people. Six decades plus of disintegrating parishes, seminaries, and churches have not affected their beliefs one iota. I doubt anything will at this point. 

This is not a gentlemanly dispute that can be resolved by gestures of charity and humility. The Church is not “polarized” between two groups of people who share the same basic beliefs. It is divided between people who have long ceased to believe in anything resembling the Catholic Faith, and those who still adhere to it. 

And those who have abandoned that Faith clearly want the rest of us to give up that Faith too, which is why they do things like this whenever and wherever they gain enough power to do so. When they say things like “the reforms of Vatican II are irreversible,” what they mean is that you are going to abandon the Catholic dogmas they have rejected or else they will drive you from the Church. 
Will Rome intervene? Not likely, at least of its own accord. There is a reason Pope Leo XIV was amenable to the Progressives in the last conclave, and my guess is that, though he may not like it, he will not act against Progressives when they do things like this. But that doesn’t mean faithful Catholics have no recourse. The hierarchy often doesn’t respond to the concerns of the faithful, but they will respond to bad media coverage. 

If supporters can make this a story in the secular media, that might cause the powers that be to act. Peters stated in a message on 𝕏 that he has retained counsel, and I hope the other two would do the same. They should also consider legal action against Internet trolls defaming their character and accusing them of heresy on social media. But make no mistake: unless someone makes them pay a price for these types of outrages, Progressives will continue to perpetrate them. 

The revolution of the janitors will not stop of its own accord. You must stop it or else join it. Its conductors will not give you another choice. I say all this not to drive anyone to despair but to urge people to action. They are not numerous or invincible, and they can be defeated. But you actually have to try first. 

There are always reasons for hope, and we believe in God’s promises. In the end, He—not our own efforts—will save His people. The question is what role we will play in this drama—we can meekly submit to the revolution, or fight against it. But the first step in winning any war is to realize that you are fighting one. What faithful Catholics should take away from this episode is that they are part of an irrepressible conflict which they cannot avoid—only win or lose.