The article from the National Catholic Register (March 14, 2026) details the Holy Stairs replica at St. Patrick’s Church in Pittsburgh, focusing on Father James Cox’s legacy and the devotion’s emphasis on physical mortification and reported miraculous interventions. It frames the practice as a tangible, emotionally resonant connection to Christ’s Passion, accessible to all, with anecdotes of healings and fulfilled desires. However, this presentation systematically evacuates the devotion of its Catholic supernatural essence, reducing it to a naturalistic, therapeutic exercise that omits the social reign of Christ the King, the necessity of the Church, and the doctrine of grace. The article thus embodies the modernist errors condemned by St. Pius X and Pius IX, reflecting the theological bankruptcy of the post-conciliar “Church.”
Naturalized Piety: How the Holy Stairs Article Embodies Modernist Emptiness
Reduction of the Supernatural to Natural Experience
The article quotes parishioner Dan Yates stating that ascending the stairs provides a means of “humility” amid a culture that “worships pleasure and comfort,” and that “You invoke the passion of the Lord… You open up a whole other world.” This “world” is presented not as the supernatural realm of grace and eternal life, but as an emotional or psychological experience. Catholic theology, however, teaches that mortification—especially in imitation of Christ’s Passion—is ordered to *satisfaction for sin*, *union with Christ’s sacrifice*, and *growth in sanctifying grace*. Pope Pius XI in *Quas Primas* declares that Christ’s reign is primarily spiritual: “His kingdom… is such that men who wish to belong to it prepare themselves through repentance, but cannot enter except through faith and baptism.” The article’s focus on personal feelings and “humility” as a counter to comfort divorces the practice from its true purpose: reparation for sin and obedience to God’s law. This is a classic Modernist reduction of religion to interior sentiment, condemned by St. Pius X in *Lamentabili sane exitu* (Proposition 25: “Faith, as assent of the mind, is ultimately based on a sum of probabilities”).
Miracles as Transactional Bargains
The article recounts several “miracle” stories: a man climbs the stairs, his brain-dead wife recovers; a woman prays, her nephew receives a kidney; another conceives after praying on the stairs. These are presented as direct, transactional responses to the physical act, implying a quasi-magical causality. Catholic doctrine holds that miracles are *signs* wrought by God to confirm revealed truth or for the salvation of souls, not to gratify personal wishes. The *Catechism of the Council of Trent* (pre-1958) teaches that miracles “are intended to confirm the truth of religion, and to prove that the power of God is present with His ministers.” The article’s framing promotes superstition, reducing divine providence to a vending machine activated by ritual. This aligns with the condemned Modernist error that faith is based on “probabilities” (Lamentabili, Prop. 25) and the naturalistic notion that religious acts yield automatic material benefits, which Pius IX’s *Syllabus of Errors* anathematizes (Error 58: “All the rectitude and excellence of morality ought to be placed in the accumulation and increase of riches…” – here applied to spiritual “riches” as personal gain).
Omission of the Social Reign of Christ the King
While praising Father Cox’s advocacy for the poor, the article never connects this work to the Catholic doctrine that social order depends on the public recognition of Christ’s kingship. Pius XI’s *Quas Primas*—instituted precisely to combat secularism—declares: “Let rulers of states therefore not refuse public veneration and obedience to the reigning Christ… when God and Jesus Christ were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The article’s silence on this imperative reduces charity to mere humanitarianism, divorced from the duty of every state to submit to the law of Christ. This omission is complicit in the secularist error condemned by the *Syllabus* (Error 40: “The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well-being and interests of society”)—the opposite is true, but only if Christ reigns. By presenting Cox’s work as purely social activism, the article propagates the Modernist separation of faith from public life.
Naturalistic Morality and Pelagian Tendencies
Yates describes the devotion as a stand against a culture that “rejects mortification,” yet the article never grounds mortification in its proper theological context: *penance for sin* and *participation in Christ’s redemptive suffering*. Catholic morality is based on God’s eternal law and the necessity of grace. The *Syllabus* condemns Error 56: “Moral laws do not stand in need of the divine sanction…” The article implies that mortification is good simply because it opposes comfort, a naturalistic virtue ethics devoid of reference to original sin, justification, or the supernatural end of man. This reflects the Pelagian tendency of Modernism, which St. Pius X identified in *Lamentabili* (Prop. 58: “All the rectitude and excellence of morality ought to be placed in the accumulation and increase of riches…” – here, “riches” of self-discipline).
The Physical Over the Spiritual
“Fr.” Nicholas Vaskov states: “There’s a physical aspect to devotion… sometimes, [it’s] just the physical pain of kneeling your way up 28 marble stairs that I think inserts us even more into Jesus’ experience of his passion.” This dangerously reduces redemption to mere imitation. Catholic theology teaches that we unite our sufferings to Christ’s *through grace* for the salvation of souls (Colossians 1:24). The physical act, without the sacramental grace and explicit intention of reparation, is empty. Moreover, the article mentions the tabernacle but never the *Most Holy Sacrifice* of the Mass, which is the source of grace. The focus on “physical pain” as an end in itself echoes the Jansenist rigorism condemned by the Church, not Catholic asceticism. The *Syllabus* (Error 57) condemns the notion that “the science of philosophical things and morals… may and ought to keep aloof from divine and ecclesiastical authority”—here, the physical is elevated without reference to divine authority.
Silence on Doctrinal Truths and the Necessity of the True Church
The article never mentions sin, repentance, the necessity of the sacraments, or the dogma *extra Ecclesiam nulla salus*. It presents the devotion as universally accessible, implying that anyone can “feel connected to Jesus” regardless of their faith state. This is the indifferentism condemned by Pius IX (*Syllabus*, Error 16: “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation”). The article’s therapeutic universalism contradicts the Catholic truth that sanctifying grace comes only through the sacraments of the Catholic Church. The silence on the Church’s authority and the need for her to teach all nations (Matthew 28:19-20) is a grave omission, reflecting the Modernist hermeneutic of discontinuity.
Use of Post-Conciliar Clergy and Structures
The article treats “Fr.” Vaskov as a legitimate priest and the parish as part of the Catholic Church. However, from an integral Catholic perspective, the post-1958 hierarchy has apostatized. As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches (cited in the *Defense of Sedevacantism* file): “A manifest heretic… ceases to be Pope and head… by which things he may be judged and punished by the Church.” The line of usurpers begins with John XXIII; the current antipope is “Leo XIV” (Robert Prevost). Thus, “Fr.” Vaskov is a minister of the *conciliar sect*, not the Catholic Church. His sacraments are invalid due to the radical changes in rite and his lack of valid jurisdiction. The article’s uncritical acceptance of these structures deceives readers into believing they are participating in Catholic devotion when, in fact, they are engaging in a syncretistic practice of the neo-church.
Conclusion: A Devotion Divorced from the Kingdom of Christ
The article’s portrayal of the Holy Stairs devotion exemplifies the post-conciliar corruption: a traditional practice stripped of its supernatural purpose, reduced to a naturalistic experience of “humility” and “miraculous” personal benefits. It omits the reign of Christ over individuals and societies, the necessity of the Church, and the centrality of grace. This is not a defense of tradition but its evacuation, aligning perfectly with the Modernist errors Pius X condemned as “the synthesis of all errors.” The faithful are led to believe they are growing in holiness through physical acts and emotional consolations, while the essential doctrines of the faith—the kingship of Christ, the authority of the Church, the reality of sin and grace—are silently excluded. Such a presentation is not merely deficient; it is a tool of apostasy, directing souls toward a humanistic piety that satisfies the senses but starves the soul.
Source:
Step By Step Toward Christ: Pittsburgh’s Holy Stairs (ncregister.com)
Date: 14.03.2026