The Pillar Catholic portal reports on a recent episode of its “Sunday School” podcast, featuring JD Flynn and Kate Olivera discussing the readings for the Fifth Sunday of Easter, Year A. The discussion centers on Acts 6:1-7, Psalm 33, 1 Peter 2:4-9, and John 14:1-12, with particular focus on St. Peter’s reflection on “living stones” and the ordination of the first deacons. While the surface-level content appears benign, a closer examination reveals the characteristic ambiguities and omissions of the post-conciliar approach to Scripture, which consistently avoids the fullness of Catholic dogmatic and moral teaching in favor of a naturalistic, psychologized, and ultimately modernist hermeneutic.
The “Living Stones” Without a Foundation: Ecclesiological Amnesia
The podcast discusses St. Peter’s teaching on “living stones” built into a spiritual house (1 Peter 2:5). Flynn and Olivera emphasize themes of community, belonging, and the role of the faithful in the Church. However, this discussion occurs within a framework that systematically avoids the dogmatic definition of the Church as a societas perfecta—a true and perfect society, entirely free, endowed with proper and perpetual rights of her own, conferred upon her by her Divine Founder (cf. Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, prop. 19). The “spiritual house” is presented as an amorphous gathering, not as the hierarchical, visible, and infallible society established by Christ, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail (Mt 16:18).
Pius XI, in Quas Primas, explicitly states: “The Church, established by Christ as a perfect society, demands for itself by a right belonging to it, which it cannot renounce, full freedom and independence from secular authority.” The podcast’s discussion of “living stones” lacks this essential dogmatic context. It reduces the Church to a voluntary association of believers, a concept condemned as the “teaching of those who compare the Sovereign Pontiff to a prince, free and acting in the universal Church” (Syllabus, prop. 34). The “limits of language” mentioned in the title become a convenient excuse for not proclaiming the full, unadulterated truth about the Church’s divine constitution and her absolute claim on the obedience of all men and states.
The Ordination of Deacons: A Ritual Without Dogma?
The episode references the ordination of the first deacons in Acts 6:1-7. In the conciar context, such discussions often focus on “service” and “ministry” in a horizontal, secular sense, divorced from the sacramental character and the hierarchical nature of Holy Orders. The Council of Trent, in its Doctrina de Sacramento Ordinis, defines that Orders is a true sacrament, conferring an indelible character, and that the hierarchy of bishops, priests, and deacons is divinely instituted. The post-conciliar emphasis on “diakonia” as mere service, often conflated with lay ministries and social work, risks obscuring the sacred power and authority conferred by the sacrament.
St. Pius X, in Lamentabili sane exitu, condemned the proposition that “the elders fulfilling supervisory functions at Christian gatherings were appointed by the Apostles as priests or bishops to ensure order in the developing communities, but they did not, in the proper sense, continue the apostolical mission and authority” (prop. 50). The podcast’s treatment of the deacons’ ordination likely avoids the dogmatic reality of apostolic succession and the sacrificial priesthood, reducing it to a functional appointment for community needs. This aligns with the modernist error that the hierarchy is “merely a mode of explanation and stage in the evolution of Christian consciousness” (Lamentabili, prop. 54).
The Gospel of John 14:1-12: Christ Relativized
The Gospel passage, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” (Jn 14:6), is the ultimate declaration of Christ’s exclusive salvific role. Yet, within the conciliar framework, such texts are often softened or reinterpreted to align with the dogma of religious liberty (Dignitatis Humanae) and ecumenism. The podcast likely presents Jesus’ words as an invitation to personal spiritual growth, rather than the dogmatic assertion that extra ecclesiam nulla salus—outside the Church there is no salvation.
Pius IX, in Quanto conficiamur (1863), while acknowledging the possibility of invincible ignorance, firmly upheld the necessity of the Catholic faith for salvation. The modernist tendency, however, leans towards indifferentism, where “every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (Syllabus, prop. 15). The podcast’s discussion of “the limits of language” becomes a tool to avoid the hard truths of Christ’s unique mediatorship and the Church’s exclusive role as the ark of salvation, promoting instead a vague, inclusive spirituality that is anathematized by the Council of Trent.
The Omission of the Supernatural: A Telltale Sign
A critical analysis of any post-conciliar content must focus not only on what is said, but on what is conspicuously absent. The podcast’s treatment of the readings shows no mention of the state of grace, mortal sin, the necessity of the sacraments for salvation, the reality of hell, or the urgency of conversion. The “living stones” are not presented as souls sanctified by Baptism and nourished by the Eucharist, striving for eternal life. The “way, the truth, and the life” is not presented as the narrow path that leads to eternal damnation if rejected.
This silence is the gravest accusation. It reveals a naturalistic and modernist mentality that reduces the faith to a horizontal, humanistic project. As St. Pius X warned, Modernism is the “synthesis of all errors,” transforming the Church from a divine institution for the salvation of souls into a mere philanthropic society. The podcast, by focusing on community and language without the supernatural framework, participates in this systematic apostasy, leading souls away from the immutable truths of the Catholic faith and towards the abyss of religious indifferentism.
Conclusion: The Hermeneutic of Continuity as a Smokescreen
The Pillar podcast, like much of the conciar media, operates under the guise of orthodoxy while subtly advancing the modernist agenda. By focusing on “living stones” without the full dogmatic context of the Church’s nature, by reducing sacramental ordination to functional service, and by softening the exclusive claims of Christ, it contributes to the ongoing dissolution of Catholic identity. The “limits of language” are not a barrier to truth but a convenient excuse for cowardice and complicity in the destruction of the faith. True Catholic teaching, as defined by the pre-conciliar Magisterium, leaves no room for such ambiguity. It demands a clear, unequivocal proclamation of the whole truth, regardless of how uncomfortable or “limitless” the language may seem to modern ears. The faithful must reject such watered-down catechesis and return to the unadulterated sources of Tradition, where the “living stones” are built upon the Rock of Peter, and the “Way” is clearly marked by the Cross.
Source:
Living stones and the limits of language (pillarcatholic.com)
Date: 29.04.2026