Search This Blog

Wednesday, October 19, 2022

Church Militant Is at It Again! NO, the SSPX is NOT in Schism!

I won't be saying much about this yet because I haven't had a chance to do enough research, but the latest assault on the SSPX by Church Militant has risen to a new level of vicious attack. (If you watch the episode, note Michael's snide comments throughout.) Their assault weapon in this case is a "former" 32nd degree mason, John Salza, slandering Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX. One Peter 5 has an interesting article on Salza (John Salza Replies to John Salza) by Rudolph West. Included in the article intro is this:

...the SSPX’s canonical status is irregular [NOT SCHISMATIC!] and thus their priests operate under supplied and not ordinary jurisdiction, the SSPX is not and never has been in schism (schismatics don’t have “irregular” canonical situations because they are not subject to the Church’s canon law at all). However, given the rash way in which the Holy See originally handled Archbishop Lefebvre’s 1988 episcopal consecrations, we can understand why ignorant Catholics would hold this erroneous opinion.[3]
We must… remember that canon law is not the only law of the Church that applies to situations like this. There are traditional, ecclesiastical and hierarchical laws, and even the general principles of law (virtue of equity, epikeia), that are fundamental and divine, even if not written down (see canon 19). All these laws are ordered to the supreme law: salus animarum suprema lex. Man has an obligation to save his soul, and thus has a right to receive the means of salvation. While the law of receiving jurisdiction from the hierarchy is a divine law, it is subordinated to the superior law of exercising the priestly ministry. When there is a conflict, the superior law must prevail over the inferior law, which is why ecclesia supplet exists. A man’s right to receive the means of salvation should never be limited by positive law, for in such cases, “the letter killeth” (2 Cor 3:6). This is why the Church can fulfill what the hierarchy does not do through supplied jurisdiction. Mother Church does not abandon her children, even when the hierarchy does.[4]

Salza's first statement that the Society is "in schism" is false and he has zero authority (as does Michael Voris) to declare them as such. 

Here's what Bishop Athanasius Schneider said about the Society in 2018:

What are your views on the Society of St. Pius X? Do you have sympathy for their position?

Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis on various occasions spoke with understanding towards the SSPX. It was particularly at his time, as Cardinal of Buenos Aires, that Pope Francis helped the SSPX in some administrative issues. Pope Benedict XVI once said about Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre: “He was a great bishop of the Catholic Church.” Pope Francis considers the SSPX as Catholic, and has expressed this publicly several times. Therefore, he seeks a pastoral solution, and he made the generous pastoral provisions of granting to the priests of the SSPX the ordinary faculty to hear confessions and conditional faculties to celebrate canonically marriage. The more the doctrinal, moral and liturgical confusion grows in the life of the Church, the more one will understand the prophetic mission of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in an extraordinary dark time of a generalized crisis of the Church.

Maybe one day History will apply the following words of Saint Augustine to him: “Often, too, divine providence permits even good men to be driven from the congregation of Christ by the turbulent seditions of carnal men. When for the sake of the peace of the Church they patiently endure that insult or injury, and attempt no novelties in the way of heresy or schism, they will teach men how God is to be served with a true disposition and with great and sincere charity. The intention of such men is to return when the tumult has subsided. But if that is not permitted because the storm continues or because a fiercer one might be stirred up by their return, they hold fast to their purpose to look to the good even of those responsible for the tumults and commotions that drove them out. They form no separate conventicles of their own, but defend to the death and assist by their testimony the faith which they know is preached in the Catholic Church” (De vera religione 6, 11).

Who would you rather trust -- a "former" 32nd degree mason and a "former" 20 year active homosexual or Bishop Schneider, Fr. Gregory Hesse, and other traditional theologians and canon lawyers? The SSPX is NOT IN SCHISM! And none of us who attend SSPX chapels are in schism, nor have we left the Church! We love the faith, we love the Church and we love the pope even when he is an abusive and vindictive father. May God convert him.


Anonymous said...

Getting tired of this! It's over and over and over again and again and again!

jason said...

What does "schism" matter when Vatican I has been proven as heretical as Vatican II by so many libtard popes? It is your dury to schism against the vatican.

Anonymous said...

I was not necessary to mention the "abusive pope" because he is not the pope!

Andrew Dunn said...

With concerned catholics (intentional lower-case c) like Voris and Niles, who needs the freemasons?

Unknown said...

I’ve been attending the local SSPX mass the past few months and very happy except one incident. A month ago the priest said in his sermon not to go to any Novus Ordo masses even if it’s the only one available to fulfill your Sunday obligation. He was very clear about this. I told him the next week that I disagreed with him, but he blew it off said something like “I understand” but didn’t give me a further explanation).
I’m not happy about this. I understand there are illicit N.O. Masses, but I think those are not prevalent.
It seems to me this is a incorrect instruction and could be viewed as a schismatic poaition (after all N.O. Masses are valid albeit inferior).

Anonymous said...

These Voris attacks on the SSPX seem to be ramping up, probably part of the effort by antipope Bergoglio to erase the TLM (Real Mass). Clearly, the Novus Ordo, in all it's myriad variations, is absolutely fine with the V2 Nuchurch schismatics, so the warning against it makes sense to me. And the folks who are adhering to Church dogma, teachings and tradition cannot be the schismatics, they are the V2 listening, dialoguing, all-inclusive, and accompanying revolutionaries.

Anonymous said...

What is it going to take for CM to understand that the SSPX is not in "schism"? It's as though, CM feels that they know everything! Granted they do some good things, but on other things they go way over board! I turned them off a long time ago, I wonder how many others are getting tired of this continuous bashing of the Society and are going to turn them off also.
No wonder Michael Matt, Taylor Marshall, Life Site News have distanced themselves from Michael Voris.

Debbie said...

Unknown, he can't give you further info because the society is trying to regularize with Rome. There are sede priests within the SSPX. Do research on the society; they have backtracked on some of their stances over the decades.

ProLIFEmommy said...

Thank you for this post, MaryAnn. So happy to hear someone stand up for the SSPX!