I’ve been attending an SSPX chapel for almost a year now. The SSPX is an “oasis” of true, traditional Catholicism in a “sea” of uninspiring, banal Modernism. The church is filled, and has many young, large families… the lines for Confession are long, the homilies are outstanding. Attending the SSPX liturgies has truly enriched my spiritual life and given me many Graces! I too feel that Abp Lefebvre is a saint. I’ve read his 700 pg biography and he lived a life of heroic virtue.
I agree wholeheartedly! I've been blessed to be attending an SSPX chapel here in New Zealand since 2020, and my Faith has grown, and grown, and grown ... you get the picture 😁 Thank you Archbishop Lefebvre, I'll be grateful to you for eternity 🙏✝️
The SSPX tramples on Catholic teaching on the papacy. < SSPX liturgies> They use the Bugnini 1962 missal that had the Canon altered and was only used for 2 1/2 years.
As Catholics, we can go back and forth on this topic of Trads, SSPX, NO, etc,etc. Personally, I have served and trained alter servers for the NO and have attended the TLM under an Archdiocese as well as presently attending an SSPX chapel. Down in my heart, gut, whatever you want to call it, I strongly feel a deeper and more spiritual connection when attending the Latin mass. Something just feels right.
Our Catholic faith is not based on feelings. Our faith is based on Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Majisterium. It is Mormonism that bases their faith on feelings.
Well, I’ve been a member of the SSPX since 1987, and I seen the storms that were howling. It’s not over yet but thank goodness. We can be reassured. That one day archbishop, Marcel Lefevre will be canonized. I pray for this, I never met the man but truly he was very saintly. Thank you for the inspiring program. God bless.
If the SSPX are just Catholics, then what's up with comments like this where you bring up the how you were brought into "The Society" Isn't Catholic and SSPX the same thing?
@@JamesHarrison687 If you did a search you could find information. There is an article by novus ordo Patrick Perez called, "The Missal Crisis of '62." You can also look for "The Pius X and John XXIII Missals Compared." Bugnini has a book: The Reform of the Liturgy (1948-1975) You could also look for information on previous attempts to add St. Joseph to the Canon and how it was rejected.
@@JamesHarrison687 If you did a search you could find information. There is an article by novus ordo Patrick Perez called, "The Missal Crisis of '62." You can also look for "The Pius X and John XXIII Missals Compared." Bugnini has a book: The Reform of the Liturgy (1948-1975) You could also look for information on previous attempts to add St. Joseph to the Canon and how it was rejected.
@@JamesHarrison687 If you did a search you could find information. There is an article by novus ordo Patrick Perez called, "The Missal Crisis of '62." You can also look for "The Pius X and John XXIII Missals Compared." Bugnini has a book: The Reform of the Liturgy (1948-1975) You could also look for information on previous attempts to add St. Joseph to the Canon and how it was rejected.
You can thank much of the schism issue because of Michael Voris. He did a lying hit piece on CM about them. He has a long history of going after others falsely
@@lovesrlady2 many peoples lives have already been destroyed. That's why character assassination was considered worse than murder. Because, you killed the person while they still had to live being destroyed. How many people will give you a chance once everyone called you a pe do? Try surviving that when everyone around you believes it's true even though it's not.
@Belladicta You are correct. Each person should do their own homework on the subject, seeking only the truth but many do not. In my case, it didn't sit well with me the whole "schism" accusation, so I dug deeper and found the truth. Same with all the other issues. I love and respect the SSPX and will be eternally grateful to Archbishop Lefebvre for fighting within the church for the faith.
He also did a hit piece on Medjugorje, as did his studio sidekick Christine. I warned them both, a few years ago, that there would be punishment for this, and I was right. You trash the Blessed Mother, you will pay a price!
@@DefendourMother there is a lot of evidence it is fake. Our Lady of La Sallette warned about all the fake apparitions on the end. After research I believe Fr Malachi Martin. Satanic Hoax. It kept people from doing their First Saturdays. That would have fulfilled Fatima request. Rush ah has had tech to turn base medals to gold for decades. V2k, voice of God wea p0ns to beam messages into peoples heads thinking God is talking with them. Scalar tech to heal people. It was condemned by 2 Bishops, one Bishop was even kidnapped trying to make him recant. The Medjugorie Deception, shows this. Money through the sight was used for trafficking, documented in the book, "Lucifer's Lodge." Errors will come from Rush ah. I believe it was one of their greatest mind control efforts ever done. I used to believe it, until I set out to prove someone wrong who said it was fake. Once you get out of the bubble of just hearing the promoters you are astonished. Benedict even asked the faithful not to go. Supposedly, he was going to condemn it. another reason he had to be removed. The priest who was supposed to get the secrets was molesting pilgrims , and had two illegitimate children with a nun. The visionaries were even caught lying and admitted it. The project is Blue beam all the way. Very sad. Many don't want to investigate to find out. It's so much easier than Fatima. Documentary, "The Medjugorie Deception," is on yt. Evidence shown right on the vid. Including the Bishops. 😢 Sad
I’ve learned a lot about the SSPX watching your videos…I knew little to nothing about them before I started watching you channel. I wish you had gone into more detail about the mutual excommunications of 1054. As an Orthodox Christian (who prays in Latin and loves the Roman Church) I would like to hear more details about the distinctions you make there. I’m going to have to think about that. Brings up so many questions.
When my car broke down 2 years ago I was unable to get to work and became destitute. I also lost access to the Mass and the Sacraments as I had to move in with a non Christian friend out in the middle of nowhere to avoid being homeless. I wrote to countless churches and only the SSPX put any serious effort into helping me get a car. This past Christmas an SSPX priest mailed me enough money to buy a used car and I now have access to the Sacraments again and start a new job next week after hearing non SSPX TLM and Novus Ordo Catholics (with a few exceptions) tell me "just get a job", "pull yourself by the bootstraps" , "no one owes you charity. We are not our brothers keeper" for the last 2 years
Do you mean jaded ex-sspxer, supposed ex-freemason, even though there are pictures proving he's still a freemason, john salza? Who now attacks the sspx? 1peter5 has a good article titled " John salza replies to John salza" onepeterfive.com/john-salza-replies-to-john-salza/ It shows that his " I didnt know, for 15 years" Is just bunk. I will breifly address one of Mr Salza's stances in my next video. If you cant wait heres one I've already done. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fVudrTLnJIA.htmlsi=o9HIKw2iYjLdLL0r
Work out your salvation in fear and trembling… If you would rather go to a protestantized Novus Ordo Mass, or an Indult type FSSP Mass where they remain silent on modernistic errors, just because the above have full canonical status than go to a SSPX Chapel where the Mass of all time is offered as well as the timeless Catholic doctrines that go with it…then you are either not able to think for yourself, or are attached to the opinions of people and fear losing their esteem. God be with you…
The SSPX does not have full canonical status, that’s why they have chapels and not churches. Also I don’t think you understand what protestants are or do. Because protestants also follow a man who was excommunicated.
“Eat this Bread and drink this Cup”, “it shall become our spiritual drink.” This is paschal theology and its Protestantism. No need to be careful. Watch Mass of the Ages trilogy.
What you described is what some protestants believe, but not all of them. But where in the NO is that? I can’t find it at all. Maybe before making accusations about the sacred you should do a little research. I did find “ Be pleased, O God, we pray, to bless, acknowledge, and approve this offering in every respect; make it spiritual and acceptable, so that it may become for us the Body and Blood of your most beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.” Then it says “FOR THIS IS MY BODY.” Not the other way around as you accuse it of. Also I would suggest that you watch the mass of the ages from a clinical viewpoint. It’s laughable. The first was all emotional, the second had blatant misinformation and literally disproved itself on to of that, and the third was a bunch of boys who were mad at their boss so they sent their moms to talk to him. What man sends his mom to talk with his boss? It was so bad.
It’s in the Offertory. Have you ever been to the NO? Unbelievable… unbelievable. I grew up in it and attended it for over 30 years (not going back)… The offertory is supposed to express the goal of the Mass. The NO offertory is Jewish supper prayers which express the Mass as a meal and not a sacrifice. The heretical Protestants adopted it because they believe in consubstantiation not transubstantiation. They don’t believe in a propitiatory Sacrifice. That’s the problem with NO people-their Mass is in the vernacular and they still don’t understand it. You’re way off the mark. Sad. Watch Mass of the Ages and read the Council of Trent.
I think maybe your right. I didnt look into it enough. I was under the impression Benedict XVI had reinstated his, but They're saying he has incurred latea sententiae for consecrating Bishops. So, same as Lefebvre, which I dont buy. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll retract it, or clarify, in my part 2.
Thank you for these clarifications. For all of St John Paul's virtues as our Pope, he could be quite heavy handed and harsh at times. His handling of SSPX was one such occasion, IMHO. Although I'm not a fan of the Latin mass, I do respect the priests of the SSPX and their work. I especially appreciate the way they provide confession immediately before mass. You would think that most of us could stay clear of mortal sin from Friday afternoon confession to Sunday morning mass, but not a few people do suffer from habitual dangerous sins. This raises an interesting theological question. If a Catholic received the Eucharist in a state of grace, this does good for his soul. But if that person later commits a mortal sin, do they lose that benefit? In which case all the spiritual benefit of masses through one's life are lost if even one mortal sin is committed? I suggest that this could be an interesting topic for this channel to tackle. I say this because this channel has proven itself to be a trustworthy source of information.
Good presentation! You are much more knowledgeable of the SSPX situation than you are the apparitions of Medjugorje. I have the same problem with people making ignorant comments about Medjugorje as you have with people making ignorant comments about the SSPX. I also hate when people speak against the SSPX. Though I do not belong to an SSPX chapel, I will go out of my way to humiliate anyone who speaks against this Society. There is no reason for anyone to talk about something/anything they know nothing about, including the SSPX.
The SSPX is a lifeboat of true Catholicism. The Novus Ordo Church is really a totally new religion and not Catholic. Our Lady of La Salette prophesied that Rome would loose the Faith. She was talking about our times of the Modernists heresy.
It is not a yes or no question. We would be in grave sin if we knowingly follow a pope's heretical pronouncements. The current pontiff has uttered many.
Its a complicated matter, but the main question is if they are in schism or not, and that view changes from bishop to bishop Even if they have no schism in their theology and they accept Pope Francis as their Pope, the main difference comes from the fact that they dont accept the second Vatican counsel and also that they dont form part of the official church hierarchy, as they have their own bishops and their own structure totally independent of the catholic church (or the church of the counsel as they say) Also from what i know i heard that the Pope made a paper where he authorises people to go to SSPX mass IF the local bishop gives the authorization So if your bishop sais that, i think probably you shouldnt go to SSPX mass
The point of the video is that schism needs to be clearly stated and articulated from the authority of the Church not open to opinions of individual Bishops. If the SSPX was in schism and not from God there would be clear and loud declarations in writing from said authority that you Cannot, Must Not, Will Not go to SSPX. That does not exist and quite frankly will not exist.
Your bishop is repeating to you the official stance of The Church. Channels like this unfortunately try to twist words and find loopholes to make the SSPX ok somehow. But no, it does not fulfill your Sunday obligation.
@@nealkriestererStop slandering. That’s a lie. It’s not the Official stance. That is only One Bishops opinion. It could be 10 000 Bishops, it doesn’t matter if it’s only an opinion.
So many rude an uncharitable comments on here. It's all very easily answered by one simple question to ones self. Am I doing this out of the desire to love God to the fullest extent of my ability, or am I going to church where it's easier for me to have one foot in the world. If you are sincere and honest with yourself, you'll end up in the right place. And if you aren't, arguing with people online won't save your soul. There is no he said she said at your judgement, there is only what you did and what you should have done. You don't get to argue with God, you don't get to plead your case or explain why you didn't try to learn more, it's all laid out what your intentions were and the effort you put in and then it's final. So maybe try to get it right...
@@littlerock5256 First of all, even if JPII said it was in schism, it doesn’t matter because of canon law. With Pope Francis, the pope can’t give faculties for marriages and confessions to a group not in communion with Rome.
@@maddogproductions2916 Popes are not bound by canon law. Francis also said that the SSPX was on its way to full communion, so apparently he doesn't think they are yet. Why does the SSPX want to be in communion with the conciliar church that Lefebvre said wasn't the Catholic Church?
@@littlerock5256 I think you’re gonna have to do a little bit more reading popes are bound by it as well. You can’t put laws out and then not follow them still rational, and other words not logical.
Attending Mass at SSPX do fulfilled your obligations,so the social media canon lawyers and theologians are not authority in the church,and mouthpiece of the Roman church
The SSPX remains with Rome and the Pope, because, they are Roman Catholic, like its founder archbishop Matcel Lefebvre. To be considered Catholic you need to recognize the Pope, even if he is sick with modernism. This is chastisement from our Lord Jesus Christ who remains in control of His Church. We are in a storm, but we must remain in the ship with whoever is sitting in the seat Peter. Only our Lord Jesus Christ will deal with His Vicar and the crisis that we ate going through.
While I do attend a TLM parish and am hopeful that traditional liturgy & theology reattains a prominent place with the hierarchal structures of the church, the arguments in this video are for the most part sorely disappointing. For one thing, the content creator was cynical of the Holy See's "doublespeak" in clarifying that attending mass at SSPX chapels doesn't constitute schism, while over time it can build up a schismatic mentality (as infected with 'nominalism', 'de Cartesianism', 'Kantism', etc.). And (of course) the last 3 popes got the illicit ordinations of '88 wrong when referring to the "schism of Lefebvre". Now if they have such an abysmal track record during the past 6 decades of getting things wrong, why should we take their alleged declaration of the SSPX not being in schism as "undeniable truth"?? (That doesn't make a modicum of sense BTW). Now Cdl. Castrillon Hoyos fell well short of declaring "the SSPX is not in schism". He simply said they were treating relations between the Holy See & the SSPX as an "internal matter" (i.e., giving them the benefit of a doubt). An argument could've certainly been made that some SSPX clergy were excommunicated while others weren't. (Just like Church authorities don't necessarily know when baptized Catholics obtain abortions, perform abortions, pay for abortions or drive women to obtain abortions, likewise they don't know when SSPX clergy & lay faithful who attend masses at their chapels, send their children to their schools, become financial benefactors, etc. "formally adhere" to the schism of Lefebvre. There's not a "scarlet letter S" that spontaneously appears on their chests notifying people of this.) Pope Benedict XVI (in the decree remitting the excommunication of the 4 illicitly ordained SSPX bishops, as told by then CDF Prefect Cdl. Battista Re): "...in his paternal concern for the spiritual distress which the parties concerned have voiced as a result of the excommunication, and trusting in their commitment, expressed in the aforementioned letter, to spare no effort in exploring as yet unresolved questions through requisite discussions with the authorities of the Holy See in order to reach a prompt, full and satisfactory solution to the original problem has decided to reconsider the canonical situation of Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, resulting from their episcopal consecration." So BXVI was presuming on the good will of the Bishops, as well as his desire to obtain unity with and normalize the canonical status of SSPX clergy, stating, "Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be." Also, there's this "parallel community" argument that keeps getting floated around by SSPX apologists (and I don't know how one arrives at the conclusion that a society that ordains its own bishops, sets up its own marriage tribunals, etc. does so without the intent of operating independently of the Holy See, which would constitute any sane person's definition of a "parallel community") But I'm sorry; baptized Catholics don't have to ordain their own Popes & Church hierarchies to incur excommunication. Read your Church history and quit using this regurgitated argument which has no historical merit whatsoever. And yes ... the Ecclesia Dei Commission has been suppressed, although the work & mission of that commission was merely commuted to the CDF (which has yet undergone another "metamorphosis" from Holy Inquisition, to CDF, to DDF, but I digress). The suppression of the commission doesn't constitute the rescinding of the declarations contained in the motu proprio "Ecclesia Dei". You're conflating two distinct entities. It would be like asserting that since the authority of the Pontifical Biblical Commission has been reduced to that of an "ecclesial advisory board" in recent decades, the authoritative document "Praestantia Sacrae Scripturae" (compiled by the PBC in 1907 under the direction of St. Pope Pius X, considered to be binding on the conscience of faithful Catholics) need no longer be intellectually ascended to. That is pure rubbish. In short, don't conflate disparate concepts & non-sequiturs in a veiled attempt to justify every action of Lefebvre & Co. (Doing so will only put you on equal footing with the 'modernist', 'nominalist', 'Kantist', 'de Cartesian' kabal currently occupying some of the preeminent positions of the Church). PS I am curious whether SSPX adherents consider Bp. Williamson's Episcopal consecration of another bishop to constitute a "schismatic act". He seemed to only be doing what Abp. Lefebvre did 2 1/2 decades earlier, for apparently similar reasons ... (that the SSPX had become too 'consiliar' in wanting to normalize relations with Rome, the same way Lefebvre felt the Society would become to conciliar if they accepted VII and validated the liturgical reforms that came afterwards).
The SSPX has always rejected and will continue to reject the heresy of modernism which was condemned by many Popes before Vatican II. The SSPX will continue to profess the true faith of our Lord Jesus Christ and not the heretical doctrine of the modernists, freemasons, communists and sodomites who have taken over the Church. The SSPX will continue to celebrate only the Latin mass of all ages instead of the protestant novus ordo which was pushed by the freemason Annibal Bugnini with 6 protestants. The SSPX will continue to recognise the Pope (so they are not schismatic), but will oppose any of his teachings which are contrary to the head of the Church who is our Lord Jesus Christ. The SSPX is continuing what the Church always did for 2000 years before Vatican II. Therefore, if the SSPX is wrong, then the Church was wrong for 2000 years. God never changes and warned to be aware of false prophets and of wolves in sheep clothings. God never taught that you can save yourself in all religions, that we have the same God as Muslims (as stated by JP II who kissed the Coran and Francis) or that we should bless sin (Fiducia Suplicans). Please be reminded that the Catholic Church is the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ, not the Church of its Vicar (the Pope), not the Church of modernist Vatican II who has embrassed the world who is rejecting our Lord Jesus Christ.
Regarding the 1988 excommunication (1) it was not a performative utterance but a declarative one since it presupposed that a latae sententiae excommunication had already occurred (2) consequently the "lifting" of the excommunication was not a performative utterance either but an admission that the 1988 declaration was false. PS: A performative utterance brings about the fact it declares e.g. "I now pronounce you man and wife" said as part of a marriage ceremony. This produces the marriage. A declarative utterance does not bring about the fact it declares, e.g. "You are now man and wife" said after the marriage ceremony. This does not produce the marriage. It merely states that the marriage has already occurred.
From about 3min30 to 4min you read comments stressed by the PCED as being technical and a matter or how the Church choose/has chosen to treat the matter/behave as if until now. This sort of formulation which is highly contextual and one in which an option of a particular generosity on the part of the Church's authority which it need NOT do is being exercised nevertheless to allow one to one respectful dialogue.- Instead of a truthful acknowledgement that this is a language of reconciliation , maintaining discussion ALTHOUGH serious error, points of schism and of heresy HAVE arisen your presentation of this is to seize on a technical point whose only authorisation is an optional act of good faith by those you disagree with to keep discussion going as if this was proof you are in the right & justified instead of saying the Church wants to avoid another schism at all costs but maybe that's exactly why you shouldn't be even more strident in effectively saying the (N.O.) Mass said throughout the world is in some sense heretical/not a valid mass, etc.., The points you raise but misunderstand or misrepresented are NOT that you are being mistreated or clearly can show how right you are but EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. Every conciliatory word or move by the Church is taken as proof you should oppose it/the magesteriumv& dismiss any opposing point raised. Meanwhile any vord of opposition is taken as proof of how very badly you're treated, how evil "they " are and that the Church is no longer the Church. This type of video is exactly what makes me fear there will come a time the Church HAS TO exert it's authority against invincible ignorance and declare the aggressively antagonist cults within the Church as being in schism and excommunicated. It is entirely valid (and not contrary to statements by the Church) that such is what it has been fearful of for a long time. It seems disingenuous and deceitful to try to silence or negate any voice with perfectly legitimate disagreement with you especially when here on YT SSPX priests openly deny the mass most people attend and the Eucharist recieved (ever in their lives, for hundreds of millions) is real/valid & that they though baptised have yet to come to Christ -but we shouldn't (?) say this is schismatic or heretical? That makes no sense.
I like a lot of content here but nothing traditional about thinking you know better than the magisterium; that’s Protestantism Division is of the devil. God gathers
The SSPX are a light on the hilltop. However, sadly In Glasgow, Scotland the SSPX priests pay bouncers on the doors of the Church on Sunday mornings to bar three lay faithful, the reason they give is that they do not like the questions/statements that two of these faithful Catholics who assisted at Holy Mass at that Church for over twenty years. Shame on the SSPX. Archbishop Lefevre pray for these wayward priests.
There is not an article, it is a situation that I learnt about directly at first from one of the faithful who it happened to, a faithful Catholic laywoman. I first became aware of it in Lent 2023. I was so shocked by this non Catholic response from Catholic clergymen. I wrote to the Superior General in Switzerland ( twice) in the hope that this scandal would have been resolved and received a reply from the Superior for the UK asking me to trust his judgement, as he says it was his decision. Shameful behaviour and not in the spirit of the great Archbishop.@@nealkriesterer
Could you link the identity of the church and those price,and formerly report them to their superior. The Society doesn't to the best of my knowledge,tolerate rascality and indiscipline from their priests and clergy even their bishops can't fall out of line. Please properly report this issue,
I do believe that the good Archbishop Lefebvre will be canonized, but not until the crisis in the church is over. Any canonization until then is questionable. 😢
@lovesrlady2 - Bsp. Lefebvre died in schism though! Are you kidding?! Even in this video the OP shows that Pope Benedict lifted the EXCOMMUNICATION on the four SSPX bishops BY NAME!! (Lefebvre was not among the list) Benedict lifted the excommunication to create a pathway of SALVATION to the multitude of souls being misled by SSPX; - not because they were correct.
But this statement we then have to question all canonizations. Because there has always been a “crisis” in the Church. So why should I believe this one is worse than any others? Did Christ lie when he said “you are Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church”? By your own logic and argument I will have to throw away Vatican I, and about 1500 years of Church teachings. I’m sorry, but that’s what the Baptists say, and I was Baptist and now I’m in full communion with Rome! I’d recommend you read some of the Church teachings. Like how Saint Pope Pius X said there has never been a time when the Pope is not needed.
I love the SSPX! They have helped me and many I know to love and grow in the authentic Catholic faith. Thank you for the work you are doing regarding this matter. Please come for a visit to the seminary in Dillwyn Virginia. I will arrange a tour for you and you'd be welcome to stay with our family while you visit.
@littlerock5256 It's interesting that only those who don't attend SSPX chapels make this false and unsubstantiated claim to bring the SSPX down and yet they are growing and bearing good fruits...
@@1000catz Truth is truth, regardless of who points it out. The SSPX has some novus ordo priests, a novus ordo bishop, sends people in danger of death to the novus ordo for "anointing of the sick," offers Mass and administers confirmation in a novus ordo church, has done "eucharistic" adoration in a novus ordo church, now accepts the novus ordo catechism and the novus ordo code of canon law, has novus ordo presbyters and apologists as speakers at SSPX conferences, and says that the novus ordo service is now the same Sacrifice of Calvary as the old Mass.
@@littlerock5256you must be a sede. Which schismatic and sede group do you hang with? CMRI? SSPV? The Dimond Bros? Who think that everyone but them is a heretic. God bless the SSPX, FSSP, ICKSP, the Eastern Catholics and their traditions as well as the VALID NO Mass where Christ the King is present in the Eucharist.
Sir, what do you mean when you say "If you are not excommunicated from the Catholic Church, you are in communion with the Catholic Church"? That's not true, is it? The Eastern Orthodox excommunication was listen but they are not in communion with the Catholic Church.
I have been following your platform for 2years now sound traditional Catholic content,no wonder you attend Mass at SSPX,so you are deep rooted to accurate doctrine and teachings of the church without biase,without any conspiracy theory. I have made my research,ask questions from both sides,from sincere and honest Catholic theologians.
I am concerned for you IMC, but hey, you're an adult and Catholic as I am. There's two or three very easy ways to 'see' if the SSPX are actually in communion with The Church; 1 - Why can't the SSPX have mass in any Catholic chapel or cathedral every Sunday or day of obligation as normal like we have different 'cultures' or language liturgies now? 2 - Why do they need permission of the local Bishop of a Diocesan (or a delegation) for ANY THING?? 3 - If Francis exercises his authority as Pope on the SSPX for anything - like he has recently with other dubious bishops and priests - do you think the SSPX would comply??? I love you, Man....and the channel; but the commentaries of your videos are becoming an ECHO chamber of those levelling the finger at Rome and hurling stones at The Church! Be careful, Man, lest the din causes you to leave the Barque of Peter too. Christ left him as Vicar...
1. Technically they could, with the permission of the local bishop. They are not diocesan priests directly under the local bishop. They can't just barge into a church that belongs to the Diocese and start saying mass. Anymore then a Franciscan or dominican who might be in the area but not directly under the bishop could. 2. Every priest needs permission from the bishop. Because he has authority over the Diocese. 3. IDk. No reason to play what if. Thats like Protestants saying " what if the Pope says something infallible thats wrong?"
@@errorsofmodernism7331 The Novus Ordo Mass as instituted by Vatican II is fully and legitimately Catholic. Those who do accept Vatican II as legitimate fail to accept Matt 16:18.
@@JackGleason543Wow, that response from a Catholic? I'm glad you're on the Novus Ordo Protestant side. A Catholic is never going to be in a position to take that action, but a Protestant might.
@@ghostlyimageoffear6210I agree with what he said. As Jesus said to Judas Iscariot, "Woe unto the man by whom the son of man is betrayed it would have been better for him if he were not born."
@@nathanielus5296 Is SSPX Valid ? According to the Popes Declaration yes. *Confession; *Holy Communion; *Sunday Obligation; *Matrimony Sacrament Marks all boxes. Stop being prideful and putting it next to heretics and schismatics. Stop acting as if it rejects Papacy.
@@nathanielus5296 According to the Pope no. We are in Communion with Rome. Stop acting like we reject the Papacy and it’s some split as “rEFoRmAtIoN”. According to some people, SSPX is outside the Church. So are those who are saying that are rejecting Pope’s stance on SSPX ?
@@AK_Catholic_Traditional Francis referred to the schism with the SSPX. He said the SSPX was on it's way to full communion, so seemingly not in communion at present. Why does the SSPX want to be in communion with the conciliar church that Lefebvre said wasn't the Catholic Church?
I have to add this comment: Anyone thinking of joining the Catholic faith, please do not get your formation at a diocesan church, or you will be scandalized. If you want to learn the the Catholic faith, as close to truth as possible, seek out the SSPX or SSPV for your formation. As the Blessed Mother once said in an apparition: "You must defend the Faith!" The only way to do this is for everyone to return to the traditional teachings of the Church. No exceptions! The Vatican no longer represents the true Catholic faith, and everyone should steer clear of its teachings.
My friend, the idea that the Catechism of the Catholic faith can be altered by Church leaders, in order to be more appeasing to their secular desires and the secular desires of most Catholics, is, in itself, an abomination of the faith. To believe that Catholicism can be "fluid" over time, is to suggest that it can morf into any kind of belief system and still be called Catholic, as long as Church (Vatican) leaders are making the call. Sadly, the people who accept this belief are often those who have no interest in preserving or defending the true faith. Anyone who believes that current Church leaders have any intention of preserving the faith or following the explicit teachings of Jesus, the Apostles and the Apostolic Fathers, is living in confusion. Never were we expected to follow those bishops & priests who dared to teach & promote heresy and apostasy. You either defend Jesus and the faith, or you oppose them both by following the heretical teachings that have evolved since Vatican ll. If you believe in the traditional Catholic faith, the choice is very easy. @@JamesHarrison687
My advice to SSPX: Instead of attacking the Vatican for whatsoever reasons, just make yourself grow and demand recognition of Tridentine rite as one of the approved rites in communion with Rome, the seat of Peter. Popes will come and go. I hope one day SSPX will be in full communion with Rome.
I assume that the Lord Jesus, being true man as well as true God, must have a sense of humor. I can imagine him laughing uproariously at this completely Gospel-less nonsense.
SSPX=78=15=6 S=19 Adam or DNA P=16=7 X=24 XX=Women XY=Men Have none of you ever heard of Adam and DNA???!! Your Spirit Recipe DNA is Holy chromosomes. Somebody Cut Them! We are Alpha and Omega. We are the first and the last. We are the beginning and the ending. We are the beginning At the ending! That’s what happens when you put Holys in the BIBLE Basic Instruction Before Leaving Earth 😂😂😂😂😂❤❤❤
