What I will argue here is not about the SSPX.
I am not a Society of St. Pius X member (having only ever been to one of their Masses at a conference, and to none of their chapels). I wish them well (and am aware of the criticisms), but this is my thesis:
They could vanish, and the trouble we’re in will remain….
In 2024, Cardinal Raymond Burke told Raymond Arroyo on The World Over,
“No one has been able to define what the meaning of Synodality is … [yes,] there is a role for consultation… according to the ancient Synods; [Synodality] is not an essential mark of the church. [Synodality] is extremely troublesome, and dangerous, and it needs to be needs to be corrected…”
In his appeal to the Vatican on behalf of the SSPX this February, Bishop Athanasius Schneider said,
“The current situation regarding the episcopal consecrations in the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has suddenly awakened the entire Church.”
Both of these prelates put their finger on the spot.
Bishop Schneider is correct: People have a sense that the situation is about more than this little faction, with its discontents, intransigence, and confidence. Even if you think theirs is a faulty confidence, be honest. Something has come up, and it’s not just about the SSPX. If it were, opposition to them would not be so heated.
The non-SSPX-yet-Francis-resisting, vaguely-Synodality-rejecting Many, feel existentially uneasy. Online pundits can dismiss and mock the Society as much as they like, but we can’t take away the prophetic quality of the witness, and those opposed to them can’t deny they spend their non-SSPX-focused time also lamenting the trouble we’re in.
We need to confront the real “state of necessity.”
Three major acts of Pope Francis represent the culmination of his mission, self-proclaimed, which was to sow confusion, and make a mess. (I will try to restrain myself to these particular acts; I am well aware that there are many others.) We’ve lived with confusion for 13 long years, and now we are waking up to what their culmination, Synodality, means for us as a Church.
The Troika of Deep Concern comprises acts aimed at the goal of changing ecclesiology from what’s expressed in the Creed to something different. We intuit it, even if we’re not (like Cardinal Burke) sure how. The Troika transforms three sides or roles of the Church: the interior, the exterior, and the unifying bloodstream of the those two, namely, worship.
The first blow: Amoris Laetitia (AL), the apostolic letter published in 2016, after the Synod on the Family. AL disrupts the inner life and promise of the Church: marriage and its covenantal transformation of the community, reflecting the union of Christ and His Church, as St. Paul tells us in Eph 5:32: “This is a great mystery.”
The Dubia cardinals spoke up about questions raised by AL in Chapter 8. While those questions are valid, I think there’s a more specific problem in the previous chapter. In my book, God Has No Grandchildren, I explain that without ever, in a document of 60,000 words on the topic, quoting or referencing the words of Our Lord that establish marriage as a sacramental union, and forbid divorce, AL calls marriage an “ideal” (implying an aspirational, rather than attainable, quality) and speaks of the possibility of recognizing “a new relationship” after divorce, including the reception of Holy Communion. In other words, by normalizing the divorced and remarried, AL calls into question God’s relationship with His people and the whole sacramental system.2
The second blow — The 2019 Abu Dhabi Declaration. (ADD) If Amoris Laetitia has to do with the mystery of the interior life of persons and of God’s love for the Church, the message of Abu Dhabi represents the abdication of the outward, centrifugal mission of the Church. It gives up on her mark of apostolicity.
Some say the ADD is not “Church teaching” because it is just a sort of proclamation, a good-will gesture, an informal expression of brotherly love. However, it’s important to remember when Bishop Schneider met with Pope Francis to urge him to add a proviso to the declaration’s most controversial passage, “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings.”
Bishop Schneider reported, after the meeting:
“On the topic of my concern about the phrase used in the Abu Dhabi document – that God “wills” the diversity of religions – the Pope’s answer was very clear: he said that the diversity of religions is only the permissive will of God. He stressed this and told us: you can say this, too, that the diversity of religions is the permissive will of God.”
What happened then? Pope Francis gave the cordial nod to Bishop Schneider, but the final, official statement did not include any such amendment to the language; it was put into the record without any qualification. According to the Pope, God wills all religions. Whether this counts as “Church teaching” or not, the declaration is on record as being “implemented” as such.
I confess I was surprised when, three years after what I thought was the last straw of Amoris Laetitia, the Abu Dhabi Declaration is what shocked many of the faithful out of complacency. But perhaps the difference was that the ADD was short and to the fatal point, whereas AL was long and the point was buried.
Can we be surprised, though, that accepting the plurality of marriages is followed by accepting a plurality of faiths?
The third blow: Traditionis Custodes (TC). If AL attacks the nuptial meaning of Christ’s love for His Church by undermining marriage, and the ADD attacks the Gospel mandate to teach and convert nations, TC disrupts the circulation system that makes the Church a living body (in fact, the Body of Christ), a whole, and unites every part and function: the Liturgy in its fullness of sacraments, prayer, and celebration of the liturgical year. TC does this by tightly restricting the Traditional Latin Mass .
In theory, this is a merely legislative matter, but in the Church, there is not supposed to be a division between the legislative and the doctrinal. Everything flows from the worship of God. We’ve often said “Lex orandi, lex credendi” — the law of prayer is the law of belief. Legislation sends a message. If I were a Latinist, I would be able to provide a tag that conveys that how we worship affects our bonds, our life together, our conscience. How can Tradition, the continuous worship of millennia, with its fruits in the saints and in the conversion of all the nations, be truncated and dismissed?
We must admit it: we have come to see division as the norm and expect it. TC opened a healing liturgical wound with spitefully worded division. But with the “SSPX moment,” perhaps we are stopping to ask why we expect division. It amounts to a kind of schizophrenia and cannot be healthy for the faith.
The fourth blow, from the newly elected Pope Leo, is one more hit. Its significance is for what makes all the rest possible, in the primary fact of Revelation, the Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Second Person of the Trinity: Mater Populi Fidelis: Doctrinal Note on Some Marian Titles, Regarding Mary’s Cooperation in the Work of Salvation.
Mary’s title of Mediatrix of all Graces and the lesser known but still valid and historical title Co-Redemptrix keep alive in the hearts of the faithful the unique and pivotal role she accepted with her fiat, in which she becomes the means of uniting heaven and earth. They are not over-pious epithets or exaggerations, but rather, true expressions leading us to the reality of the hypostatic union, in which the human nature of Our Lord deigns to originate under the heart of His Blessed Mother. Truly, there is no greater paradox in God’s revelation, no greater sign of His love for His creatures, which He seals with His death on our behalf, on the cross. In the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, the people cry out, “Theotokos, save us!”
These are the flashpoints of emergency; the SSPX highlights them but we know them as well. No matter what happens with the SSPX, whether they are excommunicated or, in some unlikely scenario, take an oath that satisfies both them and the Vatican and allows them to consecrate bishops licitly, these disruptions remain and are not resolved. The Troika drags us into Formlessness, the anti-doctrine….
It is all about the Second Vatican Council. The SSPX does not accept the Council as a whole. Until there is discussion about the teachings of VII among serious theologians appointed by the Pope (not on the Internet!), we’ll never see the end of it. There were undeniable innovations in VII, underlined by the late Roman theologian Mons. Brunero Gherardini. Namely: the collegiality of bishops, the absorption of Tradition in Holy Scripture, the limitation of biblical inspiration and inerrancy, the strange relations with the Jewish and Islamic world, the strain on the so-called religious freedom.
Yes, doctrinal clarity is urgently needed. Pope Leo is not the man to do it, but it seems to me that what is needed from a pope is an encyclical letter or apostolic constitution that definitively establishes the correct understandings of the most contested and problematic ambiguous statements in the documents of Vatican II. Along with anathemas, of course, for those who hold a contrary opinion. Settle it once and for all.
As long as James Martin is in good standing I am with the SSPX.
I’d caution you not to formally adhere to the Lefebvrists. That would subject you to the penalty of excommunication.
‘caution’…Can a ‘Pope’ who promotes Sodomites and has been photographed venerating Pagan Idils excommunicate anyone? Don’t these actions incur automatic excommunication on the perpetrator?
It can’t be mere coincidence that the belief in the Real Presence has diminished since V2. It’s the law of unintended consequences.
So people, I’ve read Lawler’s write-up here, and I have concluded that this is another hack writer. Essentially, she puts out conclusions and positions without demonstrating their logical basis and truth.
Take for instance her point about Traditionis custodes “truncating and dismissing” Tradition. She puts out that bombastic point, without demonstrating how that assertion of hers is based on reality. She can’t demonstrate that because her assertin is groundless. Proof of a hack writer.
Or her point that that Amoris Laetitia “normalizes” divorce and remarriage. That’s bunk. Total bunk. Pope Francis has repeatedly proclaimed the timeless teaching of the Church about marriage.
I can go on and on about her other two other “points” (or “blows” as he calls them).
People like her have confused themselves either deliberately or inadvertently by buying into the discredited narratives being disseminated by the ultra-traditionalist pundits, media-people, and influencers out there.
In other words: people like her do not seem to think. They just absorb these narratives without actually “listening” and praying over what the Magisterium of the Church is actually saying. Yes people, the virtue of “listening” which Synodality is all about would have benefitted people like Lawler.
You can take this however to the bank: your schismatic and beloved SSPX would still have travelled on this trajectory of schism and excommunication in 2026 regardless of Amoris Laetitia, Traditionis custodes, or the Abu Dubai Declaration.
Address, if you will, the seeming erosion of belief in the True Presence over the past 60+ years.
Exactly. The consecrating and co-consecrating bishops had their previous excommunications lifted by the merciful Pope Benedict XVI, yet they remained intransigent and eventually committed a schismatic act again, resulting in new excommunications for the both of them.
The Lefevbrists are not in union with the Church. They reject the authority of the Second Vatican Council and the pope, and they will never accept the new Mass nor Vatican II. There is no ecclesial emergency that justified their unauthorized episcopal consecrations.
Cardinal Fernandez laid it all out very clearly in the decree of excommunication and the accompanying explanatory note. I have read trads trying to claim that the excommunications and threats have no force, which is laughable.
The Lefevbrists have formally severed union with Rome. Support for them or attempting to seek spiritual care from their clergy places one in grave spiritual danger.
Never bow down to flawed, immature human beings, who may also be filthy, criminal pedophiles, in clerical garb. Make sure that these Church leaders are holy, daily promoting only the true teachings of Christ and His Church. Same thing with political leadership. Never bow down to “Heil Hitler,” Mussolini, Stalin, or any lying human being, dressed as a King, claiming the Divine Right, from God, to rule you. What if Theodore McCarrick had been elected as Pope? OMG! The honestly heterodox, ambiguous Pope Francis was bad enough. The true head of the Church is only Jesus Christ. Not all Catholic clerical leaders obey Him. Man was given Free Will by God. A great Gift– but sadly, often abused. Never bow down to false human being idols, in clerical garb. Only bow to Almighty God. Just as it says in the 10 Commandments. And only obey those who obey God, in clerical leadership. Jesus always reproached the powerful Jewish false religious leaders– the evil Pharisees. They put Him to death for that.
When a man discusses a subject, especially an intellectual subject, most men do so objectively, not in a biased or emotional manner. They dislike pettiness. A man typically rejects knee-jerk, extreme reactions as unintelligent, boorish, unmanly– and unnecessary. They tend to laugh at overly-emotional, petty, “silly” women, and try to help them calm down, and get more objective about things. Most intelligent men objectively listen to another person’s perspective, and then, they objectively, unemotionally put forth their perspective. That way, they also get along better at the office, and everywhere else. What do you think about that, jon?
“Take for instance her point about Traditionis custodes “truncating and dismissing” Tradition. She puts out that bombastic point, without demonstrating how that assertion of hers is based on reality. She can’t demonstrate that because her assertin is groundless. Proof of a hack writer.” I have to ask, jon, in what way is her assertion groundless? Pope Francis employed the hermeneutic of rupture in gutting the legacy of Pope Benedict, who wished “the continuous worship of millennia, with its fruits in the saints and in the conversion of all the nations” to be preserved.
I have always agreed with the SSPX– there should be an open dialogue between them and the Pope. And the Pope and his College of Cardinals should listen to their side, intelligently. Vaticsn II has serious flaws and ambiguities that I myself, since the 1960s, could never accept. The post-Conciliar Church is very poor, and its leaders have abandoned responsible Church leadership, authority and discipline. That alone, was a horrific shock to me, in the 1960s, when it was announced, that everyone–clergy and laity– now must individually make their own decisions, according to their own individual consciences. Paternal leadership, authority and discipline of Popes and clerical leaders was now despised, unwanted– because it is “cruel.” So we shall now have a “big mess,” of individuals– “the great, Almighty Human Being!”— individually making his own decisions! We are now, all “Human Beings”— oh, my!– doing as we please! Not Catholic believers, folliwing Christ! No! Plus– the New Mass is terrible. It does not even resemble what the Council Fathers had in mind with “Sacrosanctum Concilium.” The “interim Mass” of the mid-1960s was much better– but it was discarded, after the 1969 Novus Ordo Missae was introduced– an abysmal failure! This Mass had as much traditional, 2,000 years of original Catholic elements stripped from it as possible, favoring the “God of Ecumenism.” Sooner or later, the modernist, ecumenical-minded, secular Humanist, anti- Church authority, dogma and discipline, anti-Catholic Sacred Tradition fools in Rome, will have to face these failures of Vatican II– and rectify them.
I greatly appreciate Leila Marie Lseler’s capitalization of all pronouns related to God and Christ– “He,” “Him,” His,” etc. I have never accepted the modernist de-capitalization of these pronouns— extremely disrespectful. Leila Marie Lawler is the wife of Philip Lawler.
As a Catholic lay person in America with enough knowledge of the history of the Roman Church to point to Americanism and Modernism condemned by the Church at the turn of the twentieth century, at its core was immorality of man directly related to family, women, and children. The rest is history, as they say, by what immorality looks like and how Catholics are to reconcile to heresy. It was thought then the moral prestige of the Church was antidote to heresy. A long syllabus of errors was published then and upon rereading now, errors have become the standard. The past century of dumbing down the Church and softening of heresies offers few Catholics perspective today. At the turn of the twentieth century papal infallibility and the new article of faith in the Immaculate Conception was denied and at the core of problems, not with the Pope, but rather with those with problems related to the papacy and devotion to Mary. Before condemnations the Church grew in mission; Pope Francis dismantled mission. Pope Leo XIV is bringing it back. SSPX needs to go away by its own volition or align with the Church in papal infallibility and dogmas of Mary, then the next, then the next in dismantling condemned heresies, in my humble opinion. God Bless the Roman Church and Pope Leo XIV.
Nothing is “wrong” with the SSPX– except that they have some objections to Vatican II and the New Mass– for intelligent reasons. Me, too. If you think clearly, honestly, you, too, may have some intelligent objections. Especially if you are young, want to get married, and raise a family– as I was, in the 1960s. I thought that marriage and trying to raise children according to the “New Church”— and send them to Catholic school–would be “a disordered zoo of humanism and individualism.” Anarchy and a total breakdown were soon to come. Now, in the 1960s, we saw crazy priests acting like beatniks or hippies, preaching against Church teachings on marriage, birth control, abortion, etc. Telling young people that they should “experiment,” that Christian Morality was “too rigid” and “not true,” that “Situation Ethics” is much better — and you should make your own individualistic decisions. We had crazy new “hippie-style Masses,” priests preaching that you should “loosen up” and “try out” sex and “living together,” etc. And abortion is “a woman’s personal decision.” Many priests acted like “entertainers” on the altar, facing versus populum.The Catholic Church and Catechism was ridiculed, as was Catholic Tradition. Protestantism was “better” — and “everyone goes to Heaven, anyway,” and “Hell does not exist.” “All religions are the same.” Christ and Our Blessed Mother were “dumbed down” to a degraded, very “human” level– He is now just “our Brother.” Mary’s holy virginity was forgotten. You cannot live this way– nor have a good Catholic marriage and family life– and raise kids this way.
Cardinal Fernandez, the author of salacious tracts, should be up next for excommunication.
An accompanying explanatory note should not be required.
To the contrary, the explanatory note was helpful because it went beyond the declaration of punishment for the six bishops. The bishops each committed excommunicable offenses as a matter of public record. The declaration’s purpose was to identify the guilty and name their punishments.
The priests and deacons who are members of the SSPX were not subject to the same declaration. The explanatory note says they are to be handled differently: they are considered in schism for formally adhering to a society led by schismatic and excommunicated bishops, but a declaration of excommunication has to be made on a case by case basis.
Laity who formally adhere to the society are also subject to excommunication, but those too have to be handled on a case by case basis.
The declaration of punishment is for the obvious public offenses. The explanatory note is to make priests, deacons, and laity aware that continued association with the society may carry a grave spiritual danger and penalty. The note is a warning.
Would so love to have a huge book burning of Cardinal “Tucho” Fernandez’ pornographic, blasphemous books– right in the middle of St. Peter’s Square. And next, a big excommunication ceremony, and formal laicization ceremony, attended by thousands, telecast worldwide.
You still will not address the astonishing public sins of Cardinal Fernandez, the author of obscene literature, and the man who orchestrated the excommunication of SSPX.
It is brazen duplicity that such a man could be promoted through the ranks and now serve as Prefect of the DDF.
As you conveniently cite public record as to the SSPX, then let’s identify and expose the truly guilty Cardinal and name HIS punishment.
We have a totally blinded Church of sinful, self-serving, false leaders, not at all devoted to Jesus Christ. They are devoted to their own evils– and “Vatican II agendas.” That’s all. The whole thing is rigged. No discussions. No “listening.” The chosen leader in the papacy is a young, immature, anti-American, leftist, self-serving wimp– with no horror of sin. And no guts to admit the truth and clean up the filth and mess of the Vatican, and entire Vatican II Church. Same thing, if you complain to your local bishop about a sinful “James Martin” or the “Three Stooges,” Cupich, Tobin and McElroy– or a sinful, filthy Catholic school or college, etc. False Catholic leaders.
They kicked out a good bishop– Bishop Strickland. Strickland first brought up the horrible evils of Theodore McCarrick at a USCCB meeting– and was warned to shut up. The then-U.S. nuncio, Cdl. Christophe Pierre, threatened Strickland for that. And soon, Strickland got kicked out– also for complaining rightfully, about Pope Francis. Shame on these “wolves in sheep’s clothing!” They belong to Satan! Give every penny in every collection basket to the millions of poor, suffering victims of clerical sex abuse.
Hear, O people of the Lord: do not think that the storm shall come only upon the nations outside your gates. The house that bears My Name shall also be tested, and the hearts of many shall be revealed. There shall arise voices that speak not from My wisdom, and many shall be led astray by words pleasing to the ear but empty of truth. The foundations shall be shaken, and some shall stumble because they have built upon sand.
Yet do not be afraid, for I am the Lord who purifies silver and refines gold. I do not abandon the vineyard I have planted, nor forsake the people whom I have called. A remnant shall remain faithful; they shall seek My face when others turn away. They shall be like a lamp burning in the darkness, like a watchman upon the walls who keeps vigil through the night.
Return to Me with humble hearts. Seek My law, love My ways, and walk in righteousness. For though the night may be long, the dawn belongs to the Lord. I shall make all things new, and My glory shall once again shine upon My people.
Outside the church there is no salvation. The SSPX are now formally and officially outside the church. Ouch.
From what I’ve seen, heard, and read, the SSPX don’t care. They believe they are the only remaining true church. They wanted Rome’s approval for optics, but they never really cared about that from a theological standpoint. The SSPX reject the entire postconciliar church as apostate. Now that they’ve realized Rome will not have them unless they accept Vatican II and the new liturgy — both of which the SSPX will not agree to — they’ve decided to give up the pretense of union with Rome and sever ties.
Every diocesan bishop in the United States should issue a formal warning to their faithful that attending Mass or attempting to receive other sacraments from SSPX clergy places them in grave spiritual danger for associating with a schismatic group whose clergy don’t have legitimacy nor status in the Roman Church. Formal adherence to the group is grounds for excommunication of lay faithful.
No. That belief, called “Feeneyism,” preached by Jesuit Fr. Leonard Feeney, was condemned by the Church and Pope Pius XII in 1949. In 1953, Feeney was excommunicated.
What a big laugh. So your diocesan bishop issues stern anti-SSPX warnings. How many criminal clerical sex abusers does he hide or ignore? How many horrible “Catholic” grade schools, high schools (like Abp. Mitty High School in San Jose– as well as in San Francisco and everywhere else!) and horrible “Catholic” colleges does he ignore?? Because of Vatican II mandates? Anti-Church authority and discipline. Except for Church discipline and authority hand-picked by the self-serving pope and prelates. Cdl. Cupich and Cdl. McElroy can give pro abortion politicians Communion, a wayward priests can hold all the Pride Masses they want, and preach anti-Catholic beliefs on the Sacrament of Marriage, and etc — like the German Synodal Way clerics. And the pope can force the Synod on Synodality on us. Sorry– it is very true, the post-Conciliar Church is extremely in error. They need to be pushed into a crisis situation, so that they will be forced to clean up their mess.
Contrary to what some believe, the SSPX is NOT “sedevacantist.” And they do NOT want a rupture with Rome at all. All they want, is an honest discussion about the problems of Vatican II– and to fix these problems and to remain a part of the Church, respecting the pope as head of the Church. The SSPX is not American, they do not think as American Catholics do. They are French. The Catholic Church, with filthy “Tucho” currently in charge of excommunications– controls its people by scaring the dickens out of everyone, with threats, intimidation– and excommunication– for their self-interest, to protect Vatican II and its “convenience” to them– right or wrong. They have all the power. No discussions. Satanic!! Someday, everyone will finally see the evil truth– exposed by a Divine act of God.
The poster about Feeneyism is incorrect. The Church continues to teach, as it always has, that there is no salvation outside the Church. Look at the current Catechism #846-848.
The error of the Feeneyites was holding a too narrow interpretation of what it means to be outside the Church. The Feenyites denied baptism of desire and baptism by blood, holding that only Catholics (not Protestants or Orthodox) who had been baptized with water were eligible for eternal salvation.
In a hilarious irony, Fr. Feeney and his followers were outside the Church for their heretical interpretation of “outside the church there is no salvation”.
Alien, you are correct about Feeneyism. The Vatican today. — including the actions of today’s modern popes– often seems contradictory to this ancient statement contained in the Catechism. This concept is a tricky thing, theologically. Also, read “Lumen Gentiun,” see what you think. I bet you a million dollars, the SSPX has some objections with it. What do you think?
One thing the Catechism of the Council of Trent says about adult baptism and Baptism of desire, page 179 in my copy, is:
“On adults, however, the Church has not been accustomed to confer the Sacrament of Baptism at once, but has ordained that it be deferred for a certain time. The delay is not attended with the same danger as in the case of infants.,,,,,,,,, should any unforeseen accident make it impossible for adults to be washed in the salutary waters, their intention and determination to receive Baptism and their repentance for past sins, will avail them to grace and righteousness.”
The delay was to make sure the person was well catechized.
In Oct. of 2021, most of the 800+ student body immediately walked out of an anti-abortion event held during an all-school assembly. Archbishop Cordileone met with student leaders, and wrote an open letter. When I was in high school, that would never have happened. If it did, the brats staging a walk-out would have received strong discipline, their parents would have been called, and the brats would have probably gotten kicked out of Catholic school. In that era, abortion was a big, shameful crime, besides being a very serious mortal sin, in the Catholic Church. No Archbishop would have “met with juvenile delinquent Catholic student leaders,” who are pro abortion. No “open letters.” This is a Catholic high school. Not so, in Vatican II.
This shameful student walk-out happened at Archbishop Riordan High School in San Francisco. Current tuition is $28,000/school year, plus a $100 application fee and a $1,200 registration fee– for day students. Boarding students pay much more.
Just goes to show you that so-called “Catholic” schools are really just elite private schools that are owned and operated by the diocese. They do not have Catholic famiies and students attending, for the most part. They do not have Catholic teachers and administrators, for the most part. The students and their families do not want a Catholic education, nor do the teachers and administrators want to provide a Catholic education, despite the lip service paid to Catholic idenitity in brochures and on websites. They want a winning football team, and a nongovernment school that is safe and provides a pathway to a good college. Jesus has left the building, even though there are religion classes and Masses.
Rear Done, you say?
Corporal punishment for misbehavior was common in both public schools and Catholic schools, before Vatican II. Bl. Abp. Sheen told a story about how his first grade teacher, a nun he liked very much, once locked him in the closet in the classroom for a brief time, for misbehaving– another common punishment, a very long time ago, when Sheen was a boy. He later ended up as friends for life with this nun. Do you think that corporal punishment should return to Catholic and public schools? Many years ago, upon learning that the Cathedral pastor was a heartless pedophile, I was deeply shocked, and told the Archbishop he ought to get out a Big Red Paddle and spank him publicly, in front of everyone– and send him off to jail in handcuffs. Humiliate the clerical criminal in the cathedral, in front of his poor, suffering victims and their parents– and all the Massgoers. Not a beating– just a couple of rear end slaps, a humiliation. And publicly announce his horrific crimes, too.
I think we need to get young, heroic Alexander Tschugguel to steal the pagan Pachamama idols once again, and to also steal the original missal of the Mayan Mass at the Vatican, and all copies of it in all languages– and burn all of this trash in a big bonfire in the middle of St. Peter’s Square.
I viewed a Mass for the dead on video yesterday. It was billed as a “celebration of life” for the deceased. Before Mass began, a guitar group sang “Both Sides Now” by Joni Mitchell. This was at St. Monica’s in Santa Monica, CA, which is a leftist, homosexualist, renegade parish in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles whose pastor is well past retirement age and has been in place for over 30 years because the archbishop has been afraid to replace him. Here is a link to the video:
https://www.facebook.com/StMonica90403/videos/greg-hayakawa-memorial-mass-july-7-2026/1042754441743140/
Clearly, as this article presents, there are big problems in the Catholic Church. Terrible worship is one of them. Yes, the SSPX could vanish but the problems in the church would remain.
St. Monica’s is a fake Catholic parish. Imagine that: a parish named after a faithful Catholic mother who fervently prayed for her prodigal son to return to the Church is itself a prodigal community steeped in modernistic heresy.
People: there is one significant reason why your beloved and schismatic SSPX chose excommunication and schism rather than reconciliation which none of you have mentioned. Money. Follow the money, people. Why should they be in union with Rome and have to donate to Holy See when you can go it yourself (schismatically as the beloved SSPX is doing) and pocket all those donations?
During the consecrations in Econe, online viewers got the beloved SSPX’s QR Code projected on their screens to make their online donations. There were easily hundreds of thousands of online viewers to that schismatic act.
So, I propose that a great motivator for their schism is money. And only secondly their misguided and erroneous ecclesiology.
The Ted Kennedy Funeral Canonization was not about money.
Money? What a big laugh. Did you spend money on a Papal Pachamama idol– or on one of filthy “Tucho’s” dirty teen pornographic, blasphemous books? Now that is where your money should go. The SSPX has always had the support of very wealthy European Catholic traditionalists. The entire motivation behind the SSPX is something you could never relate to — the love and preservation of the beautiful, holy, old Latin Mass. Huge numbers of Catholics in France are devoted to the Latin Tridentine Mass. It has been a big part of French culture for centuries. They all miss it. Stop being such an American extremist religious bigot. Be happy that your beloved “Tucho the Blasphemous Teen Pornogapher” kicked the French priests’ group you so despise, out of “your” Church.
Yes, people, it’s about money for your schismatic and beloved SSPX. That’s a major motivation for these people.
The schismatic and disobedient SSPX have no compunction risking your eternal salvation by administering illicit sacraments to you so that with your donations they may enrich their coffers in this life. It’s unconscionable.
How can they preach obedience and faith to God Almighty when they are not faithful and obedient to the Vicar of Christ on earth? They’re hypocrites.
These are not good people. They clothe themselves with trappings of holiness and dignity, yet thumb their nose at Peter.
Guess what: because they disobey Peter’s successor, they have disobeyed Christ. Because they disobey Christ, they disobey the One Who sent Christ.
The hierarchy and clergy of your schismatic and beloved SSPX are very bad people. Very. Bad. Corrupt. People.
To the adherents of your schismatic and beloved SSPX: listen to the words of Revelation: “Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues.” (Rev. 18:4).
Calm down, jon. Nobody here gets all worked up emotionally like you do, over a French foreign religious group like the SSPX. So what? Popes and clerical leaders of today, throw around their power and do as they please– just like the Pharisees, reproached constantly by Christ. Your “beloved Church” today, is corrupt, jon. Face it. The Vatican approves of clerics holding gay Pride Masses, preaching and supporting gay sex unions, giving Communion to pro abortion politicians, bowing down publicly to Pachamama pagan fertility idols, blessing blocks of ice at pagan cultural events, political appointments of females in charge of Vatican dicasteries, proclaiming that “the diversity of religions is willed by God in His wisdom” (Pope Francis, 2019 “Vatican Document on Human Fraternity”), kissing the Koran publicly (Pope St. John Paul II, on May 14,1999)….. etc.etc. This is not the Church founded by Christ, for us. This is a corrupt institution. And so what, they expelled a French foreign religious group? Their corrupt DDF Cardinal, an author of teenage pornographic books, was in charge of the dumb excommunication. Your non-Catholic friends at work all would laugh at it.
In your typical censorious fashion, you catastrophize honorable motives and scold people for not adhering to your imperious set of rules.
If you would climb off your high horse, you’d realize that most people’s opinions here are moderate and balanced. I’m still trying to make up my mind about the SSPX, but I can assure you that they’re not the demons you make them out to be.
“Most people’s opinions here are moderate and balanced” says “O’Really”.
Really?? Let me show you a sampling of the “moderate and balanced” phrases on this thread:
“Pope who promotes Sodomites and has been photographed venerating Pagan idols”, “filthy, criminal pedophiles, in clerical garb”, “the New Mass is terrible”, “a huge book burning of Cardinal “Tucho” Fernandez’ pornographic, blasphemous books,” “Church of sinful, self-serving, false leaders, not at all devoted to Jesus Christ,” “Humiliate the clerical criminal in the cathedral, in front of his poor, suffering victims and their parents– and all the Massgoers,” “steal the original missal of the Mayan Mass at the Vatican, and all copies of it in all languages– and burn all of this trash in a big bonfire in the middle of St. Peter’s Square,” “This is not the Church founded by Christ, for us. This is a corrupt institution.”
All those are “moderate and balanced” eh? Right.
“Honorable motives?” Consider these lines from the text read before the ordination in place of having a papal mandate to consecrate new bishops:
“From the Second Vatican Council up to the present day, the authorities in the Church have been animated by a spirit that is contrary to that of the Faith, and have been acting against holy Tradition – they will no longer endure sound doctrine, turning away their hearing from the truth, and turning towards fables.”
The SSPX publicly accused the Church authorities of mass apostasy.
While not demons, the SSPX clergy are prideful, presumptuous, arrogant, scandalous schismatics who consider themselves to be the saviors of the Church. They are no longer in the fold of the Church. Every time they celebrate Mass they are taking another step towards hell, and they are misleading thousands of laity down the path of spiritual danger.
Apart from you and the poster who uses all the commas, the rest of us are moderate and balanced.
Jon must be a radical leftist Democrat. He does not believe that sinners and criminals in the Catholic clergy should be punished. How about filthy nun rapist, Marko “Rapenik?”Get filthy “Tucho” to excommunicate and laicize this creep!
Alien, I don’t think the French SSPX priests are horrible men. They are not “prideful, presumptuous, arrogant, scandalous schismatics.” Neither was Augustinian priest and university professor, Martin Luther. These are decent, honorable Churchmen, with some very honest, intelligent, valid points to make, valid questions. Just like the Cardinals with the dubia. Don’t let your Church control you and scare the daylights out of you. Examine everything rationally, intellectually, piece by piece. Be honest. You and your Protestant and Orthodox (etc.) neighbors in your community are not going to be “sent to Hell,” by your Loving God, for honest intelligent questioning. The Churchmen who are “on the path to Hell” are only the gravely immoral ones, preaching and committing and hiding horrific sins and crimes!! The Catholic Church finally did examine and fix some of the Protestant reformers’ criticisms, during the Counter Reformation, and Council of Trent. Let’s see if the Church someday decides to have another Council, to honestly address serious problems, once again.
America was founded by a great many who were Protestants, who rejected papal authority, and sought a land where they could settle, and freely worship God as they wished. Without rule by a king nor a pope. And all Catholics are free to honor their Pope. All people of all faiths are welcome here, in America. Bl. Abp. Sheen said, “we may not all be able to meet in the same pew– but we can still meet on our knees (in prayer).”
No. Wrong.
Luther did not have valid points to make. Schism is a grave sin and Protestantism remains a heresy.
Instead of reading Lawler’s pathetic write-up here, I would recommend instead Cassandra Hackstock’s story below about her personal experience inside your schismatic and beloved SSPX.
Her experience is troubling. I mean, among other things: neglecting the atmosphere of abuse among its members? It’s shocking.
People, they’re not as holy as they portray themselves to be. Very troubling.
https://wherepeteris.com/seven-years-in-the-sspx/
Jon, I did not give you a thumbs up nor a thumbs down. I read that article, and I am sure some of what the woman wrote happens in the SSPX, but that kind of behavior also happens among those who go to the Ordinary Masses. It also happens at times among those who go to other rites, and among Protestants and Orthodox. All the other religions have similar or worse problems. Marriage is hard. It takes a lot of compromise, and some people are just not cut out for it. Men are meant to protect women and women are meant to be their helpmates, not prideful competitors. We are all broken human beings who need to find out God’s will for us, not God’s will for someone else. It is a lifetime struggle.
“Anne TE” doesn’t get it. What is wrong is the complicity of the ministers to any hint of abuse and mistreatment in their communities. That is what Hackstock’s article is all about.
The Church has Zero tolerance when it comes to abuse of any kind. This is implemented in all dioceses in the US.
Your schismatic SSPX doesn’t fall under that universal implementation in the US Church.
If people here are truly outraged by the abuse of minors, and abuse of any kind, as you people seem to be since you repeatedly bring up people like McCarrick with regularity on this blog, you should be equally outraged by Hackstock’s story, and not downplay it.
Your seeming to downplay Hackstock’s article because “oh it happens everywhere” is wrong. Very Wong, “Anne TE.”
Excellent comment. It is all very true. I used to live in Santa Clara, many years ago. I once went out with an elderly couple to an SSPX Mass, out in rural Los Gatos. There were mostly middle-aged and elderly folks there, at the Mass. This was probably long before the young people were born and grew up, and started to marry and raise families, attending traditional Catholic Latin Tridentine Masses. The middle-aged (I was in my 40s) and elderly people all were very normal, not in any kind of crazy “youth church cult,” as Cassandra described. These Catholics also went to any Catholic church. And liked the Tridentine Latin Mass, of their youth. Me, too.
I do not miss the point at all, Jon. I have never been to an SSPX Mass and have no plans on going there, though there is one not too far away. I do read some of their materials, though. I just know from 83 years of life that these problems exist in all communities at times. The Lord said himself that the wheat would grow up with the chaff. Sometimes people improve, and sometimes they get worse.
At any time, God may send beautiful, extraordinary children to earth, to bless the world with their gifts and talents. St. Carlo Acutis, born in 1991, only lived to be aged 15. After his death, he appeared in dreams to his grieving mother, and told her that he would soon be made a saint, and that God would be sending many young saints to earth, soon. He also consoled his mother by telling her that she would soon be blessed with more children. Amazing! Who knows, but maybe future young saints– and even a good future pope–may come from a good, young traditional Catholic family– a family that goes to any of the churches that offer the old Latin Mass. Young families like that today, headed by married couples in their mid-20s, with children, would have been born around the year 2000. Also, someday, the SSPX excommunications may be lifted, and their Society may be in union with Rome. Who knows what God can do?
In reply to jon’s comment of July 11 at 7:05pm: No, jon, you must read history accurately. Martin Luther– and many othets– all had valid points to make during the Reformation. The Catholic Church finally listened, and convened the Council of Trent and Counter Reformation, and cleaned up massive abuses and corruption. Everyone kniws this. You need to read history clearly and accurately.
One important point that Martin Luther made, was that in that era, priests were often poorly educated, there was no standardization of training. Many priests were Biblically illiterate, and were unable to properly teach the Faith to the people. Luther also believed that laymen should be educated, and should be able to read the Bible. To help this cause, Luther translated the Bible into vernacular German, so that all of the laymen as well as clergy, could read the Bible in their own language. In response to Luther’s criticisms about poorly-trained priests, the Church, at the Council of Trent, set up a system of seminaries with standardized training for all priests.
The Catholic Church officially mandated the establishment of seminaries in 1563, during the Council of Trent. Every diocese had to have a seminary. The first seminary, the Roman Seminary, opened in 1565. Before that time, theological education was restricted to universities, or to informal mentorships under local bishops. Many aspirants to the priesthood were poorly educated, and lacked the necessary skills to carry out their duties properly. The whole history of the priesthood is fascinating!
What has happened to your schismatic and beloved SSPX should be a warning to the other traditionalist groups out there, such as your beloved FSSP and your beloved Institute, among others. Those ex-Ecclesia Dei groups look up to your beloved SSPX.
If those groups continue in their trajectory, they will end up in the same situation as the beloved SSPX.
So to your beloved FSSP and Institute: do not despise Vatican II. If you profess that you have no problems with Vatican II and the Ordinary Form, you better not object when you will be required to offer the Ordinary Form, or required to concelebrate at the Chrism Mass, or required use the new Lectionary for your Masses, or required to adopt the new calendar. You people better obey.
These ex-Ecclesia Dei groups cannot refuse a bishop when he asks them to offer at least one Sunday Mass per month in the Ordinary Form. This is what happened in Chicago. Your beloved Institute did not obey Cupich. The result: your beloved Institute no longer has faculties in Chicago.
That is the trajectory these groups are traveling on.
You people in these ex-Ecclesia Dei groups: turn around soon, lest you suffer the same fate as your beloved SSPX.
We separate ourselves from Christ when we “despise” other Christians with different viewpoints. Last week, arsonists set fire to a couple of different old SF Protestant churches. We had to close our windows and not go outside, because the smoke was all over the city, and hurt our lungs. I felt very sorry for the poor clergy and parishioners of these churches — many were elderly, and were lifelong parishioners. I prayed for them all. I would never attend one of their services, but they have the right to their beliefs. Same with local Jews, and same with SSPX. It is only criminals– of any church– who should be shamed, and sent to jail. So the SSPX had a few clerical criminals? Send them to jail. The others are just fine. Will not look at your stupid, nasty link, jon.
I live a few blocks from the SF Jewish Community Center. It is very nice, with programs for families of all faiths. They have a nice, big fitness center and pool. Last year, the poor Jews were getting death threats, so they had to re-do their entrance to their big center, to make it safe from anti-Semitic criminals who could commit horrific crimes. This is not the way America should be.
“Your beloved Institute did not obey Cupich.” Cupich is a vile heretic and a hypocrite who publicly preaches and practices giving Communion –and lifetime awards for service– to horrific pro abortion politicians. Christ warned the Satanic Pharisees that His religion was made for man, to help man serve God. It is not a senseless collection of “rules” to mindlessly “obey.” Religious rules are meant to help people. They are not meant to trap, deceive and hurt people. (Mark 2:27)
“jon”, aka “👽”.
I am not jon. No, you’re not stupid, you’re just wrong.
By the way, I am just reading and commenting now and then but not clicking on the thumbs up or down. They do not work well for me for some reason. Good night.
The thumbs-up/down don’t work for me either, Anne, but I did give you a thumbs-up!
Thank you, Kathleen. Years ago, when I was going to Ordinary Masses only, I went to a Catholic bookstore that later I found was SSPX and bought some items occasionally. Often, I went there in jeans. The lady previously worked at a Catholic shrine one city over. One day when browsing through her store, I bought the small book “Kindness” by Fr. Lasance. I told her I needed the book since my husband had just retired. She laughed and told me she knew exactly what I meant as she kept her retired husband busy coaching baseball. In all our chats I did not always agree but found her quite pleasant.