See how they speak of Catholics in complete union with the Pope and the Catholic Church, and Canon 751

Notice how some "traditionalists" talk to other Catholics.

"Novus Ordites"?

Anyone who has spent any amount of time in SSPX communities, as I have, knows, this is not a one off kind of speak.

It's rather common.

They speak of those who go to the Novus Ordo as if they are some other kind of Catholic.

Well they may be right, ironically, since the SSPX is "not part of the one Catholic Church throughout the world", as Cardinal Burke says.

Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Don't forget it, as you are tempted to remain, or join the SSPX communities.

"...schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

Canon 751, Code of Canon Law

As a dog that returneth to his vomit, so is the fool that repeateth his folly: The folly of the Transalpine Redemptorists

As a dog that returneth to his vomit, so is the fool that repeateth his folly. -Proverbs 26:11, DRB Let's start off with what was publicly stated by the Transalpine Redemptorists in 2008. Read how important undisputed communion with Rome is for them... back in 2008. Tuesday, July 01, 2008 Canonical Good Standing 1 July, 2008 Feast of the Precious Blood My dear friends, I am happy to inform you that last June 18th, before Cardinal Castrillon and the members of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei in Rome, I humbly petitioned the Holy See on my own behalf and on behalf of the monastery council for our priestly suspensions to be lifted. On June 26th I received word that the Holy See had granted our petition. All canonical censures have been lifted. Our community now truly rejoices in undisputed and peaceful posession of Communion with the Holy See because our priests are now in canonical good standing. We are very grateful to our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI for issuing, last July,...

John Salza Responds to Peter Kwasniewski on the SSPX

John Salza Responds to Peter Kwasniewski on the SSPX January A.D. 2023 Following is my response to Peter Kwasniewski’s hit-and-run post about my January 9, 2023 interview with Matt Fradd on the SSPX. Before addressing his points, notice that Peter admits he only “listened to about an hour” of my three hour and fifteen-minute interview, but then provides a laundry list of points he claims I did not cover or failed to distinguish, again, even though he did not listen to over 2/3rds of the interview, and which actually did include discussion on many of the points he claims I missed (i.e, the Magisterium’s levels of authority, obedience, the problems with Pope Francis, etc). Evidently Peter thinks so highly of himself that he believes he can publicly refute his opponents’ arguments without listening to their entire arguments. This says a lot about his approach to the issue. Now, to Peter’s points. 1 – Peter claims I don’t distinguish between Sacrosanctum Concilium and the Novus O...

SSPX Masses and the Sunday Obligation by John Salza

In the span of just a few days, two well-known Catholics publicly gave what I maintain are erroneous conclusions regarding whether or not SSPX Masses fulfill the Sunday obligation. On September 18, 2024, in an interview with Gene Zannetti, Fr. Chad Ripperger stated that SSPX Masses fulfill the obligation. And on September 21, 2024, in an article by Daniel Payne for Catholic News Agency (about the Carmelite nuns who defected to the SSPX), Jimmy Akin of Catholic Answers is also quoted as suggesting that SSPX Masses fulfill the obligation (because he says Catholics can attend their Masses and receive Holy Communion). As I will demonstrate in this article, both statements fall short of a proper understanding of canon law, which lead to the erroneous conclusion. Note that I already addressed this issue at length in my November 2021 article “Do SSPX Masses Fulfill the Sunday Obligation?” (this previous article also analyzes all the negative judgments by the Holy See regarding SS...

SSPX Schism

Search This Blog