FrDave Nix, talking as if he's already in schism

I don't know much about FrDave Nix. I never heard of him before Mass of the Ages. I'm sure he's a smart and generally doctrinally sound priest. I don't watch or listen to his content. Someone informed me that he has weighed in on the John Salza Pints with Aquinas (Matt Fradd) interview calling it "silly". I checked the post and commented.

He sounds like he is a schismatic in training, if not already one himself. I wouldn't follow this blind "leader" into schism any more than the blind leaders who stay within the Catholic Communion. They are wrong for different reasons which is a distinction that emotion based Trads have a hard time making. Lesser of two evils won't work for you here because the perceived lesser of two evils here, participation in, support of, promotion of the SSPX and all similar setups, takes you out of the Catholic Church and into a schismatic "church".

There's only one Catholic Church, outside of which, there is no salvation.

*UPDATE: Since I knew very little about FrDave Nix, a friend sent me this telling article about him: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/39512/denver-archbishop-releases-letter-responding-to-claims-by-priest

"At this time, they (SSPX) are not part of the one Roman Catholic Church throughout the world" - Cardinal Raymond Burke

Bookmarked here at timestamp 9:21: https://youtu.be/0TyjRoKUi2w?t=561

Lefebvrist: "The SSPX is not in schism!"

Lefebvrist: "The SSPX is not in schism!" CIC: "....schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him." (Canon 751) - - - - - - Marcel Lefebvre: “We refuse on the other hand, and have always refused, to follow the Rome of Neo-Modernist and Neo-Protestant tendencies which became clearly manifest during the Second Vatican Council, and after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it.” (Declaration, November 21, 1974) “We believe that we can affirm, taking into consideration the internal and external critique on Vatican II, that is, in analysing the texts and in studying its circumstances and its consequences, that the Council, turning its back on Tradition and breaking with the Church of the past, is a schismatic council. The tree is known by its fruits. Since the Council, all the larger newspapers throughout the world, American and European, recognise that it is destroying t

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 Schism

Search This Blog