Skip to main content

On Geocentrism, the Magisterium, and the Errors of Archbishop Lefebvre

June 9, 2025

Dear Fr. K:

I commend you on your pursuit of truth in regard to geocentrism. We need more faithful priests like you to know, embrace and teach what the Church has always taught. Thank you for your courage and witness.  

In regard to your comment about there still being freedom to be heliocentrists because the doctrine has not been defined, I would add that we need to be careful to follow the Church's Profession of Faith, which requires religious submission of intellect and will to truths which the Magisterium has authentically proposed (the truth of geocentrism and the falsity of heliocentrism being two such truths, based on the Scriptures and consensus of the Fathers). This is precisely why I as a Catholic apologist entered into this debate over 15 years ago; because our counterparts were arguing that since the 16th century decrees were not "infallible," they could be dismissed. 

While a case could be made that these teachings are infallible by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium (on the ground that all the bishops dispersed throughout the would have held the 16th century propositions as definitive truths), these propositions, at a minimum, require our assent of intellect and will. 

Regarding your comments about Abp Lefebvre - if you wish, we can have a separate off-line discussion about him. I spent 15 years with the SSPX, and after having spent the tail end of those years critically studying Lefebvre's books and letters, and the Society's doctrinal positions, I came to recognize the many errors and even heresies Lefebvre promoted, which unfortunately are little known, in the "trad world." While Lefebvre fought to preserve the traditional Mass (which I have attended for 20 years), his doctrinal errors on canonical mission, supplied jurisdiction, episcopal consecration, Collegiality, sacramental intention, etc. etc. cannot be overlooked. We address many of these errors at www.trueorfalsepope.com. I still maintain close friendships with a number of Society priests who I believe are men of goodwill (and can tell you many of them feel "stuck" and betrayed by those within the SSPX who formed them). 

I pray that we all have the wisdom to recognize the errors that have sprung forth from both the Liberal Left and the Liberal extreme Right. Indeed, the errors on the extreme Right can be even more pernicious, because they end by leading souls right out of the Church. 

In Christo Rex,

John Salza

Popular posts from this blog

Lefebvre: Marks of the Church only with SSPX, not with others

Lefebvre: Marks of the Church only with SSPX, not with others "Where is the visible Church? The visible Church is recognized by the signs that she has always given for her visibility: she is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. (…) where are the true marks of the Church? Are they more in the official Church (it is not the visible Church, it is the official Church) or with us, in what we represent, what we are? If there is still any visibility of the Church today, it is thanks to you. These signs are no longer found in others. There is no longer any unity of faith among them, yet it is faith that is the basis of all visibility of the Church. Catholicity is one faith in space. Apostolicity is one faith in time and holiness is the fruit of faith, which materializes in souls by the grace of God, by the grace of the sacraments. It is quite wrong to consider ourselves as if we were not part of the visible Church. […] is to make a mistake in equating the official Church with th...

Fr. Brian Harrison, OS, MA, STD on the Status of the SSPX

Father Brian Harrison, OS, MA, STD on The Journey Home (EWTN) Editor, L. Gonzaga: With permission, I publish here a private group message written by Fr. Brian Harrison, OS, MA, STD addressed to two SSPX priests, whom I am not naming as their emails have not been approved for publication. This message was in support of an initial case made by Dr. Robert Sungenis on the status of the SSPX. On Fri, Sep 12, 2025, 5:55 PM Brian Harrison wrote: If I may be permitted to weigh in here:   Dr. Sungenis is right.  Pope Benedict XVI, even when lifting the 1988 excommunications on the SSPX bishops in 2009, said (via the Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops), that the Society was not "in full communion" with the Catholic Church, and that he hoped this gesture would be a step towards bringing them back into full communion.    As is well known, "not in full communion" with the Catholic Church is just the polite, ecumenically-oriented post-Vatican II term for being in schism ...

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...