Another great column Chris, but where do you come down on all this? Are you sedevacanist, sspx, fssp, diocese trad or what? Easy to criticize everyone else's position without revealing your own. It's time to do that. No hostility here, but your hiding a bit. I'm sspx by the way.
John, a journalist's job is to expose to his readers the issues. We are to pick it up from there and do what we can to further expose the errors/truths. Without our action, a journalist is just a frustrated investigator.
I'm guessing that Chris' focus is to articulate the issues. Perhaps he thinks, and perhaps rightly, that stating his own position would present himself as an advocate and thereby hinder his credibility in exploring the problem.
I think this is the key to Chris’s success in defending the deposit of Faith. I’m SSPX with one leg in Sede world and I pray that after July 1st the SSPX might begin to clarify the madness further. I believe the ArchBishop if alive today would find it hard to call these men Pope of the Catholic Church
Good question. I, too, would like to know which Trad Team Chris Jackson is a member of. (I myself am orthodox and believe the SSPX does need to go ahead with the consecrations. I happen not to be SSPX - yet - mostly out of laziness.)
For some souls there is very little rest or solid ground. If they excommunicate us it is mean. It is also very deeply unjust and unmerciful.
Mean to the mothers and children the church has allowed to be abused. Mean to the abandoned men now in a grave. Mean to the grandparents grieving the loss of faith in their families . Mean to the many souls, who searching for an open door when the church herself closed and they were forced to find help. That was not 50 years ago, it was 5 years ago, when the SSPX kept their doors open, when they brought sacraments to the dying, when they still bravely walked pilgrimages to closed empty churches.
There are only two bishops for a thousand priests and many thousand faithful worldwide. What is lost upon everyone is that they are only looking to keep doing what they have been doing. That is all.
The prideful can run back and forth with you are excommunicated now and you are not later and then again you are while nothing changed on the other side.
Which means it is arbitrary and capricious and MEAN. Charity is not mean.
As for my house we will try to serve the Lord in our little poor chapel of broken people but know this, like Bishop Vigano they cannot say we are not faithful to Jesus.
We did not leave the church, the church left us.
They shut our church down. Closed its doors. They told us it was okay to go the SSPX. That the confession and sacraments were valid. NOTHING has changed except there are more people coming, YOUNG people and that is what matters to them. They don’t want young faithful families following the traditions that last thousands of years. They want control of the youth and the future. If it’s dying out, no problem but not if it’s growing. Look at every large area like Charlotte where there is diocesan Latin mass the Vatican sent in a destroyer not an encourager.
Why can’t they leave it alone? Because it is a sign of contradiction. That their experiment in a New Order was not perfect. That ecumenism might be harmful. That bending the Word of God might not be okay. That the shepherd leading the sheep to the crucification and receiving Him like a child on our knees might be good for the soul. Instead of a meal with friends who may or may not believe the same things you do. It’s always the second commandment before the first.
That they would choose to harm us again is evil. That they would choose to play games like this and target the cloistered Cor Orans and the full seminaries tells you something is deeply wrong with them.
We did not leave the faith, the church left us in the dark and God lead us to a light. Now you wish to put out that light?
Pope Leo XIV is MEAN, not loving, and not charitable. He is unjust and unmerciful. I still pray a decade of my rosary for him every day even though he doesn’t care about me or my dead brother. May Jesus love him enough to correct him.
Jesus does love Prevost enough to correct him, but he doesn't seem to be listening to our Lord Jesus (and certainly appears to reject His/our Holy Mother).
we know things with varying degrees of assurance.. some things we know are probably true, others true beyond a reasonable doubt, very few do we know for certain...
SSPX is Catholic, that we know. the present crew running the hierarchy are lavender mafia homosexuals, that we know.. where the ship went off the rails is beyond a reasonable doubt V2..
is Leo's Papacy valid? don't know.. "that" in and of itself is sufficient.
Perhaps you will consider the words of St Paul to decide if Prevost is really a pope? See Galatians 1:8 as that forever and undeniably defined the requirements the entire Catholic Church must meet if it is to remain Catholic.
Galatians 1:8-10 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. 9 As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ."
The "recognize-and-resist position can become incoherent."
R&R starts off as incoherent. The traditionalists' strategy of ongoing, one might even say foundational, resistance to someone whom they recognize as a valid pope is utterly contrary to Tradition. Anyone who wants to uphold Tradition doesn't even get out of the starting gate when he adopts the R&R position.
Traditionalists who mock the sedevacantist position are like little children who refuse to take their medicine because it tastes bad. Sedevacantism is the only intellectually coherent stance that provides one with a path to resist Vatican heresies without becoming a heretic oneself.
We need to be honest enough with ourselves to admit that we face a choice between two irreconcilable positions: either we hold as true the Church’s pre-Vatican II perennial teachings, or we hold as true recent popes’ teachings that contradict pre-Vatican II teachings.
If we go with the latter, we are rejecting 2,000 years of Catholic teaching. And if we go with the former, we are rejecting recent popes as being invalid.
How do we resolve this conundrum? Recall that St Paul wrote that those who do not have a love of truth cannot be saved. That is a warning we should always keep in mind. When we are forced to choose between the perennial truths of Catholicism and the (apparent) authority of the Vatican, we should stick with the perennial truths, because we know that they at least can never be illusory.
The problem with sedevacantism is the difficulty it has in explaining the failure of Christ's promise. One needs to postulate that, at some point, through some set of events as yet unknown, a mechanism for selecting the successor of Peter that had worked for over a thousand years ceased to work and the 'real' pope was never selected or was hidden like the hidden Imams of Sevener and Twelver Shiite Islam. And then that 'occultation' would itself have to be explained as some kind of apocalyptic event taking us beyond what has been revealed through Scripture and Tradition, even contradicting Scripture and Tradition. R&R has often been mischaracterised as some kind of schizophrenia when, in fact, it is rather straight forward. The Pope, by accepting V2 and promulgating it as Pope, contradicts himself - literally. He is not being heretical. He is saying nothing at all since the V2 texts themselves contradict Scripture and Tradition which the Pope is using to justify his acceptance and promulgation. The reality is that, since Paul VI attempted to 'incorporate' the V2 texts into the Deposit of Faith, the Teaching Office has been silent. The Pope can start actually saying things again if he either a) rejects V2 or b) rejects his occupation of the Throne of Peter (something Francis - who I think understood these points - came very close to doing and perhaps did.)
You misstated the "problem". Sede vacante does not claim that the Chair of Peter has been eliminated or has failed. What it claims, and properly so, is that some individuals who have sat in that chair have failed to defend the defined Magisterium of the Church as they are obligated to do. Both the 1917 and 1983 Code of Canon Law state that anyone, even a pope, can lose their authority if they commit sins listed therein. As a direct result of that commission, and without ANY need of judgment, they are latae sententiae excommunicated and therefore are no longer Catholic. Since it is a requirement for all clergy in the Roman Catholic Church to be Catholic, which is NOT sinoddal, they cannot remain in the clergy and so lose their office.
The sedevacantists never declared the Church has failed or that Chair of Peter no longer exists. Read the history of the Church as there have been times in the past when the chair has been empty, and even disputed. Those events did not destroy the chair any more than the position of sede vacante did as you incorrectly claim it did.
I hope this brings some clarity to the situation. Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.
It's amazing how confidently some online Catholic influencers can discuss ecclesiology while acting as if the pre-Vatican II catechisms and papal teaching are optional reading. These guys can spend three hours on a livestream explaining why everyone else is confused, yet somehow never open a traditional catechism when the hard questions come up.
Might I suggest less YouTube and more Fr. Joseph Deharbe's Catechism, Radio Replies, The Catechism Explained by Fr. Spirago, or the Catechism of the Council of Trent? Those books answered these questions long before livestreams and clickbait thumbnails existed.
The original Mass of Paul VI uses Latin; we will be using it tomorrow for a priest's first Mass. We will be singing Gregorian Chant as Sacrosanctum Concilium requires. But just like Prevost who likes to dress nicely and use Latin in his prayers, it's cosplay, window dressing. This newly ordained priest told me he is not permitted to say the TLM. It tells me, Prevost and his curia don't permit the Catholic faith as handed down to us.
The crisis has gotten visibly so bad, and God the Father has allowed us to see it, so that we understand that God alone possesses both the power and the clarity to resolve it.
We must cooperate by humble faith and prayer, and obedience to His will, as God restores His Church and His world, according to His plans.
Your blog, with its incisive analysis, helps us to cooperate with the grace He gives us in these times, and not get in the way. As you wrote:
"The living problem asks whether the Catholic must obey men who use Catholic authority to dismantle Catholic Tradition."
But we will not be able to clear and repair the diabolical confusion by human solutions alone.
How on earth do you find the time to write such a long missive AND create so many memes as well? There are only 24 hours in a day, and you have to sleep at least 3-4 of them!
There were two high priests. Rome had deposed the licit high priest and installed a puppet.
The divinely constituted religious authorities persecuted God Himself.
The faithful thought the sacrifice was happening where it had always happened, while the Real Sacrifice was happening in plain sight yet hidden from everyone's eyes.
Very few remained at the side of the Lord during the Passion; the greatest enemies were human frailty and human confusion.
After suffering through 60+ years of lies, distortions, half-truths, persecutions and manipulations by the V-II ape of the church, I chose to accept the position of Sede Vacante as it most correctly identified the problems and provided that most faithful solution to the countless intentional errors of V-II.
Your article was spot on where your stated "The real question is whether the postconciliar structure that claims to be the Catholic hierarchy can repeatedly act as the enemy of Catholic Tradition while retaining the ordinary claims Catholics are required to give the hierarchy of the Catholic Church."
In answer, your observation about Jesus was 100% true, which proves what V-II really is which is NOT the Unam, Sanctam, Catolicam et Apostolicam Ecclesiam Christ established:
"But Christ in His Passion never became the agent of falsehood," a clear implication that the V-II ape of the church DID become an agent of falsehood.
End of debate. God prevails, V-II loses and therefore must be abolished. Meanwhile, we thank God for CMRI and for SSPX, even if SSPX does not explicitly accept sede vacante.
Assuming the V-II as ape of the church and the sede positions are accurate, which they do indeed appear to be accurate. Where does that leave those us who were confirmed and converted in the modern post conciliar church? Are we just larping essentially? As none of the sacraments from confirmation, confession and the Eucharist were valid and licit, as they were all performed by Bishops and priests whose orders and consecrations were likely not valid and licit. It’s not a pleasant possibility to ponder, but I do prefer the truth regardless of feelings involved. It’s a question thats been on my mind lately.
Let me be clear from the beginning: the SSPX wants to have it both ways. "Leo XIV is the Pope"—except when his authority gets in the way. If he's truly the Vicar of Christ, why consecrate bishops without his mandate? If he isn't, then stop pretending and admit the sedevacantist conclusion. "Recognize and resist" eventually becomes "recognize in theory, ignore in practice." That's NOT Catholic to me.
Personally, I find your questions completely reasonable and relevant. Thank you. In full disclosure, we are committed believers to the concept of sede vacante.
Doesn't Canon Law PERMIT bishops to disobey the Pope in cases of emergency? If Canon Law does permit that, it is not necessarily the case that the SSPX is acting petulantly,
This is thoughtful and praiseworthy. I agree entirely and have argued this in the comments of a show I still enjoy and hosts I find genuine, likeable and warm. I think we should be honest and admit that there is a craziness to online Sedevanctism and sometimes it goes too far. I think we all go a bit too far sometimes online. Other than that a lot to commend and agree with in this piece.
Speaking of craziness on Team Sedevacante…it’s kind of like you on Sede Picante’s Live the other night, going on about shoving “Frankenstein chickens” down a death chute in the middle of the night. That was interesting. 🤪
The Passion of the Church is interesting, because in the Passion of Christ, He dies. So, one asks, does the Church die? The answer might be in an analogy to modern medical “death,” meaning no brain function but the body is kept alive by machines (usually for the organ donations). The Sacraments are what is keeping the Church Militant, the Body of Christ, alive. But the Modernist hierarchy, is the no brain function part of the analogy.
At least they've dropped the Temu Nick Fuentes grift for a bit
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/traditional-priest-pope-leo-must-act-to-avoid-unfortunate-rupture-with-sspx/
“Don’t forget to join us on Locals where we can get really spicy!”
Another great column Chris, but where do you come down on all this? Are you sedevacanist, sspx, fssp, diocese trad or what? Easy to criticize everyone else's position without revealing your own. It's time to do that. No hostility here, but your hiding a bit. I'm sspx by the way.
John, a journalist's job is to expose to his readers the issues. We are to pick it up from there and do what we can to further expose the errors/truths. Without our action, a journalist is just a frustrated investigator.
I'm guessing that Chris' focus is to articulate the issues. Perhaps he thinks, and perhaps rightly, that stating his own position would present himself as an advocate and thereby hinder his credibility in exploring the problem.
I think this is the key to Chris’s success in defending the deposit of Faith. I’m SSPX with one leg in Sede world and I pray that after July 1st the SSPX might begin to clarify the madness further. I believe the ArchBishop if alive today would find it hard to call these men Pope of the Catholic Church
Good question. I, too, would like to know which Trad Team Chris Jackson is a member of. (I myself am orthodox and believe the SSPX does need to go ahead with the consecrations. I happen not to be SSPX - yet - mostly out of laziness.)
Maybe he’s just a garden variety AARP Catholic. Or perhaps, he’s an NRA Catholic. Personally, I’m an IHOP Catholic.
For some souls there is very little rest or solid ground. If they excommunicate us it is mean. It is also very deeply unjust and unmerciful.
Mean to the mothers and children the church has allowed to be abused. Mean to the abandoned men now in a grave. Mean to the grandparents grieving the loss of faith in their families . Mean to the many souls, who searching for an open door when the church herself closed and they were forced to find help. That was not 50 years ago, it was 5 years ago, when the SSPX kept their doors open, when they brought sacraments to the dying, when they still bravely walked pilgrimages to closed empty churches.
There are only two bishops for a thousand priests and many thousand faithful worldwide. What is lost upon everyone is that they are only looking to keep doing what they have been doing. That is all.
The prideful can run back and forth with you are excommunicated now and you are not later and then again you are while nothing changed on the other side.
Which means it is arbitrary and capricious and MEAN. Charity is not mean.
As for my house we will try to serve the Lord in our little poor chapel of broken people but know this, like Bishop Vigano they cannot say we are not faithful to Jesus.
We did not leave the church, the church left us.
They shut our church down. Closed its doors. They told us it was okay to go the SSPX. That the confession and sacraments were valid. NOTHING has changed except there are more people coming, YOUNG people and that is what matters to them. They don’t want young faithful families following the traditions that last thousands of years. They want control of the youth and the future. If it’s dying out, no problem but not if it’s growing. Look at every large area like Charlotte where there is diocesan Latin mass the Vatican sent in a destroyer not an encourager.
Why can’t they leave it alone? Because it is a sign of contradiction. That their experiment in a New Order was not perfect. That ecumenism might be harmful. That bending the Word of God might not be okay. That the shepherd leading the sheep to the crucification and receiving Him like a child on our knees might be good for the soul. Instead of a meal with friends who may or may not believe the same things you do. It’s always the second commandment before the first.
That they would choose to harm us again is evil. That they would choose to play games like this and target the cloistered Cor Orans and the full seminaries tells you something is deeply wrong with them.
We did not leave the faith, the church left us in the dark and God lead us to a light. Now you wish to put out that light?
Pope Leo XIV is MEAN, not loving, and not charitable. He is unjust and unmerciful. I still pray a decade of my rosary for him every day even though he doesn’t care about me or my dead brother. May Jesus love him enough to correct him.
You are completely truthful in saying that "We did not leave the church, the church left us." Thank you.
Jesus does love Prevost enough to correct him, but he doesn't seem to be listening to our Lord Jesus (and certainly appears to reject His/our Holy Mother).
(an ordinary pew sitting engineer's take... )
we know things with varying degrees of assurance.. some things we know are probably true, others true beyond a reasonable doubt, very few do we know for certain...
SSPX is Catholic, that we know. the present crew running the hierarchy are lavender mafia homosexuals, that we know.. where the ship went off the rails is beyond a reasonable doubt V2..
is Leo's Papacy valid? don't know.. "that" in and of itself is sufficient.
Perhaps you will consider the words of St Paul to decide if Prevost is really a pope? See Galatians 1:8 as that forever and undeniably defined the requirements the entire Catholic Church must meet if it is to remain Catholic.
Galatians 1:8-10 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. 9 As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ."
The "recognize-and-resist position can become incoherent."
R&R starts off as incoherent. The traditionalists' strategy of ongoing, one might even say foundational, resistance to someone whom they recognize as a valid pope is utterly contrary to Tradition. Anyone who wants to uphold Tradition doesn't even get out of the starting gate when he adopts the R&R position.
Traditionalists who mock the sedevacantist position are like little children who refuse to take their medicine because it tastes bad. Sedevacantism is the only intellectually coherent stance that provides one with a path to resist Vatican heresies without becoming a heretic oneself.
We need to be honest enough with ourselves to admit that we face a choice between two irreconcilable positions: either we hold as true the Church’s pre-Vatican II perennial teachings, or we hold as true recent popes’ teachings that contradict pre-Vatican II teachings.
If we go with the latter, we are rejecting 2,000 years of Catholic teaching. And if we go with the former, we are rejecting recent popes as being invalid.
How do we resolve this conundrum? Recall that St Paul wrote that those who do not have a love of truth cannot be saved. That is a warning we should always keep in mind. When we are forced to choose between the perennial truths of Catholicism and the (apparent) authority of the Vatican, we should stick with the perennial truths, because we know that they at least can never be illusory.
The problem with sedevacantism is the difficulty it has in explaining the failure of Christ's promise. One needs to postulate that, at some point, through some set of events as yet unknown, a mechanism for selecting the successor of Peter that had worked for over a thousand years ceased to work and the 'real' pope was never selected or was hidden like the hidden Imams of Sevener and Twelver Shiite Islam. And then that 'occultation' would itself have to be explained as some kind of apocalyptic event taking us beyond what has been revealed through Scripture and Tradition, even contradicting Scripture and Tradition. R&R has often been mischaracterised as some kind of schizophrenia when, in fact, it is rather straight forward. The Pope, by accepting V2 and promulgating it as Pope, contradicts himself - literally. He is not being heretical. He is saying nothing at all since the V2 texts themselves contradict Scripture and Tradition which the Pope is using to justify his acceptance and promulgation. The reality is that, since Paul VI attempted to 'incorporate' the V2 texts into the Deposit of Faith, the Teaching Office has been silent. The Pope can start actually saying things again if he either a) rejects V2 or b) rejects his occupation of the Throne of Peter (something Francis - who I think understood these points - came very close to doing and perhaps did.)
You misstated the "problem". Sede vacante does not claim that the Chair of Peter has been eliminated or has failed. What it claims, and properly so, is that some individuals who have sat in that chair have failed to defend the defined Magisterium of the Church as they are obligated to do. Both the 1917 and 1983 Code of Canon Law state that anyone, even a pope, can lose their authority if they commit sins listed therein. As a direct result of that commission, and without ANY need of judgment, they are latae sententiae excommunicated and therefore are no longer Catholic. Since it is a requirement for all clergy in the Roman Catholic Church to be Catholic, which is NOT sinoddal, they cannot remain in the clergy and so lose their office.
The sedevacantists never declared the Church has failed or that Chair of Peter no longer exists. Read the history of the Church as there have been times in the past when the chair has been empty, and even disputed. Those events did not destroy the chair any more than the position of sede vacante did as you incorrectly claim it did.
I hope this brings some clarity to the situation. Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.
You answered better than I would have.
Thank you.
Exactly!!
Thank you all.
It's amazing how confidently some online Catholic influencers can discuss ecclesiology while acting as if the pre-Vatican II catechisms and papal teaching are optional reading. These guys can spend three hours on a livestream explaining why everyone else is confused, yet somehow never open a traditional catechism when the hard questions come up.
Might I suggest less YouTube and more Fr. Joseph Deharbe's Catechism, Radio Replies, The Catechism Explained by Fr. Spirago, or the Catechism of the Council of Trent? Those books answered these questions long before livestreams and clickbait thumbnails existed.
Thank you for your excellent reply! No one should study the documents of V-II unless it is to prove they are NOT Catholic.
It's easy to complain. It's much more difficult to attempt to do something-anything-about the problems.
So Vatican II said preserve Latin. Mission accomplished — they preserved it so well almost nobody gets to hear it anymore.
Preserved it in a jar of formaldehyde, like some extinct species!
The original Mass of Paul VI uses Latin; we will be using it tomorrow for a priest's first Mass. We will be singing Gregorian Chant as Sacrosanctum Concilium requires. But just like Prevost who likes to dress nicely and use Latin in his prayers, it's cosplay, window dressing. This newly ordained priest told me he is not permitted to say the TLM. It tells me, Prevost and his curia don't permit the Catholic faith as handed down to us.
The crisis has gotten visibly so bad, and God the Father has allowed us to see it, so that we understand that God alone possesses both the power and the clarity to resolve it.
We must cooperate by humble faith and prayer, and obedience to His will, as God restores His Church and His world, according to His plans.
Your blog, with its incisive analysis, helps us to cooperate with the grace He gives us in these times, and not get in the way. As you wrote:
"The living problem asks whether the Catholic must obey men who use Catholic authority to dismantle Catholic Tradition."
But we will not be able to clear and repair the diabolical confusion by human solutions alone.
The SSPX has to consecrate bishops. Otherwise, Rome will let them just die out, not unlike the Old Believers of Russia.
Catholics might ask themselves...
Can God make a mistake?
Would God contradict himself?
Does Vatican II contradict eternal Catholic teachings about indifferentism, sodomy and Idolatry?
Have you been told by the Vatican II church you have no authority to recognize heresy?
Veritas est, Frater!
How on earth do you find the time to write such a long missive AND create so many memes as well? There are only 24 hours in a day, and you have to sleep at least 3-4 of them!
"Passion of the Church" is interesting.
During the passion:
There were two high priests. Rome had deposed the licit high priest and installed a puppet.
The divinely constituted religious authorities persecuted God Himself.
The faithful thought the sacrifice was happening where it had always happened, while the Real Sacrifice was happening in plain sight yet hidden from everyone's eyes.
Very few remained at the side of the Lord during the Passion; the greatest enemies were human frailty and human confusion.
After suffering through 60+ years of lies, distortions, half-truths, persecutions and manipulations by the V-II ape of the church, I chose to accept the position of Sede Vacante as it most correctly identified the problems and provided that most faithful solution to the countless intentional errors of V-II.
Your article was spot on where your stated "The real question is whether the postconciliar structure that claims to be the Catholic hierarchy can repeatedly act as the enemy of Catholic Tradition while retaining the ordinary claims Catholics are required to give the hierarchy of the Catholic Church."
In answer, your observation about Jesus was 100% true, which proves what V-II really is which is NOT the Unam, Sanctam, Catolicam et Apostolicam Ecclesiam Christ established:
"But Christ in His Passion never became the agent of falsehood," a clear implication that the V-II ape of the church DID become an agent of falsehood.
End of debate. God prevails, V-II loses and therefore must be abolished. Meanwhile, we thank God for CMRI and for SSPX, even if SSPX does not explicitly accept sede vacante.
Deus Vult!
Assuming the V-II as ape of the church and the sede positions are accurate, which they do indeed appear to be accurate. Where does that leave those us who were confirmed and converted in the modern post conciliar church? Are we just larping essentially? As none of the sacraments from confirmation, confession and the Eucharist were valid and licit, as they were all performed by Bishops and priests whose orders and consecrations were likely not valid and licit. It’s not a pleasant possibility to ponder, but I do prefer the truth regardless of feelings involved. It’s a question thats been on my mind lately.
Let me be clear from the beginning: the SSPX wants to have it both ways. "Leo XIV is the Pope"—except when his authority gets in the way. If he's truly the Vicar of Christ, why consecrate bishops without his mandate? If he isn't, then stop pretending and admit the sedevacantist conclusion. "Recognize and resist" eventually becomes "recognize in theory, ignore in practice." That's NOT Catholic to me.
Personally, I find your questions completely reasonable and relevant. Thank you. In full disclosure, we are committed believers to the concept of sede vacante.
Doesn't Canon Law PERMIT bishops to disobey the Pope in cases of emergency? If Canon Law does permit that, it is not necessarily the case that the SSPX is acting petulantly,
This is thoughtful and praiseworthy. I agree entirely and have argued this in the comments of a show I still enjoy and hosts I find genuine, likeable and warm. I think we should be honest and admit that there is a craziness to online Sedevanctism and sometimes it goes too far. I think we all go a bit too far sometimes online. Other than that a lot to commend and agree with in this piece.
Speaking of craziness on Team Sedevacante…it’s kind of like you on Sede Picante’s Live the other night, going on about shoving “Frankenstein chickens” down a death chute in the middle of the night. That was interesting. 🤪
I didn’t say the word death chute but I do work at a hatchery so that explains the chute and I’m referring to how they are produced :)
Ok, I’m just relieved it’s more occupation-related and not just a fetish.
No lol definitely not, we all have to earn a crust somehow, is it my dream job? No but it’s a living I guess
The Passion of the Church is interesting, because in the Passion of Christ, He dies. So, one asks, does the Church die? The answer might be in an analogy to modern medical “death,” meaning no brain function but the body is kept alive by machines (usually for the organ donations). The Sacraments are what is keeping the Church Militant, the Body of Christ, alive. But the Modernist hierarchy, is the no brain function part of the analogy.