I have great respect for the Cardinal but I don’t agree with how he framed this.
The church for the most part has departed from many traditional beliefs and practices that is why the practice of the faith is in tatters in most countries.
Confusion reins supreme, heterodoxy rules and souls are being lost.
Well hasn't that always been the position of the SSPX? I have great respect for the pope and his magisterium but I don't agree, because ultimately we (and only we) are right, and Rome is wrong.
I have great respect for objective Truth. Even so, you have every right to freely adhere to your personal thinking, even as you are bound to reap the moral repercussions of that thinking. You simply have to accept with some maturity that there are others who disagree with you. And then go on your merry way.
Diane, I highly respect your work and think you should know that if my heart stirred the way it did as I read THE PROFESSION, many other hearts did too. Reverts like me ('98) are going to seek the SSPX as the lifeboat off of the deck of a Barque that appears right now to be busting apart at the seams. We do so because we read Rev. 9:20 to 11:15 and see how the Church refuses to repent, and the hour appears very late... Viva Cristo Rey👑
Mike, I would love to leave a reply…..but you’ve said everything that needs to be said…..
May the Blessed Virgin, whom the SSPX so diligently and courageously defended her title as Mediatrix of grace and Co Redeemer with her Divine Son, continue, along with the Sacred Heart, to bestow their blessings upon these warriors for our Faith and true missionaries for the salvation of souls!
What was, is and has always been the One Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church has been labelled "the Lefebvrists" by the lavender mob, the misinformed, and an eclipsed common sense poignant reality in the fruits of the Vatican 2 deceits. Add to that certain schismatics sitting in Rome pontificating fruits of a synodal-church orchard plant arising from the earth in all its Luciferian glory, pagan worship affirmations, and immoral proclivities by many ladies in collars dressed in their purple and red garb of the Kings clothing. They symbolize His anthesis through a feigned 'holy' group-think in what appears to be self proclaimed Latae Sententiae. These gutless ladies in collars sacrifice cardinal and theological virtues according to their blind, deaf, dumb, obfuscating, equivocating wordless theological word salads. Christ the King rules and until the realignment of this accelerated synodal debacle of the former "Disastrous Pontificate" (Grigio) with His Church fosters a genuine Catholicity, there will be no good come from this disgusting mob. The alignment will only come through the Immaculate Heart. So, all you ladies in collars, get with the program and push and live the Fatima message or continue the facade and destruction and you may find yourselves burning. The SSPX is not going away nor any facet of the TLM. And by the way, I am forced through the historical fraudulent implementation of Vat 2 to only have access to the Novis Ordo that I can tell you first hand through witnessing has been an abject failure and pro Protestantisation of the ONE Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ.
I wonder if, rather than an exodus out of the SSPX per actions taken by current-Rome in response to the consecration - whether by clergy, religious, or laity - there might not instead be a great pilgrimage towards them.
That my, friend, is precisely what I think! In fact several comments by others on other forums have said that IF the SSPX had a chapel nearby, they would happily “cross over on the side of Tradition”!
Much more likely. Who, having remained with the SSPX through thick and thin, is suddenly going to look back at Sodom and say “That’s the place for me”?
I appreciate Müller's parrhesia. He is not afraid to stand up and speak his mind; in a synodally-controlled, prefabricated meeting, that is all to the good.
However, it's tragic that Müller wants the SSPX to be met with a hammer rather than a sign of peace. It's far too late now, but if the pope had met with Pagliarani, discussed the situation, reviewed the proposed candidates, and granted permission, there would at least have been a real and practical relationship between the 99 sheep and the 1 "lost" sheep. The shepherd wouldn't have just let them wander off into the wilderness (I'm speaking, for the sake of argument, from the perspective of the Society's skeptics). A real personal relationship is worth more than a distant crossfire of documents.
But what it looks like now, according to Müller, is: "We condemn these thousands of priests and religious, and millions of faithful; and if any of them would like to come back, we'll make them sign off on accepting all of Vatican II and the new Mass as a precondition, even if we permit them to keep celebrating the old rite." This is the very definition of intransigent. What you see is the clash of two intransigencies, precisely the opposite of what Benedict XVI pleaded for.
Let me put it this way. Sure, you can raise objections to the SSPX. Their position is not bullet-proof. But Müller's approach is entirely one-sided, as if there has not been incredible confusion and chaos in the Church on earth for 60 years now. Postconciliar popes have often added to the mess by their sprawling documents, inadequate responses, silences, complicities, and scandalous actions (ecumania, Assisi, Koran-kissing, Abu Dhabi, Pachamama, etc.). The abuses of the liturgy have not been stamped out and the lacerations of reform are still bleeding. Pope Francis gave us 12 years of heresy and mafia crime. You'd think that any honest response to the SSPX would begin with a massive admission of collective guilt and a resolve to address precisely those issues that explain why the SSPX exists in the first place—reminiscent of the truly humble admissions of Pope Adrian VI at the time of the Reformation. But no, Müller responds as if all is normal in Rome and it's only the Society that gets Vatican II wrong. Good grief, it's so tone-deaf one hardly knows where to begin.
Why do you think the SSPX would be required to sign off on anything more than they were in 1988? The protocol that Lefebvre signed said that they could have hold their reservations, but would have to address their concerns with charity, without polemics. Thats all the other Ecclesia Dei groups were asked to sign off to.
I don’t recall St Peter ceasing being the Pope after St Paul corrected him for his double standard of eating with Gentiles. I don’t recall St Peter losing his primacy in authority because of his repeated errors and sins. Yet, personal conduct is somehow now the equivalent of moral teaching on the level of the magisterium? So we can equate the silliness or vagueness of the aforementioned words or personal actions as statements from the magisterium, when the very first Pope, after being handed the Keys, rebuked Jesus the Master for the willingness to accept the Cross, and also denied Jesus three times? Did these constitute a magisterial act or something else? The illogical idea of equivalence is untenable when we consider the entirety of Scripture, the Tradition, and the history of the Church. It doesn’t take an expert to see the truth of St Augustine in the Dontatist heresy.
The irony of this movement is that the SSPX refused to follow St Athanasius and St Pio, or any other Saint exiled by (likely corrupt) Church authorities, but who chose to be faithful to the Church, and not leave Her because of legitimate grievances. The SSPX, as a parallel organization, continues to splinter since its formation, just as its cousins started by Luther and Zwingli. And just as Mother Church has dialogued with those descendants, the Society has been dialogued with for multiple decades in the hope of reuniting, rejected not by Her but by the SSPX.
Further, many Catholics struggle with various teachings within the Deposit, but just because they struggle doesn’t mean they abandon her. They found Jesus and strive to understand how He means to use that struggle to grow in Him. The lack of effective communication or understanding is not grounds to walk away from Christ in His fullness, for some sliver of the truth. We simply “may not be able to bear it now.” To choose only the sliver of the truth over the fullness makes one a heretic and schismatic. Instead of seeing vague statements as evidence of possible error, it should be seen as an opportunity to show the truth also present, as it accords with the Deposit. This is what the Church has done for centuries when it answers one question, but not others, leaving vagueness and lack of clarity until a new Council or Papal pronouncement clarifies the next question and so on. The rejection of a Dogmatic Council, on the grounds of vagueness is frankly stupid. The Society yielded the fight over proper interpretation through the Deposit to corrupt “spirit” Bishops. It is not a matter of whether the Council speaks truth, it does. Rather, it is about who utilizes their authority properly afterwards. Even your own book details the nefarious acts of Bishops who intended to subvert the text’s meaning into something else. That’s not a fault of the Council but the Bishops that God entrusted to lead faithfully. Which is what we’ve experienced for 2 millennia.
Finally, to speak of the importance of a personal relationship is a stretch considering that the SSPX chose not to be in relationship with the Church. The grounds to be heard in the Church with good faith is less firm, than if fraternal correction came from the FSSP, who maintained fidelity to the Church when SSPX did not and now will further not.
These last 7 never became Popes. A non Catholic can't become Pope.
Btw, Saint Peter didn't commit heresy in your example. Better get all this right. Vatican II church isn't Catholic and many hundreds of millions of souls could be landing in hell.
All of them were Catholic. Just because someone says something incorrect doesn’t inherently make them a heretic, nor does it necessarily mean that those off-hand comments makes their Christ-given authority invalid. What indeed would be the point of Christ giving the parable about the abusive Shepherds who, believing that He was late in coming, begin to beat the servants?
Those Shepherds didn’t lose their authority; they in justice will lose their souls, but until a higher superior removes them from authority, they maintain the office.
St Augustine points out your very error of ascribed personal morality as directly affecting the minister’s Christic authority to effect the Sacraments associated with the minister’s office. Just as Christ said of the Pharisees, who the People were called by Jesus to listen to, but not follow their model. They didn’t lose their authority/office just because they were unfaithful.
If Jesus no longer inheres in the Catholic Church He built, knowing and prophesied about bad Shepherds, you make Him a liar since He said the gates of Hell would not prevail against her. It’s same equivalence argument Luther made 500+ years ago.
She has been in crises before with abusive Shepherds. Jesus will always restore His wayward Church because He will not fail nor forsake her.
If the SSPX were truly serious, they would rejoin Her and fight for Her from within to demand and cultivate true Shepherds. Alas, they will not follow the Saints.
He should have said less about SSPX and establishing a new containment operation and more about repealing Traditio Custodes. Without the repeal, Ecclesia Dei 2.0 offers and solves nothing.
Good heavens... one does not become a Lefebvrist merely by personal preference, but because one is led by the Holy Spirit and the truth—because people still possess faith, true Catholic faith, and adherence to unchanging truths. Given the facts—that Pope Benedict appears to have been the last valid pope, since his resignation, legally, canonically and theologically— is invalid, this entire situation is a disgrace, and history will record it as such. The Kabbalistic masters behind the Synodal Path will never agree to abandon it. Kabbalists (Freemasons) work purposefully according to calculated stages that must be achieved within calculated timeframes. Since the plan entails a return to the Old Testament—to a single God and animal sacrifice—the only remaining obstacle is traditional Catholics and their Tridentine Mass.
Yep the talmudic twerkers are and have been running the show here on planet earth before they murdered the savior of humanity and now these same tribe currently called Zionists or Jews are coming for humanity. Own nothing and be happy, don't like they have gotten their Goy servants to pass Noahide Laws which supersede US law and call for the death penalty for those who don't injest or buy the talmudist goyslop.
Before Muller became a darling of the conservatives, he was highly sympathetic to Liberation Theology, a Marxist deformation of Catholicism. More recently, he has declared on Raymond Arroyos interview that the Church is victim of a hostile takeover, but he denies the SSPX any state of emergency. My answer is this: Muller had years as head of doctrine under Pope Benedict to answer the SSPX. He didn’t. The SSPX has been saying the same things since Lefebvre. Muller is part and parcel of the Church’s silence on the crisis.
It won't take but a Mass or two seeing aunt Wilma ordinary extraordinary communion in the hand Eucharistic 'minister' and faithful wearing shorts and beach flip flops with the tabernacle in the coat closet accompanied by the guitars and drum choir to remember the SSPX offered Tridentine Mass.....
This is laughable. Rome has lost its marbles. Do they really think that the Laity will leave the Society and run into their demonic hands????? Another Eclesiá Dei under this pontificate????? I’m speechless. They truly, truly have lost the faithful in tradition. Come Jesus Come!!
Rome left Tradition in the late 60’s and if Archbishop Lefebvre (and a few others) didn’t step in, the Church would be unrecognizable today. Rome (the Freemasons running the Vatican) has been forced to rethink some steps so as not to reveal their true intentions of destroying the Church. We can’t stop supporting the SSPX now. They are the reason we have any tradition at all! Cardinal Mueller I’m disappointed in your lack of backbone for this stronghold of faith that has the only backbone on record. Pray for the SSPX!
With due respect to dear Cardinal Mueller, he seems to be aloof of the dire situation infiltrating Rome. Are the modernists so completely deceived? It appears that Rome no longer adheres fully to the Profession of Faith put forth by the Society of St. Pius X. Do they honestly believe people will leave the Society and flee to Rome with all the heretical rubbish, vehemence toward truth, and vengeance, that has come from the Vatican over the past 60 years? The synodal church is a church of man, the work of human hands. The SSPX is a remnant of Catholicism. May God continue to bless the Society with an abundance of holy priests and lay faithful during this unjust persecution.
I well remember after the 1988 consecrations that an extraordinary General Chapter of the SSPX superiors invited the Vatican to excommunicate them as well since they supported Archbishop Lefebvre's actions. I would not be surprised if they do that again if, as some say, the excommunication only falls on the bishops involved. In 1988, it was left a little vague as to what constituted "formal adherence" to the schismatic act.
I hate to see the whole thing being thrown back to 1988 but it seems to have entered that phase the French call a "dialogue of the deaf".
how does the vatican argue that they have not been unfaithful to their duty of defending traditional faith? All points in the 28 page credo of SSPX make complete sense and are directly applicable to facts. Gaslighting. The schismatic is the Pope who refuses to support movemenzs that are uncompromisingly proclaiming roman catolic religion and supporting 100.000s of people to live a catholic life. The one thing the Pooe is NOT doing. He neither spraks nor acts like a roman catholic.
The Pope said this:“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16). In these words, Peter, asked by the Master, together with the other disciples, about his faith in him, expressed the patrimony that the Church, through the apostolic succession, has preserved, deepened and handed on for two thousand years.Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God: the one Saviour, who alone reveals the face of the Father.In him, God, in order to make himself close and accessible to men and women, revealed himself to us in the trusting eyes of a child, in the lively mind of a young person and in the mature features of a man (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 22), finally appearing to his disciples after the resurrection with his glorious body. He thus showed us a model of human holiness that we can all imitate, together with the promise of an eternal destiny that transcends all our limits and abilities.Peter, in his response, understands both of these things: the gift of God and the path to follow in order to allow himself to be changed by that gift. They are two inseparable aspects of salvation entrusted to the Church to be proclaimed for the good of the human race. Indeed, they are entrusted to us, who were chosen by him before we were formed in our mothers’ wombs (cf. Jer 1:5), reborn in the waters of Baptism and, surpassing our limitations and with no merit of our own, brought here and sent forth from here, so that the Gospel might be proclaimed to every creature (cf. Mk 16:15)."Is this Protestant or atheistic for you?Certainly not for me ,I am a profound Catholic who submits to the Vicar of Christ on Earth.Maybe the idea you are bringing forward implying that the Church has erred need some examination because I believe when Christ said that the gates of hell will not prevail against it about his Church.I firmly accept Pastor Aeternus
yes, thankyou Mr Bins for this excerpt. Indeed, the Pope is able to form pretty sentences and these you share above do summarise the story and faith and there is ONE specific catholic element as it refers to the apostolic succession which "has been deepened" and there his Holiness might be.referring to the "Pastor Aeternus". Apart from that however, the text could very well be Protestant. Or not?
Could you share a text where he talks about sin, sanctifying grace, hell and such really precise roman catholic elements that make this particular religion which -until Vat II -proclaimed to be indeed the ONLY Religion and the Only path to God.
On the contrary, the pope has a clear tendency towards embracing all religions and of course he loves using words that we know from popular secular movements, such as "diversity". I could write a whole essay here.
Also about the encyclica he published the title of which I don't recall.fully, but it has to do with the Dignity of Man. There's hardly a mention of our Lord Jesus Christ in there. Indeed, lit's just words that say everything and nothing. Truly I felt dizzy with it.
The catholic life is different to any other path and it is indeed very narrow and of course - as we know (not because the Pope told us) -no catholic life without the CROSS.
Indeed -show me another way which is as uncompromising and intolerable to Modernists as the catholic life.
I learnt about this narrow path, about sanctifying grace, about the importance of understanding the cruelty of SIN and how to work on becoming essentially more and more holy - I learnt all of that from the traditional sector within this church and indeed NONE of it in the modern . I was in the "novos ordo" for fifty years and I was not prompted to understand how to live this religion.
I would prefer the Pope to be less in the public light and to do his actual job which is to be in touch with the bishops and to name cardinals that are suited to pass on the faith.
Instead this Pope loves the limelight, blesses icebergs, defends illegal immigrants more than the unborn and surrounds himself with cardinals like Fernandez AND he is a proclaimed follower and admirwr of Pope Francis AND the "synodal way" which causes confuison and is ambiguous like most of the things tbat come out of this mans mouth.
Have you not boticed any of that? Does it not cause distress for you as a fully catholic man?
It causes great distress for me.
And he can be a sinner -as many pope's were - even a grave sinner - as pope's have been. But he is not a mere sinner, he IS a heretic. He is clearly moving the church towards a changing of dogma through "DIALOG".
He is - I think - quite consciously building a Universal -a Global Church which stands in absolute contradiction to the roman catholic tradition.
So the "Pastor Aeternus" is valid only if the man proclaims the roman catholic religion. Once he diverts from that -which he clearly and ummistankenly is - it does not apply.
I have been through a process with this and I pray for the holy catholic church every day and in this prayer I invcude all angels and demons that walk the halls of the vatican city.
God will not permit His church to be destroyed. But He has allowed it to be captured by men that claim to be catholics but are indeed actually not catholic but modernists,.globalists - building a universal Church -.a "One World Global Church" which fits in well with the "One World Order" that freemasonry has been working strategically towards. Essentially it is the preparation for the coming of the Antichrist.
BUT - God will NOT allow HIS church to be destroyed. Hiw can I lwas a catholic life? Solely through traditional teaching. How can I receive sacraments? Solely through traditional priests. No Novos Ordo can teach me a catholic life.
Gaslighting, indeed! I have been saying that what Rome is doing (and has been since at least the late 1950s) is the very definition of gaslighting. They use “obedience” and “spirit of Vatican II” in an attempt to create a sense of guilt or cause one to question oneself if you even question V2.
I suspect Cardinal Muller does NOT expect many members of the SSPX will rush back to the Church after the excommunications. Muller was just framing an argument. I give him credit for that.
Yes. I do not believe that Cardinal Muller TRULY believes many members of the SSPX will come rushing back to the Synodal Church, post-excommunication. I think Muller was raising the topic of the SSPX using the only tone that wouldn't provoke Pope Leo into shutting down the conversation right away.
I have great respect for the Cardinal but I don’t agree with how he framed this.
The church for the most part has departed from many traditional beliefs and practices that is why the practice of the faith is in tatters in most countries.
Confusion reins supreme, heterodoxy rules and souls are being lost.
The SSPX was right in what they published!
Sacred Heart of Jesus have mercy on us!
Bollocks.
Isn't the new mass celebrated extensively?
Excommunicate me Apostate Rome!
I was,born into this church of satan, Feb 1960.
I reject Vatican II, false popes etc.
Austin diocese refuses me excommunication, Galveston Houston archdiocese refused my appeal.
Cell 512 284 6535 for screenshots
Luciano... The Vatican II church is not the Catholic Church.
Catholic Church is ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC. A tender Mother, without spot. Research sedevacantism.
Well hasn't that always been the position of the SSPX? I have great respect for the pope and his magisterium but I don't agree, because ultimately we (and only we) are right, and Rome is wrong.
You have great respect for an idolator?
I have great respect for objective Truth. Even so, you have every right to freely adhere to your personal thinking, even as you are bound to reap the moral repercussions of that thinking. You simply have to accept with some maturity that there are others who disagree with you. And then go on your merry way.
Diane, I highly respect your work and think you should know that if my heart stirred the way it did as I read THE PROFESSION, many other hearts did too. Reverts like me ('98) are going to seek the SSPX as the lifeboat off of the deck of a Barque that appears right now to be busting apart at the seams. We do so because we read Rev. 9:20 to 11:15 and see how the Church refuses to repent, and the hour appears very late... Viva Cristo Rey👑
Mike, I would love to leave a reply…..but you’ve said everything that needs to be said…..
May the Blessed Virgin, whom the SSPX so diligently and courageously defended her title as Mediatrix of grace and Co Redeemer with her Divine Son, continue, along with the Sacred Heart, to bestow their blessings upon these warriors for our Faith and true missionaries for the salvation of souls!
✝️📿🙏
Much love to SSPX Priests who defended COREDEMPTRIX. MEDIATRIX OF ALL GRACES.
I wouldn’t use the analogy of seeking a “lifeboat off of the deck of a Barque [of Peter]”, since it implies the setting up of a new church.
The SSPX is seeking to prevent the ship of sinking, not leaving the ship.
On the contrary, it is the remnant Church that still has the integrity to stay afloat and function so as to save souls.
What was, is and has always been the One Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church has been labelled "the Lefebvrists" by the lavender mob, the misinformed, and an eclipsed common sense poignant reality in the fruits of the Vatican 2 deceits. Add to that certain schismatics sitting in Rome pontificating fruits of a synodal-church orchard plant arising from the earth in all its Luciferian glory, pagan worship affirmations, and immoral proclivities by many ladies in collars dressed in their purple and red garb of the Kings clothing. They symbolize His anthesis through a feigned 'holy' group-think in what appears to be self proclaimed Latae Sententiae. These gutless ladies in collars sacrifice cardinal and theological virtues according to their blind, deaf, dumb, obfuscating, equivocating wordless theological word salads. Christ the King rules and until the realignment of this accelerated synodal debacle of the former "Disastrous Pontificate" (Grigio) with His Church fosters a genuine Catholicity, there will be no good come from this disgusting mob. The alignment will only come through the Immaculate Heart. So, all you ladies in collars, get with the program and push and live the Fatima message or continue the facade and destruction and you may find yourselves burning. The SSPX is not going away nor any facet of the TLM. And by the way, I am forced through the historical fraudulent implementation of Vat 2 to only have access to the Novis Ordo that I can tell you first hand through witnessing has been an abject failure and pro Protestantisation of the ONE Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ.
Well stated
Beautifully said!
I wonder if, rather than an exodus out of the SSPX per actions taken by current-Rome in response to the consecration - whether by clergy, religious, or laity - there might not instead be a great pilgrimage towards them.
That my, friend, is precisely what I think! In fact several comments by others on other forums have said that IF the SSPX had a chapel nearby, they would happily “cross over on the side of Tradition”!
Much more likely. Who, having remained with the SSPX through thick and thin, is suddenly going to look back at Sodom and say “That’s the place for me”?
Blasphemy. Because you see HARLOT JUDEO MASONIC CHURCH as church of Jesus Christ.
Blasphemy
Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus.
The Barque is 2000 years old and has weathered many storms and it will weather this one to. Like Noah's Ark, there is no salvation outside of it.
Viva!
I appreciate Müller's parrhesia. He is not afraid to stand up and speak his mind; in a synodally-controlled, prefabricated meeting, that is all to the good.
However, it's tragic that Müller wants the SSPX to be met with a hammer rather than a sign of peace. It's far too late now, but if the pope had met with Pagliarani, discussed the situation, reviewed the proposed candidates, and granted permission, there would at least have been a real and practical relationship between the 99 sheep and the 1 "lost" sheep. The shepherd wouldn't have just let them wander off into the wilderness (I'm speaking, for the sake of argument, from the perspective of the Society's skeptics). A real personal relationship is worth more than a distant crossfire of documents.
But what it looks like now, according to Müller, is: "We condemn these thousands of priests and religious, and millions of faithful; and if any of them would like to come back, we'll make them sign off on accepting all of Vatican II and the new Mass as a precondition, even if we permit them to keep celebrating the old rite." This is the very definition of intransigent. What you see is the clash of two intransigencies, precisely the opposite of what Benedict XVI pleaded for.
Let me put it this way. Sure, you can raise objections to the SSPX. Their position is not bullet-proof. But Müller's approach is entirely one-sided, as if there has not been incredible confusion and chaos in the Church on earth for 60 years now. Postconciliar popes have often added to the mess by their sprawling documents, inadequate responses, silences, complicities, and scandalous actions (ecumania, Assisi, Koran-kissing, Abu Dhabi, Pachamama, etc.). The abuses of the liturgy have not been stamped out and the lacerations of reform are still bleeding. Pope Francis gave us 12 years of heresy and mafia crime. You'd think that any honest response to the SSPX would begin with a massive admission of collective guilt and a resolve to address precisely those issues that explain why the SSPX exists in the first place—reminiscent of the truly humble admissions of Pope Adrian VI at the time of the Reformation. But no, Müller responds as if all is normal in Rome and it's only the Society that gets Vatican II wrong. Good grief, it's so tone-deaf one hardly knows where to begin.
[EDITED]
I could not possibly agree more......
Pax Christi
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/traditional-priest-pope-leo-must-act-to-avoid-unfortunate-rupture-with-sspx/
The SSPX was notified repeatedly by Pope Saint John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVI to reverse course. The SSPX did not listen!
Petey
Why do you think the SSPX would be required to sign off on anything more than they were in 1988? The protocol that Lefebvre signed said that they could have hold their reservations, but would have to address their concerns with charity, without polemics. Thats all the other Ecclesia Dei groups were asked to sign off to.
I don’t recall St Peter ceasing being the Pope after St Paul corrected him for his double standard of eating with Gentiles. I don’t recall St Peter losing his primacy in authority because of his repeated errors and sins. Yet, personal conduct is somehow now the equivalent of moral teaching on the level of the magisterium? So we can equate the silliness or vagueness of the aforementioned words or personal actions as statements from the magisterium, when the very first Pope, after being handed the Keys, rebuked Jesus the Master for the willingness to accept the Cross, and also denied Jesus three times? Did these constitute a magisterial act or something else? The illogical idea of equivalence is untenable when we consider the entirety of Scripture, the Tradition, and the history of the Church. It doesn’t take an expert to see the truth of St Augustine in the Dontatist heresy.
The irony of this movement is that the SSPX refused to follow St Athanasius and St Pio, or any other Saint exiled by (likely corrupt) Church authorities, but who chose to be faithful to the Church, and not leave Her because of legitimate grievances. The SSPX, as a parallel organization, continues to splinter since its formation, just as its cousins started by Luther and Zwingli. And just as Mother Church has dialogued with those descendants, the Society has been dialogued with for multiple decades in the hope of reuniting, rejected not by Her but by the SSPX.
Further, many Catholics struggle with various teachings within the Deposit, but just because they struggle doesn’t mean they abandon her. They found Jesus and strive to understand how He means to use that struggle to grow in Him. The lack of effective communication or understanding is not grounds to walk away from Christ in His fullness, for some sliver of the truth. We simply “may not be able to bear it now.” To choose only the sliver of the truth over the fullness makes one a heretic and schismatic. Instead of seeing vague statements as evidence of possible error, it should be seen as an opportunity to show the truth also present, as it accords with the Deposit. This is what the Church has done for centuries when it answers one question, but not others, leaving vagueness and lack of clarity until a new Council or Papal pronouncement clarifies the next question and so on. The rejection of a Dogmatic Council, on the grounds of vagueness is frankly stupid. The Society yielded the fight over proper interpretation through the Deposit to corrupt “spirit” Bishops. It is not a matter of whether the Council speaks truth, it does. Rather, it is about who utilizes their authority properly afterwards. Even your own book details the nefarious acts of Bishops who intended to subvert the text’s meaning into something else. That’s not a fault of the Council but the Bishops that God entrusted to lead faithfully. Which is what we’ve experienced for 2 millennia.
Finally, to speak of the importance of a personal relationship is a stretch considering that the SSPX chose not to be in relationship with the Church. The grounds to be heard in the Church with good faith is less firm, than if fraternal correction came from the FSSP, who maintained fidelity to the Church when SSPX did not and now will further not.
These last 7 never became Popes. A non Catholic can't become Pope.
Btw, Saint Peter didn't commit heresy in your example. Better get all this right. Vatican II church isn't Catholic and many hundreds of millions of souls could be landing in hell.
Sspx, vat 2 folks have serious serious issues
All of them were Catholic. Just because someone says something incorrect doesn’t inherently make them a heretic, nor does it necessarily mean that those off-hand comments makes their Christ-given authority invalid. What indeed would be the point of Christ giving the parable about the abusive Shepherds who, believing that He was late in coming, begin to beat the servants?
Those Shepherds didn’t lose their authority; they in justice will lose their souls, but until a higher superior removes them from authority, they maintain the office.
St Augustine points out your very error of ascribed personal morality as directly affecting the minister’s Christic authority to effect the Sacraments associated with the minister’s office. Just as Christ said of the Pharisees, who the People were called by Jesus to listen to, but not follow their model. They didn’t lose their authority/office just because they were unfaithful.
If Jesus no longer inheres in the Catholic Church He built, knowing and prophesied about bad Shepherds, you make Him a liar since He said the gates of Hell would not prevail against her. It’s same equivalence argument Luther made 500+ years ago.
She has been in crises before with abusive Shepherds. Jesus will always restore His wayward Church because He will not fail nor forsake her.
If the SSPX were truly serious, they would rejoin Her and fight for Her from within to demand and cultivate true Shepherds. Alas, they will not follow the Saints.
He should have said less about SSPX and establishing a new containment operation and more about repealing Traditio Custodes. Without the repeal, Ecclesia Dei 2.0 offers and solves nothing.
Amen and Fiducia Suplicans
Good heavens... one does not become a Lefebvrist merely by personal preference, but because one is led by the Holy Spirit and the truth—because people still possess faith, true Catholic faith, and adherence to unchanging truths. Given the facts—that Pope Benedict appears to have been the last valid pope, since his resignation, legally, canonically and theologically— is invalid, this entire situation is a disgrace, and history will record it as such. The Kabbalistic masters behind the Synodal Path will never agree to abandon it. Kabbalists (Freemasons) work purposefully according to calculated stages that must be achieved within calculated timeframes. Since the plan entails a return to the Old Testament—to a single God and animal sacrifice—the only remaining obstacle is traditional Catholics and their Tridentine Mass.
Yep the talmudic twerkers are and have been running the show here on planet earth before they murdered the savior of humanity and now these same tribe currently called Zionists or Jews are coming for humanity. Own nothing and be happy, don't like they have gotten their Goy servants to pass Noahide Laws which supersede US law and call for the death penalty for those who don't injest or buy the talmudist goyslop.
Before Muller became a darling of the conservatives, he was highly sympathetic to Liberation Theology, a Marxist deformation of Catholicism. More recently, he has declared on Raymond Arroyos interview that the Church is victim of a hostile takeover, but he denies the SSPX any state of emergency. My answer is this: Muller had years as head of doctrine under Pope Benedict to answer the SSPX. He didn’t. The SSPX has been saying the same things since Lefebvre. Muller is part and parcel of the Church’s silence on the crisis.
He's a modernist and aways was! Many f his theological works are questionable.
he also didn't believe in perpetual virginity of the Most Blessed Virgin.
I didn’t know that! Shocking! So the “conservative” Benedict chose him to defend Doctrine!
It won't take but a Mass or two seeing aunt Wilma ordinary extraordinary communion in the hand Eucharistic 'minister' and faithful wearing shorts and beach flip flops with the tabernacle in the coat closet accompanied by the guitars and drum choir to remember the SSPX offered Tridentine Mass.....
This is laughable. Rome has lost its marbles. Do they really think that the Laity will leave the Society and run into their demonic hands????? Another Eclesiá Dei under this pontificate????? I’m speechless. They truly, truly have lost the faithful in tradition. Come Jesus Come!!
Rome left Tradition in the late 60’s and if Archbishop Lefebvre (and a few others) didn’t step in, the Church would be unrecognizable today. Rome (the Freemasons running the Vatican) has been forced to rethink some steps so as not to reveal their true intentions of destroying the Church. We can’t stop supporting the SSPX now. They are the reason we have any tradition at all! Cardinal Mueller I’m disappointed in your lack of backbone for this stronghold of faith that has the only backbone on record. Pray for the SSPX!
I too am deeply disappointed in Cardinal Mueller, "The Rhine still flows into the Tiber", maybe now a little faster!!
With due respect to dear Cardinal Mueller, he seems to be aloof of the dire situation infiltrating Rome. Are the modernists so completely deceived? It appears that Rome no longer adheres fully to the Profession of Faith put forth by the Society of St. Pius X. Do they honestly believe people will leave the Society and flee to Rome with all the heretical rubbish, vehemence toward truth, and vengeance, that has come from the Vatican over the past 60 years? The synodal church is a church of man, the work of human hands. The SSPX is a remnant of Catholicism. May God continue to bless the Society with an abundance of holy priests and lay faithful during this unjust persecution.
Amen.
I well remember after the 1988 consecrations that an extraordinary General Chapter of the SSPX superiors invited the Vatican to excommunicate them as well since they supported Archbishop Lefebvre's actions. I would not be surprised if they do that again if, as some say, the excommunication only falls on the bishops involved. In 1988, it was left a little vague as to what constituted "formal adherence" to the schismatic act.
I hate to see the whole thing being thrown back to 1988 but it seems to have entered that phase the French call a "dialogue of the deaf".
Rome has abandoned the Faith. Rome has been in schism for a long time now.
Worse than progressives there are only so-called conservatives.
More will leave than return. The cardinal is tone deaf.
how does the vatican argue that they have not been unfaithful to their duty of defending traditional faith? All points in the 28 page credo of SSPX make complete sense and are directly applicable to facts. Gaslighting. The schismatic is the Pope who refuses to support movemenzs that are uncompromisingly proclaiming roman catolic religion and supporting 100.000s of people to live a catholic life. The one thing the Pooe is NOT doing. He neither spraks nor acts like a roman catholic.
The Pope said this:“You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16). In these words, Peter, asked by the Master, together with the other disciples, about his faith in him, expressed the patrimony that the Church, through the apostolic succession, has preserved, deepened and handed on for two thousand years.Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God: the one Saviour, who alone reveals the face of the Father.In him, God, in order to make himself close and accessible to men and women, revealed himself to us in the trusting eyes of a child, in the lively mind of a young person and in the mature features of a man (cf. Gaudium et Spes, 22), finally appearing to his disciples after the resurrection with his glorious body. He thus showed us a model of human holiness that we can all imitate, together with the promise of an eternal destiny that transcends all our limits and abilities.Peter, in his response, understands both of these things: the gift of God and the path to follow in order to allow himself to be changed by that gift. They are two inseparable aspects of salvation entrusted to the Church to be proclaimed for the good of the human race. Indeed, they are entrusted to us, who were chosen by him before we were formed in our mothers’ wombs (cf. Jer 1:5), reborn in the waters of Baptism and, surpassing our limitations and with no merit of our own, brought here and sent forth from here, so that the Gospel might be proclaimed to every creature (cf. Mk 16:15)."Is this Protestant or atheistic for you?Certainly not for me ,I am a profound Catholic who submits to the Vicar of Christ on Earth.Maybe the idea you are bringing forward implying that the Church has erred need some examination because I believe when Christ said that the gates of hell will not prevail against it about his Church.I firmly accept Pastor Aeternus
You have already been conquered by Hell if you think this pretender, promoter of sodomy and all the evils of Hell is the Vicar of Christ.
yes, thankyou Mr Bins for this excerpt. Indeed, the Pope is able to form pretty sentences and these you share above do summarise the story and faith and there is ONE specific catholic element as it refers to the apostolic succession which "has been deepened" and there his Holiness might be.referring to the "Pastor Aeternus". Apart from that however, the text could very well be Protestant. Or not?
Could you share a text where he talks about sin, sanctifying grace, hell and such really precise roman catholic elements that make this particular religion which -until Vat II -proclaimed to be indeed the ONLY Religion and the Only path to God.
On the contrary, the pope has a clear tendency towards embracing all religions and of course he loves using words that we know from popular secular movements, such as "diversity". I could write a whole essay here.
Also about the encyclica he published the title of which I don't recall.fully, but it has to do with the Dignity of Man. There's hardly a mention of our Lord Jesus Christ in there. Indeed, lit's just words that say everything and nothing. Truly I felt dizzy with it.
The catholic life is different to any other path and it is indeed very narrow and of course - as we know (not because the Pope told us) -no catholic life without the CROSS.
Indeed -show me another way which is as uncompromising and intolerable to Modernists as the catholic life.
I learnt about this narrow path, about sanctifying grace, about the importance of understanding the cruelty of SIN and how to work on becoming essentially more and more holy - I learnt all of that from the traditional sector within this church and indeed NONE of it in the modern . I was in the "novos ordo" for fifty years and I was not prompted to understand how to live this religion.
I would prefer the Pope to be less in the public light and to do his actual job which is to be in touch with the bishops and to name cardinals that are suited to pass on the faith.
Instead this Pope loves the limelight, blesses icebergs, defends illegal immigrants more than the unborn and surrounds himself with cardinals like Fernandez AND he is a proclaimed follower and admirwr of Pope Francis AND the "synodal way" which causes confuison and is ambiguous like most of the things tbat come out of this mans mouth.
Have you not boticed any of that? Does it not cause distress for you as a fully catholic man?
It causes great distress for me.
And he can be a sinner -as many pope's were - even a grave sinner - as pope's have been. But he is not a mere sinner, he IS a heretic. He is clearly moving the church towards a changing of dogma through "DIALOG".
He is - I think - quite consciously building a Universal -a Global Church which stands in absolute contradiction to the roman catholic tradition.
So the "Pastor Aeternus" is valid only if the man proclaims the roman catholic religion. Once he diverts from that -which he clearly and ummistankenly is - it does not apply.
I have been through a process with this and I pray for the holy catholic church every day and in this prayer I invcude all angels and demons that walk the halls of the vatican city.
God will not permit His church to be destroyed. But He has allowed it to be captured by men that claim to be catholics but are indeed actually not catholic but modernists,.globalists - building a universal Church -.a "One World Global Church" which fits in well with the "One World Order" that freemasonry has been working strategically towards. Essentially it is the preparation for the coming of the Antichrist.
BUT - God will NOT allow HIS church to be destroyed. Hiw can I lwas a catholic life? Solely through traditional teaching. How can I receive sacraments? Solely through traditional priests. No Novos Ordo can teach me a catholic life.
Gaslighting, indeed! I have been saying that what Rome is doing (and has been since at least the late 1950s) is the very definition of gaslighting. They use “obedience” and “spirit of Vatican II” in an attempt to create a sense of guilt or cause one to question oneself if you even question V2.
First of all, they came to take the SSPX
and I was happy because they were a threat to the new liturgy .
Then they came to take the Diocese Latin masses and I said nothing,
because they were unpleasant to me.
Then they came to take the traditional liturgy ,
and I was relieved, because it was annoying me.
Then they came to take the traditional laity,
and I said nothing because I was not one of them .
One day they came to take me the Ecclesia Deito,(FSSP and Christ the King)
and there was nobody left to protest.
I suspect Cardinal Muller does NOT expect many members of the SSPX will rush back to the Church after the excommunications. Muller was just framing an argument. I give him credit for that.
What do you mean by "rush back to the Church"? Don't you mean the SSPX will not rush to join the counterfeit Synodal Church?
Yes. I do not believe that Cardinal Muller TRULY believes many members of the SSPX will come rushing back to the Synodal Church, post-excommunication. I think Muller was raising the topic of the SSPX using the only tone that wouldn't provoke Pope Leo into shutting down the conversation right away.
Muller is a vindictive man.