There is of course no problem for the Chinese communist party to appoint bishops, afterwards perforce approved by the Vatican but heaven help you if you are a faithful Catholic organisation such as the SSPX. The blatant hypocrisy of Toucho, et al, is breathtaking.
I understand the frustration about the apparent double-standard here. However, the agreement between Rome and China--the full details of which are not public--stipulates that the CCP can propose candidates, but the pope has veto power. In other words, the pope, as head of the college of bishops, still retains control over who does or does not enter the college of bishops. He has the right to establish the process by which bishops are appointed in different places and at different times, as we see in Church history, and he always retains the final say over those appointments.
The fact that the CCP has not always abided by the agreement is not Rome's fault. In at least one case, the pope recognized the CCP-appointed bishop after the fact, thus receiving him into communion and rendering his episcopal activities legitimate (from then on). However, lacking that recognition--at least tacit--from the Holy See, no bishop's activities are licit or part of the canonical mission of the Catholic Church, since jurisdiction and mission flows only through the pope. In another case, the Holy See did not recognize the CCP-appointed bishop and instead continues to recognize the "underground bishop"--therefore in this case it is the underground bishop who is the true Catholic bishop of the diocese (https://catholicvote.org/china-appoints-new-bishops-sede-vacante-defying-vatican-agreement/).
The point is that the pope has the final say, even in the complex China situation, as to who is or is not a legitimate bishop with jurisdiction and mission in the Catholic Church. So it is not true to claim that the CCP gets away with appointing legitimate bishops completely independent of the pope, while the SSPX is forbidden to do so. If the CCP bishop isn't recognized by Rome, he's not a legitimate bishop. So it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Neither group can produce legitimate bishops unless those bishops are recognized by the Holy See, either before or after the fact, in some form or another.
I recommend reading Pius XII's encyclical on this subject, Ad Apostolorum Principis, especially starting at paragraph 36 (https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis.html.) In the encyclical, he writes, "For it has been clearly and expressly laid down in the canons that it pertains to the one Apostolic See to judge whether a person is fit for the dignity and burden of the episcopacy, and that complete freedom in the nomination of bishops is the right of the Roman Pontiff. But if, as happens at times, some persons or groups are permitted to participate in the selection of an episcopal candidate, this is lawful only if the Apostolic See has allowed it in express terms and in each particular case for clearly defined persons or groups, the conditions and circumstances being very plainly determined. Granted this exception, it follows that bishops who have been neither named nor confirmed by the Apostolic See, but who, on the contrary, have been elected and consecrated in defiance of its express orders, enjoy no powers of teaching or of jurisdiction since jurisdiction passes to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff. . .Acts requiring the power of Holy Orders which are performed by ecclesiastics of this kind, though they are valid as long as the consecration conferred on them was valid, are yet gravely illicit, that is, criminal and sacrilegious. To such conduct the warning words of the Divine Teacher fittingly apply: 'He who enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up another way, is a thief and a robber.' The sheep indeed know the true shepherd's voice. 'But a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers.' "
The last thing I'd point out is that the appeal to the Chinese situation to justify the SSPX consecrating bishops is a problematic argument even apart from the important distinctions above. It's tantamount to saying, as Taylor Marshall pointed out, "Because my brother stole a cookie from the cookie jar and got away with it, I'm justified in also stealing a cookie--especially because I'm a better child than he is." This is obviously a bad defense. I think a positive canonical and theological case would have to be made for the legitimacy of the SSPX's proposed act on its own merits (which, at least at this point, doesn't seem possible to me)--not an appeal to the questionable activities of the CCP nor even the alleged double-standard of the Vatican.
That's my understanding of the issues, anyway, but I am prepared to be corrected by someone who knows better.
never make a deal with the devil, which is what a communist government is. does the vatican agreement agree to “look the other way” when churches are bulldozed, crucifixes are destroyed, and the Bible is edited? Did the Vatican agree to be silent as Jimmy Lai is persecuted and likely will die in prison?
Sorry,Rome is accepting Communist bishops and consecrating them. This is impossible as communist cannot receive the sacraments validly. Dont compare the past ,all were believer, tis case a communist is not a believer. Where is your commonsense.
Thank you for this response which if followed as you have described is reassuring . How much easier to have published open and honestly what has been agreed with the CCP rather that refuse to do so. It is clear that to use Taylor Marshall's analogy the SSPX are not trying to steal from the "cookie jar", but one could be forgiven for believing that the CCP are, as one certainly has the impression that the selection is entirely a CCP decision , which Rome then feels obligated to approve once publicised.
“while it would be possible to engage in dialogue about the Council, its texts could not be corrected.” Even though what came out of V. II was seriously corrupted, you can’t change that.
You are not a doctor. Stop creeping on these Catholic websites. No more Podesta-loving, abortion-promoting Democrat comments. Join the Moonies. (See how easy that was?)
The Second Vatican Council did not define new dogma, and its documents contain varying levels of authority. A Catholic may question ambiguities or problematic formulations without denying the legitimacy of Pope Paul VI.
Even if one believes certain conciliar expressions conflict with prior teaching, that does not automatically prove the Pope was not pope. The Church distinguishes between infallible definitions and non-definitive teachings, and between validity of office and prudence of governance.
To conclude that Paul VI must therefore be a “non-pope” moves from theological critique into sedevacantism — a position the Society of Saint Pius X itself explicitly rejects.
Only one heresy needed by sedes. No salvation outside Church unambiguously contradicted by your false popes, and confirmed many times by false popes of a false church aping Holy Mother Church.
Do people want this to stain their souls? Become sedes. We reject it lawfully
Sedevacantism substitutes personal theological judgment for the Church’s visible authority. Once that principle is adopted, institutional reconciliation becomes structurally unlikely—not merely because of temperament, but because the underlying ecclesiology is incompatible with Catholic doctrine.
There is only one way to salvation: the Catholic Church. Although the ship is on fire, Catholics are hanging on to keep the faith, even if it means Martyrdom, whereas the sedevacantists’ position does not intend schism but, by its ecclesiology, objectively places them in a position that mirrors it.
Formal schism requires conscious refusal of legitimate authority.
Material schism can exist when one’s ecclesiology functionally separates them from the Church’s visible structure.
By accepting the false shepherds of the Council, the authority and sanctity of the Church is denied. The Conciliar teachings that false religions are also a means of salvation, denies that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. Francis specifically stated that all religions are path to God. This is directly from the so called "Pope" that you claim to recognize.
The loss of office for public heresy is automatic. There is no theologian that has ever taught that a Pope in his public office could fall into heresy. Heresy is a condition that in itself is incompatible with membership in the Church and entails automatic loss of membership.
John, declaring a pope “false” or an “apostate” is not within the competence of the laity. The Church has juridical structures and theological principles for addressing such matters; private judgment is not one of them.
A Catholic may question interpretations of the Second Vatican Council or raise concerns about ambiguities, but determining whether a pope has forfeited office is far beyond the authority of individual believers.
Fidelity to the Faith does not require adopting sedevacantism. It requires holding fast to the Deposit of Faith while remaining within the visible structure of the Church, even in times of crisis.
The Church in her official documents cannot teach error, neither can she promulgate spiritually harmful discipline. To restrict the protection of the Holy Ghost to the Church's solemn magisterium, as well as the duty of submission by the faithful to the same, was condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus and in Quanta Cura. Vatican II contained serious errors against the Faith and must be rejected.
Dogma? No; important theologies? Yes - the scriptural theology of charisms was dusted off after 1700 years of rupture, 14x in Vatican II. The theology of “experience” also in Dei Verbum, 8.
“Important theologies”? If by that we mean recovering neglected themes, that’s one thing. But invoking charisms or “experience” does not justify doctrinal ambiguity. The Deposit of Faith is not reshaped by theological trends or subjective experience.
The real issue is whether these emphases have clarified Catholic doctrine — or contributed to confusion about it.
Let's say "deliberately ambiguous" rather than "seriously corrupted." The later is a bit too much for the ecclesial bureaucrats to absorb, and actually it more accurately describes those who implemented the mid-century council than the preponderance of the council fathers themselves.
What I find most ironic about this is that they say this about vatican 2, which was not an ecumenical council, but when it comes to things like women's ordination... we can dialogue about it and leave the doors open to changing it. Ridiculous!
Toucho is an incompetent buffoon put in place by the former bishop of Rome also a radical insensitive buffoon who did more to denigrate and destroy the church than any bishop of Rome in history. Any cleric who watches Dr. Taylor Marshall's 1059 podcast with Fr Charles Murr should demand the liturgical changes made by the Masons be cancelled and the TLM to continue. This includes the protege of Francis now Pope. The Novis Ordo is a different orientation and eclipses the paschal mystery rooting the Mass in humanism and elevating the second great commandment, love of neighbor above the first, to love God foremost and with ones all from which flows the second. The infiltration of heretical bishops into the church to work on the changes destroying the church needs to be corrected after the TLM is restored. Excommunications need to ensue against the liberals if they fail to comply. Check out Infiltration by Marshall, Murder in the 33rd Degree by Murr, and The Saint Gallen Mafia by Meloni as well as The Great Facade by Ferrara and Iota Unum by Amerio as well the the YouTube podcasts of Malachi Martin's interviews. Get yourself a good catechism like The Council of Trent or Spirago and learn the faith with doctrinal purity as you read scripture. It will help in discernment of the words flowing from any of the ladies in collars, they lack the cardinal virtue of fortitude which tends to eclipse the theological virtues, and who have yet to discover a dynamic dialectical dialogical invivo faith communion with the Church Triumphant and Suffering in living out life in the paschal mystery in love daily. Its likewise critically important to adhere to our Immaculate Mother's Fatima request as Seat of Wisdom concerning the First Saturdays, daily if not frequent rosaries. We best set the Illuminative Mysteries aside because they are an intrusion confusion by PJ2 through the incorporation of the chaplet of St George Preca. The rosary is Her rosary NOT the intrusion. All that we do in sanctifying grace is best done in light of her request for expiation, reparation, through joyful penance, fasting, abstinence; anything along that line for the indifferences, blasphemes, sacrileges against the Immaculate and Sacred Hearts. Our Blessed Mother is The Shema incarnate, magnifying Yahweh our Elohim with all Her heart, soul, and might as Immaculate Conception and we best live in and through Her Immaculate Heart. She is The unique mystery as participatory Redemptrix from the moment of Her Immaculate conception in living out ALL virtues in a unique unparallel fashion albeit painfully so in so many ways. She as our spiritual Mother in hyperdulia fashion is Mediatrix of grace manifesting the Motherhood of God, daughter of The Father, Mother of The Son, Spouse of the Holy Ghost. Her love for each of us if fully known, being the love of God as Mother would melt every heart in surrender to serving the Lord God, Yahweh Elohim manifest in the Incarnate Word, Jesus Christ, Yeshua HaMashiach.
Kissy Fernandez is not only a rabid heretic, but is also a flaming sodomite. It boggles the mind that the SSPX continues to seek concord with those of the Novus Ordo Antichurch, which is nothing other than a sod bordello for heretics of the new religion of Vatican II.
Behold:
"Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?...Wherefore, go out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing."
St. Paul
2 Cor. 6:14-15, 17
"The prophecies of the Apocalypse show that Satan will imitate the Church of Christ to deceive mankind; he will set up a church of Satan in opposition to the Church of Christ. Antichrist will assume the role of Messias; his prophet will act the part of the Pope, and there will be imitations of the Sacraments of the Church. There will also be lying wonders in imitation of the miracles wrought in the Church."
E. Sylvester Berry, STD
The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise (1927; reprinted 1955)
"Flee the Novus Ordo Antichurch, spawned by the Judas Council of Vatican II and now led by Antipope Leo XIV. Flee it immediately, entirely, and without any apologies whatsoever." This should be the message.
What the Fiducia Supplicans is wrong with Cardinal Fernandez??? He will allow the Chinese Communist Party, CCP, to appoint bishops, but not the SSPX, an organization of Catholics faithful to the traditions of the Church dating back to St. Peter. That tells me all I need to know about Cardinal Fernandez and Pope Leo.
Fr Pagliarani and the SSPX have my continued prayers 🙏🏻 and also Cardinal Fernandez who I think is in much need of prayers. Also for people commenting on this and other posts including myself- may God have mercy on any lack of charity and sins of the tongue we may commit and grant us a humble and contrite heart 🙏🏻
Cardinal Fernández offered a different approach to the question...“a specifically theological path of dialogue, according to a very precise methodology, […]
Translation: My way or the highway.
Time for Pope Leo to step in.
But I don't count on it.
Pray that the charism of his office catches up to the Pope...
Let us pray for the SSPX to commit to maintaining ecclesial unity. Prayers for the Holy Father too, that, out of his paternal mercy, he may grant an audience to Fr. Pagliarini. Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
Let us pray for Rome to recommit to maintaining ecclesial unity and preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, rather than continuing down the path of indifferentism, globalism, and idolatry.
Exactly. What is the "minimal requirement" for unity? If all were true Catholics, there is no minimal of partial anything, it is total unity - you accept ALL that the Church teaches ans has taught since Jesus Christ.
I believe the "minimal requirement," in this case, is something similar, or could be comparable, to what the Eastern Churches do. For example, they omit the Filioque. They have self-governing sui-iuris churches, whilst acknowledging the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.
They acknowledge the Filioque and its theology, but for historical and other reasons, they do not explicitly say it in their Divine Liturgy. Every Eastern Catholic Church does this.
It's implicit then! I believe Rome is wrong for allowing. If your catholic you are obligated to believe all infallible dogmas of the church or you are NOT catholic . That action of the eastern churches is not honest!
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW POPE LEO XIV Can Support C. Fernandez, a Sodomite, the China Deal...letting Communists choose BISHOPS, and yet can not OK a Faithfilled group of Celibate Priests, who Provide for FAITHFUL CATHOLICS THE MASS OF THE AGES??? IT Just doesn't cause Anything but CONFUSION in the CATHOLIC CHURCH! I sincerely PRAY DAILY for POPE LEO XIV To Open His Mind To This Legitimate CATHOLIC NEED For The TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS That has been Honored from near the Beginning!!!🙏📿🙏
Before obeying Vat2, will Fernandez and James Martin obey God? The Holy Bible clearly says such sins call out to Heaven for punishment. These men promote sin and expect Catholics to obey them on man made documents of Vatican 2. Really? Just because they have usurped the office, doesn't oblige us to follow them and offend God.
its their perverted use of power that needs to be confronted and the protege of Francis now Pope needs to step forth and set things right in light of truth we now have. He needs to honor his oath of office in protecting the Deposit of Faith at all costs and restore the TLM freely for use by any cleric wanting to manifest what the church has at its core for centuries. The TLM is not a rite only but the heart and soul expression of the Redeemer to the Father in the Holy Ghost in which we as living The Way, The Truth, The Life go with Him to the cross daily in love for love of Him and one another. The perverted use of power and hi jacking the TLM and traditional rites of the church and Magisterium itself needs to STOP !!
On with the consecrations, the sooner the better. A homosexual, effeminate hierarchy is not to be trusted, they are only concerned about their own self fulfillment. Now is not the time to weaken.
Sissy Rainbow 🌈 Fernandez has loudly proclaimed his ecstatic and flamboyant endorsement of Sodumy Based Matrimony. One of the problems with the eventually needed Annulments from these Novus Ordo Vatican Council 2 Matrimony Sacraments is deciding whether the marriage was consummated and which orifice was utilized by the couple in the marital act. If the couple had no intention of bringing children into the world via their conjugal relationship—the marriage would likely have been invalid.
If the Couple was using contraception in their same sex marriage that too would likely constitute grounds for annulment.
There are so many issues in this new openness of the glorious sodumy based marriages.
If both members of the relationship are mature and committed to the permanent state of matrimony then same sex matrimonial relationships will become the new achievement of pope Leo and Fernandez.
I love the SSPX! It is trying to preserve the deposit of faith and the true liturgy. But its main failing is its acceptance of some of vat2. This makes no sense. A valid council in the Catholic Church has no errors. Also Rome is a big problem. It has apostatized . The SSPX must start being honest and see reality or it will be sucked in and destroyed by Rome.
What does the SSPX rep need to think about? Still trying to wrangle a way to appease your abuser? He TOLD you that suspension of episcopal consecration is required!
Abusers never stop abusing until the vic walks away.
There is of course no problem for the Chinese communist party to appoint bishops, afterwards perforce approved by the Vatican but heaven help you if you are a faithful Catholic organisation such as the SSPX. The blatant hypocrisy of Toucho, et al, is breathtaking.
I understand the frustration about the apparent double-standard here. However, the agreement between Rome and China--the full details of which are not public--stipulates that the CCP can propose candidates, but the pope has veto power. In other words, the pope, as head of the college of bishops, still retains control over who does or does not enter the college of bishops. He has the right to establish the process by which bishops are appointed in different places and at different times, as we see in Church history, and he always retains the final say over those appointments.
The fact that the CCP has not always abided by the agreement is not Rome's fault. In at least one case, the pope recognized the CCP-appointed bishop after the fact, thus receiving him into communion and rendering his episcopal activities legitimate (from then on). However, lacking that recognition--at least tacit--from the Holy See, no bishop's activities are licit or part of the canonical mission of the Catholic Church, since jurisdiction and mission flows only through the pope. In another case, the Holy See did not recognize the CCP-appointed bishop and instead continues to recognize the "underground bishop"--therefore in this case it is the underground bishop who is the true Catholic bishop of the diocese (https://catholicvote.org/china-appoints-new-bishops-sede-vacante-defying-vatican-agreement/).
The point is that the pope has the final say, even in the complex China situation, as to who is or is not a legitimate bishop with jurisdiction and mission in the Catholic Church. So it is not true to claim that the CCP gets away with appointing legitimate bishops completely independent of the pope, while the SSPX is forbidden to do so. If the CCP bishop isn't recognized by Rome, he's not a legitimate bishop. So it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. Neither group can produce legitimate bishops unless those bishops are recognized by the Holy See, either before or after the fact, in some form or another.
I recommend reading Pius XII's encyclical on this subject, Ad Apostolorum Principis, especially starting at paragraph 36 (https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_29061958_ad-apostolorum-principis.html.) In the encyclical, he writes, "For it has been clearly and expressly laid down in the canons that it pertains to the one Apostolic See to judge whether a person is fit for the dignity and burden of the episcopacy, and that complete freedom in the nomination of bishops is the right of the Roman Pontiff. But if, as happens at times, some persons or groups are permitted to participate in the selection of an episcopal candidate, this is lawful only if the Apostolic See has allowed it in express terms and in each particular case for clearly defined persons or groups, the conditions and circumstances being very plainly determined. Granted this exception, it follows that bishops who have been neither named nor confirmed by the Apostolic See, but who, on the contrary, have been elected and consecrated in defiance of its express orders, enjoy no powers of teaching or of jurisdiction since jurisdiction passes to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff. . .Acts requiring the power of Holy Orders which are performed by ecclesiastics of this kind, though they are valid as long as the consecration conferred on them was valid, are yet gravely illicit, that is, criminal and sacrilegious. To such conduct the warning words of the Divine Teacher fittingly apply: 'He who enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up another way, is a thief and a robber.' The sheep indeed know the true shepherd's voice. 'But a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers.' "
The last thing I'd point out is that the appeal to the Chinese situation to justify the SSPX consecrating bishops is a problematic argument even apart from the important distinctions above. It's tantamount to saying, as Taylor Marshall pointed out, "Because my brother stole a cookie from the cookie jar and got away with it, I'm justified in also stealing a cookie--especially because I'm a better child than he is." This is obviously a bad defense. I think a positive canonical and theological case would have to be made for the legitimacy of the SSPX's proposed act on its own merits (which, at least at this point, doesn't seem possible to me)--not an appeal to the questionable activities of the CCP nor even the alleged double-standard of the Vatican.
That's my understanding of the issues, anyway, but I am prepared to be corrected by someone who knows better.
never make a deal with the devil, which is what a communist government is. does the vatican agreement agree to “look the other way” when churches are bulldozed, crucifixes are destroyed, and the Bible is edited? Did the Vatican agree to be silent as Jimmy Lai is persecuted and likely will die in prison?
Sorry,Rome is accepting Communist bishops and consecrating them. This is impossible as communist cannot receive the sacraments validly. Dont compare the past ,all were believer, tis case a communist is not a believer. Where is your commonsense.
Thank you for this response which if followed as you have described is reassuring . How much easier to have published open and honestly what has been agreed with the CCP rather that refuse to do so. It is clear that to use Taylor Marshall's analogy the SSPX are not trying to steal from the "cookie jar", but one could be forgiven for believing that the CCP are, as one certainly has the impression that the selection is entirely a CCP decision , which Rome then feels obligated to approve once publicised.
Lmao cope
“Faithful Catholic Organization?” What they call Tradition is contradiction to Dei Verbum, 8.
As further footnote to my earlier comment:-https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/chinese-bishops-side-with-communist-regime-to-restrict-worship-ban-unregistered-clergy/?utm_source=daily-world-2026-02-14&utm_medium=email
Vatican II isn't Catholic either are those who defend and promote it.
“while it would be possible to engage in dialogue about the Council, its texts could not be corrected.” Even though what came out of V. II was seriously corrupted, you can’t change that.
And Leo sends a pornographer to be his personal representative in "dialoguing!"
That is exactly what I was thinking of as soon as the name of Tucho appreared.
It is almost a calculated despisement and affront.
You are not a doctor. Stop creeping on these Catholic websites. No more Podesta-loving, abortion-promoting Democrat comments. Join the Moonies. (See how easy that was?)
Your juvenilia suggests a PhD in "education" or "media studies." Good choice (for you, no doubt).
This is not true; the Second Vatican Council was pastoral and did not define a new dogma; therefore, its prudential applications are not irreformable.
When pastoral approaches yield confusion, they may be reassessed in continuity with the Deposit of Faith.
This is the Society of Saint Pius X's consistent position: fidelity to traditional doctrine must guide any evaluation of post-conciliar developments.
Vatican II must be accepted by the Faithful if you accept montini as pope.
But,,it contains many condemned doctrines. It cannot be accepted by a Catholic.
Therefore montini must be rejected as a non Catholic and a non pope
The Second Vatican Council did not define new dogma, and its documents contain varying levels of authority. A Catholic may question ambiguities or problematic formulations without denying the legitimacy of Pope Paul VI.
Even if one believes certain conciliar expressions conflict with prior teaching, that does not automatically prove the Pope was not pope. The Church distinguishes between infallible definitions and non-definitive teachings, and between validity of office and prudence of governance.
To conclude that Paul VI must therefore be a “non-pope” moves from theological critique into sedevacantism — a position the Society of Saint Pius X itself explicitly rejects.
Only one heresy needed by sedes. No salvation outside Church unambiguously contradicted by your false popes, and confirmed many times by false popes of a false church aping Holy Mother Church.
Do people want this to stain their souls? Become sedes. We reject it lawfully
The core issue with your stance:
Sedevacantism substitutes personal theological judgment for the Church’s visible authority. Once that principle is adopted, institutional reconciliation becomes structurally unlikely—not merely because of temperament, but because the underlying ecclesiology is incompatible with Catholic doctrine.
There is only one way to salvation: the Catholic Church. Although the ship is on fire, Catholics are hanging on to keep the faith, even if it means Martyrdom, whereas the sedevacantists’ position does not intend schism but, by its ecclesiology, objectively places them in a position that mirrors it.
Formal schism requires conscious refusal of legitimate authority.
Material schism can exist when one’s ecclesiology functionally separates them from the Church’s visible structure.
By accepting the false shepherds of the Council, the authority and sanctity of the Church is denied. The Conciliar teachings that false religions are also a means of salvation, denies that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. Francis specifically stated that all religions are path to God. This is directly from the so called "Pope" that you claim to recognize.
Even if a pope were suspected of error, no layperson — or private cleric — has authority to declare the See vacant.
The Church has no mechanism by which individual Catholics can retroactively nullify a pontificate.
Sedevacantism replaces ecclesial authority with personal theological arbitration, which is doctrine of the devil himself, pride.
These were never popes due to heresy..
A pontificate can be doubtful!
The loss of office for public heresy is automatic. There is no theologian that has ever taught that a Pope in his public office could fall into heresy. Heresy is a condition that in itself is incompatible with membership in the Church and entails automatic loss of membership.
Vatican II was not ambiguous in its heresies, and interpretations by your false popes.
You are not free to not assent (if you sadly accept these apostates,as popes.
Either out of Faith or Obedience
John, declaring a pope “false” or an “apostate” is not within the competence of the laity. The Church has juridical structures and theological principles for addressing such matters; private judgment is not one of them.
A Catholic may question interpretations of the Second Vatican Council or raise concerns about ambiguities, but determining whether a pope has forfeited office is far beyond the authority of individual believers.
Fidelity to the Faith does not require adopting sedevacantism. It requires holding fast to the Deposit of Faith while remaining within the visible structure of the Church, even in times of crisis.
Br. Daniel Mary… they never became Popes.
Please see Cum Ex Apostolus Oficio even laity Must reject a heretic who wins conclave.
In Arian Crisis laity rose to occasion while vast percentage of Bishops failed.
In Vatican II years, same is happening (I don't include fine Sedes Bishops who were never part of this mess, except to fight it). Peace
A catholic may recognize heresy by the pope just by being catholic .Thats commonsense.
Officially no,pratically yes!
The Church in her official documents cannot teach error, neither can she promulgate spiritually harmful discipline. To restrict the protection of the Holy Ghost to the Church's solemn magisterium, as well as the duty of submission by the faithful to the same, was condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus and in Quanta Cura. Vatican II contained serious errors against the Faith and must be rejected.
Dogma? No; important theologies? Yes - the scriptural theology of charisms was dusted off after 1700 years of rupture, 14x in Vatican II. The theology of “experience” also in Dei Verbum, 8.
“Important theologies”? If by that we mean recovering neglected themes, that’s one thing. But invoking charisms or “experience” does not justify doctrinal ambiguity. The Deposit of Faith is not reshaped by theological trends or subjective experience.
The real issue is whether these emphases have clarified Catholic doctrine — or contributed to confusion about it.
Vat2 overall man=centeredness is a BIG problem. In many of its declarations man is first, his rights etc, but God's are ignored.
Since it contains heresies, it cannot come from the Catholic Church and cannot be accepted by Catholics under the risk of a loss of faith.
What contains heresies?
Vatican II and the post Conciliar Magisterium.
Let's say "deliberately ambiguous" rather than "seriously corrupted." The later is a bit too much for the ecclesial bureaucrats to absorb, and actually it more accurately describes those who implemented the mid-century council than the preponderance of the council fathers themselves.
What I find most ironic about this is that they say this about vatican 2, which was not an ecumenical council, but when it comes to things like women's ordination... we can dialogue about it and leave the doors open to changing it. Ridiculous!
Toucho is an incompetent buffoon put in place by the former bishop of Rome also a radical insensitive buffoon who did more to denigrate and destroy the church than any bishop of Rome in history. Any cleric who watches Dr. Taylor Marshall's 1059 podcast with Fr Charles Murr should demand the liturgical changes made by the Masons be cancelled and the TLM to continue. This includes the protege of Francis now Pope. The Novis Ordo is a different orientation and eclipses the paschal mystery rooting the Mass in humanism and elevating the second great commandment, love of neighbor above the first, to love God foremost and with ones all from which flows the second. The infiltration of heretical bishops into the church to work on the changes destroying the church needs to be corrected after the TLM is restored. Excommunications need to ensue against the liberals if they fail to comply. Check out Infiltration by Marshall, Murder in the 33rd Degree by Murr, and The Saint Gallen Mafia by Meloni as well as The Great Facade by Ferrara and Iota Unum by Amerio as well the the YouTube podcasts of Malachi Martin's interviews. Get yourself a good catechism like The Council of Trent or Spirago and learn the faith with doctrinal purity as you read scripture. It will help in discernment of the words flowing from any of the ladies in collars, they lack the cardinal virtue of fortitude which tends to eclipse the theological virtues, and who have yet to discover a dynamic dialectical dialogical invivo faith communion with the Church Triumphant and Suffering in living out life in the paschal mystery in love daily. Its likewise critically important to adhere to our Immaculate Mother's Fatima request as Seat of Wisdom concerning the First Saturdays, daily if not frequent rosaries. We best set the Illuminative Mysteries aside because they are an intrusion confusion by PJ2 through the incorporation of the chaplet of St George Preca. The rosary is Her rosary NOT the intrusion. All that we do in sanctifying grace is best done in light of her request for expiation, reparation, through joyful penance, fasting, abstinence; anything along that line for the indifferences, blasphemes, sacrileges against the Immaculate and Sacred Hearts. Our Blessed Mother is The Shema incarnate, magnifying Yahweh our Elohim with all Her heart, soul, and might as Immaculate Conception and we best live in and through Her Immaculate Heart. She is The unique mystery as participatory Redemptrix from the moment of Her Immaculate conception in living out ALL virtues in a unique unparallel fashion albeit painfully so in so many ways. She as our spiritual Mother in hyperdulia fashion is Mediatrix of grace manifesting the Motherhood of God, daughter of The Father, Mother of The Son, Spouse of the Holy Ghost. Her love for each of us if fully known, being the love of God as Mother would melt every heart in surrender to serving the Lord God, Yahweh Elohim manifest in the Incarnate Word, Jesus Christ, Yeshua HaMashiach.
Kissy Fernandez is not only a rabid heretic, but is also a flaming sodomite. It boggles the mind that the SSPX continues to seek concord with those of the Novus Ordo Antichurch, which is nothing other than a sod bordello for heretics of the new religion of Vatican II.
Behold:
"Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever?...Wherefore, go out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing."
St. Paul
2 Cor. 6:14-15, 17
"The prophecies of the Apocalypse show that Satan will imitate the Church of Christ to deceive mankind; he will set up a church of Satan in opposition to the Church of Christ. Antichrist will assume the role of Messias; his prophet will act the part of the Pope, and there will be imitations of the Sacraments of the Church. There will also be lying wonders in imitation of the miracles wrought in the Church."
E. Sylvester Berry, STD
The Church of Christ: An Apologetic and Dogmatic Treatise (1927; reprinted 1955)
It is not Catholic to seek approval from apostates, even if they occupy Rome. Sspx is an intellectually and spiritual corrupt organization.
They should be telling their flock, Flee the heretics.
But they want bro make deals with them. Insane and diabolical.
"Flee the Novus Ordo Antichurch, spawned by the Judas Council of Vatican II and now led by Antipope Leo XIV. Flee it immediately, entirely, and without any apologies whatsoever." This should be the message.
What the Fiducia Supplicans is wrong with Cardinal Fernandez??? He will allow the Chinese Communist Party, CCP, to appoint bishops, but not the SSPX, an organization of Catholics faithful to the traditions of the Church dating back to St. Peter. That tells me all I need to know about Cardinal Fernandez and Pope Leo.
Fr Pagliarani and the SSPX have my continued prayers 🙏🏻 and also Cardinal Fernandez who I think is in much need of prayers. Also for people commenting on this and other posts including myself- may God have mercy on any lack of charity and sins of the tongue we may commit and grant us a humble and contrite heart 🙏🏻
Cardinal Fernández offered a different approach to the question...“a specifically theological path of dialogue, according to a very precise methodology, […]
Translation: My way or the highway.
Time for Pope Leo to step in.
But I don't count on it.
Pray that the charism of his office catches up to the Pope...
What would Leo do, honestly? He is of the same feather!
Let us pray for the SSPX to commit to maintaining ecclesial unity. Prayers for the Holy Father too, that, out of his paternal mercy, he may grant an audience to Fr. Pagliarini. Nos cum prole pia benedicat Virgo Maria.
See my articles on this issue: https://open.substack.com/pub/liturgicalpensees/p/refuting-a-defence-of-the-sspx?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4seu33
Let us pray for Rome to recommit to maintaining ecclesial unity and preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, rather than continuing down the path of indifferentism, globalism, and idolatry.
Im afraid that in the end the institution of Rome will cease to be the human housing of the true Catholic Church permanently.
This happened decades ago
What do you put in maintaining ecclesial unity ? Those are meaningless words
Exactly. What is the "minimal requirement" for unity? If all were true Catholics, there is no minimal of partial anything, it is total unity - you accept ALL that the Church teaches ans has taught since Jesus Christ.
What empty words from this insufferable sodomite.
I believe the "minimal requirement," in this case, is something similar, or could be comparable, to what the Eastern Churches do. For example, they omit the Filioque. They have self-governing sui-iuris churches, whilst acknowledging the primacy of the Roman Pontiff.
These are the minimal requirements for communion.
Its heresy is you do not acknowledge the Filioque.
They acknowledge the Filioque and its theology, but for historical and other reasons, they do not explicitly say it in their Divine Liturgy. Every Eastern Catholic Church does this.
It's implicit then! I believe Rome is wrong for allowing. If your catholic you are obligated to believe all infallible dogmas of the church or you are NOT catholic . That action of the eastern churches is not honest!
How so? I pray that the unity of Holy Mother Church is not compromised. Same thing.
If you believe in the Filioque ,you proclaim it ,thats simple.
Not necessarily. The case of the eastern churches is far more nuanced than that...
They dont believe in the Filioque,its that simple.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW POPE LEO XIV Can Support C. Fernandez, a Sodomite, the China Deal...letting Communists choose BISHOPS, and yet can not OK a Faithfilled group of Celibate Priests, who Provide for FAITHFUL CATHOLICS THE MASS OF THE AGES??? IT Just doesn't cause Anything but CONFUSION in the CATHOLIC CHURCH! I sincerely PRAY DAILY for POPE LEO XIV To Open His Mind To This Legitimate CATHOLIC NEED For The TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS That has been Honored from near the Beginning!!!🙏📿🙏
Before obeying Vat2, will Fernandez and James Martin obey God? The Holy Bible clearly says such sins call out to Heaven for punishment. These men promote sin and expect Catholics to obey them on man made documents of Vatican 2. Really? Just because they have usurped the office, doesn't oblige us to follow them and offend God.
its their perverted use of power that needs to be confronted and the protege of Francis now Pope needs to step forth and set things right in light of truth we now have. He needs to honor his oath of office in protecting the Deposit of Faith at all costs and restore the TLM freely for use by any cleric wanting to manifest what the church has at its core for centuries. The TLM is not a rite only but the heart and soul expression of the Redeemer to the Father in the Holy Ghost in which we as living The Way, The Truth, The Life go with Him to the cross daily in love for love of Him and one another. The perverted use of power and hi jacking the TLM and traditional rites of the church and Magisterium itself needs to STOP !!
On with the consecrations, the sooner the better. A homosexual, effeminate hierarchy is not to be trusted, they are only concerned about their own self fulfillment. Now is not the time to weaken.
Sissy Rainbow 🌈 Fernandez has loudly proclaimed his ecstatic and flamboyant endorsement of Sodumy Based Matrimony. One of the problems with the eventually needed Annulments from these Novus Ordo Vatican Council 2 Matrimony Sacraments is deciding whether the marriage was consummated and which orifice was utilized by the couple in the marital act. If the couple had no intention of bringing children into the world via their conjugal relationship—the marriage would likely have been invalid.
If the Couple was using contraception in their same sex marriage that too would likely constitute grounds for annulment.
There are so many issues in this new openness of the glorious sodumy based marriages.
If both members of the relationship are mature and committed to the permanent state of matrimony then same sex matrimonial relationships will become the new achievement of pope Leo and Fernandez.
I love the SSPX! It is trying to preserve the deposit of faith and the true liturgy. But its main failing is its acceptance of some of vat2. This makes no sense. A valid council in the Catholic Church has no errors. Also Rome is a big problem. It has apostatized . The SSPX must start being honest and see reality or it will be sucked in and destroyed by Rome.
The Church of today's modernists in short is the CHURCH of because "we said so". We MUST NOT
follow their lead down the road to PERDITION .
What a non sequitur this whole situation is.
What does the SSPX rep need to think about? Still trying to wrangle a way to appease your abuser? He TOLD you that suspension of episcopal consecration is required!
Abusers never stop abusing until the vic walks away.
I love how the DDF is like “y’all just need more Vatican 2 catechesis”. The debate of these issues is going to be hilarious if it happens.
Truly, I am sede and just watch Vatican II Church and Sspx for the stupidity of it all
Shane, 😅😅😅😅😂😂😂😂
Post of the month (except mine)