Skip to main content

Reblog: SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology: Answers to Common Objections - Part 2 of 2

+
JMJ



Based on previous discussions, I am confident that a number of people would present objections to some of the statements that I made in this article.

Here are the ones that I have anticipated and my repsonse.

Part 1

P^3



Some Common Objections

The following objections are ones that I have encountered over a number of years. Attached below are some of my thoughts / responses.

"Modern Catholics don't profess the same faith"

First,  while obscured by a lack of preaching, the de fide teachings of the Church remain unchanged by the Magisterium. So my answer to this objection is: Do you know and explicitly profess all 230+ de fide teachings of the Catholic Church?  Yes, that is correct there are only between 230 and 240 de fide teachings of the Church. If a Traditional Catholic does not explicitly know and profess submission to these truths of the faith, are they still Catholic?  Providing they have not committed the sin of schism, the answer is yes.  Because, as noted above, as long as the person implicitly believes and outwardly confesses this belief in all that the Church proposes as de fide - then they profess the faith of the Catholic Church. The same leeway is provided to "Modern Catholics".

"Modern Catholics profess heresy"

This is a variant of the first objection as it is true that some modern Catholics are material heretics as are some traditional Catholics. However, because they are baptized Catholics the Church does not consider them as outside the Church as it is assumed that they will submit to the Church when corrected. The same assumption is not valid for baptized non-Catholics.

Further on the presumption of the sin of heresy in another person:
... a person is not to be called a heretic as soon as he shall have offended in matters of faith; but he is a heretic who, having disregarded the authority of the Church, maintains impious opinions with pertinacity.

"The Hierarchy is full of Modernists, Masons and Homosexuals"

There are two ways to identify a person as a manifest heretic. The first way is by the person explicitly denying a truth of the faith and separating themselves from the Church (for example joining a protestant sect).  Anything less than a direct denial of a de fide teaching would require a  a judgement to be made on the matter of the heresy.  Only a person or persons in authority can make such a judgement.

This means that again the words of the Catechism of Trent apply:
Hence there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church's pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics,and excommunicated persons.
Infidels are outside the Church because they never belonged to, and never knew the Church, and were never made partakers of any of her Sacraments.
Heretics and schismatics are excluded from the Church, because they have separated from her and belong to her only as deserters belong to the army from which they have deserted. It is not, however, to be denied that they are still subject to the jurisdiction of the Church, inasmuch as they may be called before her tribunals, punished and anathematised.
Finally, excommunicated persons are not members of the Church, because they have been cut off by her sentence from the number of her children and belong not to her communion until they repent. 
But with regard to the rest, however wicked and evil they may be, it is certain that they still belong to the Church: Of this the faithful are frequently to be reminded, in order to be convinced that, were even the lives of her ministers debased by crime, they are still within the Church, and therefore lose nothing of their power.
The last paragraph is most pertinent to this objection for those who would believe that traditional Catholics are the remnant of the Church and that the rest have committed apostasy in the canonical sense.

"The Conciliar Church does not have the Four Marks"

If by 'Conciliar Church" a person means that the Church united to the Pope (Francis in case there is any confusion on that point), is no longer the Church then there are serious issues.

They need to reconcile their thesis with the:
  1. Indefectibility of the Church.
  2. Teaching of the First Vatican Council concerning the role of the Vicar of Christ in establishing and maintaining the Unity of the Church.
  3. Church teachings concerning the Marks, Indefectibility and Visibility as described above.
Lastly, they need to answer this question: Where is the Church of Christ? Certainly not with any of the Sedevacantist 'Popes' (13+).

"There is no Pope because he's a heretic"

This one phrase sums up a portion of people that have been scandalized by the events in the Church since the Second Vatican Council.

There is a large spectrum of belief amongst the sedevacantists, however ultimately they come down to the thesis stated above. They believe that the Pope was a heretic either before or after he was elected.

Taking the first instance, of pre-election heresy.  The recognition of the man elected by the College of Cardinals as Pope by the Bishops in union with Rome establishes an infallible dogmatic fact that he is Pope.  ( http://tradicat.blogspot.ca/2013/05/everything-you-wanted-to-know.html )

This soundly eliminates the objections put forth of a defect in the election of a Pope due to this cause.

Taking the second instance of post-election heresy.  The first item to establish is that there is no one on earth person or institution who can render a valid judgement on a reigning Pope.

This leads to the conclusion that in order for the sedevacantist to invoke the theory of St. Robert Bellarmine, they need to demonstrate that the Pope has explicitly denied a de-fide dogma of the Church.

One caveat-emptor for would-be judges of the occupant of the Holy See, there a number of phrases that circulate in speculative theology, as well as in regular terms that may sound heretical, but are not.

Translation: Don't jump to conclusions, there is a risk that in addition to jumping to the wrong conclusion that the jumper may be jumping out of the Church at the same time as a schismatic.

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...