Skip to main content

CMTV: Shots at the SSPX in A Mad, Rad, Trad Problem ... and From Sacrifice to Meal

 +
JMJ

 So, CMTV hasn't posted anything of note about the SSPX of late. 

They were all over any scandal for a while, but as I suspected, if nothing real turned up they would move on to someone else.

Lately, it's been an FSSP priest who has been accused of various sins.  

Anyway, a couple of articles popped up in my regular search:

  • A Mad, Rad, Trad Problem: In short - they lie, defame and smear.
  • From Sacrifice to Meal: Changing emphasis changes purpose.

Of course, if they are talking about Trads, they are going to put in some jabs about the SSPX.  

First, I find the accusation that Trads 'lie, defame and smear' a little odd.  It brings to mind the old adage of when you point your finger at someone remember that there are 3 fingers pointed back at you.  

CMTV had fallen off my radar for years until they started talking about people that I knew in St. Mary's

So, for the fun of it, here's what was said about the SSPX in their Mad podcast:


The point of all this is to say that the mad, rad, trads are off the hook — promoting schism and attacking other Catholics who don't share their insanity.

Tradical: Well, it depends to which Trads they are referring. Here is the key problem that CMTV seems to have with Trads - making the proper distinctions and actually reading what they say.

This crowd has come to support the schismatic movement of excommunicated archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. For the record, three popes in a row — John Paul, Benedict and Francis — have officially declared the SSPX movement schismatic. But the mad, rad, trad crowd, while claiming loyalty and fidelity to the Church, gives the finger to those declarations. It has officially condemned the Novus Ordo Mass as "evil" and actually "re-ordained" priests who joined the movement after being ordained in the New Rite.

Tradical: Hmmm, interesting.  

First the declaration of excommunication has been declared null and void by Rome.  Second, excommunication is within the authority of the Church Militant (not CMTV, the Catholic Church on Earth), once you die, those censure are terminated.  Third, in danger of death any validly ordained priest can provide absolution.  

As far as the SSPX 'movement' being declared schismatic, this thought casts aside a whole lot of contradicting material. Not the least of which is the CDF stating that the state of the SSPX is 'not in full communion'.  Now, I know that some people have stated that this is code for schismatic, but objectively that is their opinion.


 As far as saying that the Novus Ordo is evil, that is taking things out of context and supporting their confirmation bias.  The Novus Ordo Missae - meaning the rite surrounding the sacrifice, is deficient at what it is supposed to do - express the Doctrines of the Faith.

The correct definition of evil—lack of a due good—clearly shows that the New Mass is evil in and of itself regardless of the circumstances. It is not evil by positive profession of heresy. It is evil by lacking what Catholic dogma should profess: the True Sacrifice, the Real Presence, the ministerial priesthood. This deficiency had already been denounced by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci months before the New Mass was promulgated (Source: SSPX Is the New Mass Legit [link])

So it is important to understand how the SSPX uses the word 'evil' as opposed to CMTV et al.

As far as re-ordaining priests.  This is skewed,  it is true that the SSPX has in some cases conditionally ordained a priest ordained in the new rite. However there are cases where they have not.  It depends on whether there is any doubt as to the Form, Matter or Intention of the ordaining bishop.  I wonder if CMTV believes that every bishop from 1965 onwards always made use of the correct form to manifest the correct intention.

The SSPX has its own hierarchy and its own annulment courts. In short, it has established itself as its own church. But hey, they say the Latin Mass, so ignore all of that.

Tradical: Well, here we go.  No the SSPX doesn't have a hierarchy in the meaning of a Pope, and bishops to which is given jurisdiction. That would be a schismatic act.  As far as annulment courts - yep they have setup a tribunal and this is both a sensitive and complicated topic. So here's what the SSPX's explanation (link source article).

The SSPX and annulments

Connected with the Church's mission to care for the salvation of souls, is the matter of annulments. Unfortunately there are many misconceptions connected with an annulment—for example, an annulment is not the "Catholic form of divorce" but rather the declaration of an ecclesiastical tribunal that a marriage never took place.

Because of the state of necessity caused by the post-conciliar crisis, the Society of St. Pius X has been required for the good of souls to establish its own annulment tribunals. This has led to some concerns and these frequent questions:

  • Has the SSPX been granting annulments?
  • Isn't this a schismatic act?
  • Are all annulments granted by the diocesan tribunals invalid?

To provide some clarification about the important topic of annulments, we offer the following texts:

 
So, I don't ignore it, I try to understand it. I know Traditional SSPX Catholics who have obtained annulments from Diocesans Tribunals, and I am certain that there are some that have received them from SSPX Tribunals. 

The entire movement within the Church — brought about in reaction to the evil of the hierarchy for the past half-century — is little else than Protestantism speaking Latin.

Tradical: Wow - that's quite the judgement and it runs counter to what Pope Benedict XVI wrote about the legitimate desires of wishes of Traditional Catholics.

Sadly, well-known Catholic media sites and Catholic YouTube personalities are signing on to this agenda, directly or subtly suggesting Vatican II wasn't legitimate, Francis is a heretic and the Novus Ordo Mass isn't valid.

Tradical: Well here we go mixing in a bunch of people and calling them the same. This is a garbage generalized statement.  None of these accurately reflect the official position of the SSPX.
 

But they conveniently leave disobedience out of their messaging, as well as denying the validity of sacraments not performed by their clergy. 

Tradical: Oh, no the SSPX understands obedience only too well. 

Their leader is excommunicated. Their current leaders cover up sex abuse on an international level. Their followers lie so intensely, they need to be sued and made to pay damages to be forced to tell the truth.

Tradical: Who? Are they talking about the SSPX or some other groups - like the resistance?  Who is excommunicated?  I mean, ++Lefebvre is dead so he can't possibly still be the leader of the SSPX right?

+++

 Next articles - Sacrifice to Meal

 

With the exception of breakaway schismatic groups like the SSPX, which actually labels the New Mass "evil," no reasonable minds in the Catholic world spout that idiocy. However, that does not mean that just because it's valid, everything is OK and there are no problems with it. This is where things start to get somewhat into the weeds, because huge numbers of Catholics have a poor understanding of liturgy, both in its purpose and effect. However, for those who do grasp this extremely important point about the importance of liturgy, there is a massive battle raging.

Tradical:  This has already been addressed above - so much for the label of idiocy.

+++

 

Concluding thoughts

Nothing really new here, the speaker (I didn't listen to the podcasts - just read the trasncripts) spouts some more nonsense that will be lapped up by their own adherents.  That really doesn't matter because to become and stay a Traditional Catholic requires at least a modicum of critical thinking.

P^3

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is Tradition?

 + JMJ What Is Tradition? The basic premise, from my perspective, is that what was taught before cannot be contradicted by the 'present' magisterium, only deepened and expanded upon. I recall the Roman theologians called the SSPX protestants while the SSPX called them modernists.  I believe this was all surrounding the concept of Traditon. SSPX's Understanding of Tradition One accusation made against the SSPX is that they don't have a correct understanding of 'Tradition'.  This is how the SSPX understands Tradition: I finally profess that Tradition is not a dead memory, but the living transmission of the doctrine received from the Apostles. It remains living, in distinction to Revelation, which is closed. It is so both in the activity of the Magisterium of the Teaching Church and in the profession of Faith of the Church Taught, of which the sentire cum Ecclesia is the result of the teaching of the Magisterium. Tradition may be called ‘living’, not in the sense t...

SSPX.ca: What is the position of the SSPX on Vatican II???

 + JMJ With all the mis-information about the SSPX rejecting the Second Vatican Council, I thought it would be useful to publish an article that focuses on the real issues that the SSPX has identified. Update: Why Did the SSPX Consecrate Bishops? ( Neither Schismatic, Nor Disobedient link ) In the linked document the SSPX outlined the key motivation and core issues with Vatican II and the post-conciliar magisterium (see above link for full document): 4. The Society Acted Precisely Because of the State of Necessity in Which the Faith Finds Itself  In the present situation of the Church, if the Society of Saint Pius X had not carried out the consecrations of July 1st, it would have found itself facing an inevitable alternative: either to disappear gradually, or to accept, at least in fact, the new liturgy as well as the false doctrines of Vatican II and the post-council. Without the consecrations of July 1st, the Fraternity would have found itself, in a few years, without bishop...

Thoughts on: Finding Common Ground Between Rome and the SSPX

 + JMJ In the ramp up to the consecrations the noise floor in the intergnat grew to a constant din.  This was one of the few the peeped its signal over the noise. https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/finding-common-ground-between-rome-and-the-sspx The key issue is contained in this paragraph: In the lead-up to the planned July 1, 2026, episcopal consecrations,  the SSPX rejected Rome’s offer  of doctrinal dialogue on the grounds that “we both know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council.” Fr. Pagliarani also said that his previous attempt at dialogue in 2019 was shut down by Rome because of an assumed irreconcilability. It seems that, from the Society’s perspective, and perhaps from Rome’s too, their positions are incompatible. If memory serves, Rome killed any opportunity for an open discussion by stating that Vatican II was not up for debate. So it was a still-birth and ...

The News is an Addiction ...

 + JMJ People seem to be mesmerised by train wrecks.   They just can't turn away as the disaster creeps forward along train tracks towards the crossing where a car, truck, bus, trailer awaits its destruction. Trads have been watching the train wreck that is this crisis of the Catholic Church for decades. The trade war between the Canada and the US has reminded me that the news is addictive.   The first time I was addicted what from 2009 to  2014 when I was closely following the Rome / SSPX discussions.  I was at work watching a live-stream as Bishop Fellay disappeared into the Vatican. The lead-up to this moment had been intense as the 'resistance' got freaked out and the cultural cracks between doctrine and conspiracy theory widened. In the decade since then other things have emerged, wars, rumours of wars, conspiracies, celebrity Catholics etc. Now we have a new addiction and its name is Trump. Lately, no matter how much I try, I find myself wonderin...

Thoughts on the Thoughts of a former SSPX priest

 + JMJ Well Gary Campbell, former SSPX Priest and now laicised has posted a new article on WherePeterIs. https://wherepeteris.com/thoughts-of-a-former-sspx-priest-on-the-july-1-consecrations/ These words stuck out: Heck, they have built a five-star hotel, wine bar, and Walmart on the opposite bank of the Rubicon! They are not in danger of entering a state of schism, for they are  already  in a state of schism. I believe he doth protest too much. All the actual facts indicate that the SSPX was not in a state of schism before July 1st and an examination of the decree of excommunication highlights the either ineptitude of those in charge or a desire to leave the barn door open. The chasm between an act of disobedience and act of schism remains just what is has always been - an inconvenient barrier that person(s) in Rome seek to bridge but appear incapable of succeeding. The SSPX re-stated that they recognize the Pope as the Vicar of Christ and feel obliged by conscience...