Oh, this is great 😂

😀

Lolol FACTS

Facts! The SSPX were unjustly treated by the Church!

Move if you can. They have transformed my life.

I recently reverted back to the Catholic Church having been away for over 20 years. There is a SSPX church close about 30 mins away from my house and I have been attending faithfully for the last 2 months. Having never experienced the Latin Mass growing up it was a bit awkward at first, not knowing anything about the Liturgy, chants, etc. However, I can never see myself going back having now experienced the Latin Mass. So reverent, beautiful, holy, and sacred. My faith is stronger than it's ever been. Glory to God and Praise be to Jesus Christ!

@@AV1776 same goes for me! I wish I lived closer but it’s worth the drive!

@@proulx1q Can you explain in what ways?

We live over an hour away, but is well worth the drive.

I guess obeying the tradition of the one true church instead of the liberal modernist magisterium is schism 😂

Yes, it's called a REAL Catholic Formation.

That is true charity

TRUEST words. ✌🌹✌🌹✌🌹✌🌹

Modernist are

For what it's worth, Cardinal Luis F. Ladaria, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, recently granted an interview to the Spanish magazine Ecclesia. The following is a rough translation of a section of it in which he says explicitly the SSPX is not separated from the Catholic Church: "We have only doctrinal competence, we no longer have liturgical competence and we no longer have the competence of religious life or associations. We must ask the Lord to enlighten us all because dialogue is a bit stagnant, there has been no progress for a long time. For this reason we must ask the Lord to help us, because unity is a gift that comes from God, it does not depend on us and that with this help we can overcome these difficulties. It is something that depends on Our Lord and we must ask that He open the way for us to achieve fuller unity, because it is not that [the SSPX] are separated from the Catholic Church, but the union is not perfect at this time." www.iltimone.org/news-timone/card-ladaria-dialogo-lefevbriani-stallo-non-separati-dalla-chiesa/ And there are certainly no censures or penalties applied to faithful who assist at SSPX Masses, such that you could be put outside of the Catholic Church by going to an SSPX Mass.

@@SSPX Thank you for your response. It was most helpful. I have subscribed to your channel and am watching your videos every day. I take my role as head of my family very seriously and want to do the right thing here.

This is incredibly well put.

I truly hope so. We need every good and faithful priest there is.

Are they disbanding the FSSP?

@@paulawarnes9951 maybe after the latest instruction from the CDW

Unite the clans!

No. The head of the FSSP, was at are Church recently and he had the physical letter from Pope Francis that the FSSP are safe.

@@blackwood3243safe from ?

Dear Ed, We do receive authorization for confession and marriage, the only two sacraments that require jurisdiction for validity. For the other sacraments, we have a right to confer the traditional sacraments because of the crisis of the Church and the need of the faithful to receive sacraments in the traditional rite. [It would be hard to explain this to someone (like a priest who sees no problem saying the New Mass) who does not realize how grave the crisis is, and why going to the New Mass and receiving the sacraments in the new forms is a problem. - Fr. Franks] People portray us as angry but those who get to know us realize that is not the case! In the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Fr. Paul Robinson

@@SSPX Fr Robinson, Thanks so much for the response. I know that anyone telling the truth these days gets the wrap up smear campaign and can only attribute the response from the NO priest as one of parroting “the company line”. It’s too bad because I get along with that priest. JMJ, Ed

The SSPX position is that there is a state of emergency in the Church, therefore disobedience to some commands at this time may be prudent. Honestly, after Francis' motu proprio one would think that every FSSP,, and ICKSP priest would agree with the state of emergency, but apparently there are still a few unconvinced... I hope as you do that the traditional orders will find some common ground and stand together

@@David-nl8pw As has been evinced by one event upon another since 1989 the SSPX has been repeatedly vindicated. Obviously, the were more right in 1988 than anyone, perhaps even they, imagined at time.

I attend FSSP sometimes but consider myself SSPX. Unfortunately there is some bad blood between the two since the former split from the latter.

@@jackieforestieri3010 one of them accepts the errors found in Vatican II so there’s a bit more than bad blood.

There is Holy Mass celebrated somewhere in Jakarta by Priests from Society of Saint Pius X. If you would like to know, you may contact me personally. Pax 🕊

Hmmmm I understand your feelings, but “we” need to stay the course and not get involved with that individual. He will not prevail without any assistance from “us” Faithful. ✝️

Why?

They are chickens it seems. Mine did too!

He is apparently funded by some laypeople who are very much against the SSPX. Louie Verecchio has written about it on his blog. He knows who these people are.

Of course we are bound to obedience to the Pope. But not when he commands things against the faith. The quote is clearly not wanting to anticipate situations in which you are commanded to do something against the faith. We do not deny that the Pope has authority to command not only in areas of faith and morals, but also in discipline and government. But again, we are not bound to obey we are commanded to do something against the faith, whether that be in an act of discipline (“say the New Mass”) or government (“shut down the SSPX”) or faith (“Believe in religious liberty”). This reminds me of Feeneyites quoting this from Pope Eugene IV: "The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and teaches, that none of those who are not within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but Jews, heretics and schismatics, can ever be partakers of eternal life, but are to go into the eternal fire 'prepared for the devil, and his angels' (Mt. 25:41)., unless before the close of their lives they shall have entered into that Church; also that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is such that the Church's sacraments avail only those abiding in that Church, and that fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of piety which play their part in the Christian combat are in her alone productive of eternal rewards; moreover, that no one, no matter what alms he may have given, not even if he were to shed his blood for Christ's sake, can be saved unless he abide in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church." (Mansi, Concilia, xxxi, 1739; Pope Eugene IV, in the bull, Cantate Domino, 1441). The Pope does not want to speak of exceptional situations, where baptism of blood or desire are engaged. So too, in Pastor Aeternus, Vatican I is not wanting to consider exceptional situations, where the Pope is commanding something against God. In the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, Fr. Paul Robinson

@@SSPX You're just mixing everything up. Faith is about faith, discipline is discipline, and government of the church is about government. How can an act of discipline or government be related to faith ? Decisions about government and discipline are not infallible, nevertheless clerics ought to obey the pope in discipline and government as well. What you are saying basically is this: "The pope commands me to clean the stairs, but I won't obey him because cleaning the stairs is against my faith" How is it that saying the Novus Ordo is against the faith ? It is true that there has been many abuses in the new mass especially in the western world, but this is not representative of how the new mass was intended to be, read " _Sacrosanctum Concilium_ " - the new mass was originally intended to be a vernacular TLM. How is shutting down the SSPX against the faith ? The pope has the keys to bind and to loose, if he wants to shut down your irregular institution (which I think one pope will have to do at some point), then why would you say it goes against faith ? If the pope had the power to authorize the SSPX in the first place, he also has the power to revoke it. Give grace to God that is was made possible (Eph 5:20), because surely the society played an important role in alerting the faithful to the importance of tradition, which unwillingly helped to generate a new generation of glad trads, which now join the FSSP, ICKSP, or the Institute of the Good Shepherd, accepting the council of Vatican II, and thus making the distinction conciliar vs traditionalist completely obsolete and outdated. If by religious liberty you mean the attitude that the state has towards the exercise of religious beliefs in a said country, then it is not an article of faith, this is more of a pastoral approach. But if by religious liberty you mean the decision of an individual to cooperate freely with grace without incurring external obligation or penalty, then it is an article of Faith defined by Vatican II, and it has deep roots within the tradition of the Church. (go read Summa IIa IIae Q10 a8 C & a12 C) The human person, by it's very nature created by God, has a right to free religious belief, but this right has to be exercised within limits; individuals are obliged to search honestly and to hold to the truth once they find it. I believe the Vatican I fathers were very smart, when they distinguished faith and moral (which talk directly about salvation) apart from discipline and government, precisely because the first class is the only matter of infallibility, as they studied history of papal decrees they found out that some popes were using their apostolic authority in a very confusing way to bind all people to a sort of moral obedience regardless the matter.

​@@Iesu-Christi-Servus RE: the Novus Ordo being against the Faith - it is not, as you suggest, "just" the TLM in vernacular. We would suggest going through a few episodes we did on this topic, starting here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/nNqqmbWamrq-oo0.html Without going into a back and forth on each of these arguments, we can sum up our disagreement broadly in this way - practically everything, including disciplinary laws, pastoral approaches, etc. are related to Faith in some way. Suggestion: consider making an appointment with one of our priests to discuss your concerns more specifically - we're not dismissing them, but a long back-and-forth in the comment section on KZfaq is probably not the best avenue to resolve them. God bless you and keep you!

It is on the books for automatic excommunication, see canon law 2335

Right, that was strange. How can the doctrine change on this?

You can find confirmation of that here: www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/catholics-and-freemasonry.html Of course, it is still sinful to do so. There is just no longer the penalty of excommunication attached to it. -Fr. Robinson

@@SSPX thank you Father. And shocking that discipline is so lax on this very serious issue.

The universal language of the Catholic church is Latin.

The following is From Fr. Gaudron's Book "The Catechism of the Crisis in the Church" 71) Is it necessary to celebrate Mass in Latin? Just as it is fitting to change out of one’s work-clothes for an important ceremony, it is likewise most fitting that the language of sacred liturgy be different from that of everyday life. The vernacular is not apt for the sacred action. In the West, Latin has been the liturgical language for centuries. But in other parts of the Church, and even in numerous non-Christian religions, there is also a sacred language. Do non-Catholics also use a sacred language? The establishment of a fixed liturgical language while the common language evolves seems to be a constant of mankind. The schismatic Greeks employ ancient Greek in their liturgy; the Russians use Slavonic. At the time of Christ, the Jews already utilized ancient Hebrew for the liturgy, which was no longer the common language (and neither Jesus nor the Apostles criticized this). The same thing is found in Islam (literary Arabic, the language of prayer, is no longer understood by the multitudes) and some Oriental religions. The Roman pagans also had archaic formulations in their worship that had become incomprehensible. How can this universal custom of the use of a sacred language for divine worship be explained? Man naturally has a sense of the sacred. He understands instinctively that divine worship does not depend on him, that he must respect it and transmit it as he has received it, without allowing anything to disrupt it. The use of a fixed, sacred language in religion is in conformity with human psychology as well as the immutable nature of divine realities.

72) Don’t the faithful understand the Mass better when it is celebrated in their own language? The Mass works ineffable mysteries that no man can perfectly understand. This mysterious character finds its expression in the use of a mysterious language that is not immediately understood by all. (It is for this reason that some parts of the Mass are recited in a low voice.) The vernacular language, on the contrary, gives the superficial impression of a comprehension which in reality does not exist. People think they understand the Mass because it is celebrated in their mother tongue. In fact, they generally understand nothing of the essence of the holy sacrifice. Is the function of Latin, then, to place a barrier between the faithful and the holy mysteries? The purpose is not to build an opaque wall that would conceal everything, but, rather, to better appreciate the perspectives; for that, a certain distance is necessary. In order to penetrate a little into the mystery of the Mass, the first condition is to humbly acknowledge that it involves a mystery, something that goes beyond us. l If the mysterious character of Latin is so beneficial, should the faithful be dissuaded from learning it, and those who do understand it be pitied? The use of Latin in the liturgy keeps up the sense of mystery even for those who know this language. The mere fact that it involves a special language, distinct from one’s maternal tongue and common speech (a language which, of itself, is not immediately understood by all even if in fact it is understood), is enough to create a certain distance that fosters respect. The study of Christian Latin should be heartily encouraged. The effort it requires helps to lift up its students towards the mystery, whereas the liturgy in the vernacular tends to bring it down to the human level. Doesn’t the use of Latin risk leaving some of the faithful in ignorance of the sacred liturgy? The Council of Trent imposed upon priests the duty to preach often about the Mass and to explain its rites to the faithful. In addition, the faithful have missals in which the Latin prayers are translated, so they can have access to the beautiful prayers of the liturgy without the advantages of Latin being lost. Experience also proves that in Latin countries, the understanding of liturgical Latin (if not in all its details, then at least globally) is relatively easy for anyone who is interested. The demand it makes on their attention fosters the faithful’s genuine participation in the liturgy: that of the mind and will; whereas the vernacular language, to the contrary, is likely to encourage laziness. Doesn’t the use of a sacred language in the liturgy introduce an arbitrary break between everyday life (“profane”) and the spiritual life, while the role of Christians should be, on the contrary, to consecrate everything to God (even one’s everyday language)? In order to keep the spirit of prayer in all our activities, we must sometimes break away from these activities to devote ourselves to prayer. The same applies here: sometimes using a sacred language in order to realize more deeply the transcendence of God will be an aid, and not an impediment, to continual prayer.

73) What other reasons militate in favor of using Latin in the liturgy? Three more reasons militate in favor of using Latin: 1) its immutability (or, at least, its very great stability); 2) its almost bimillennial use in the liturgy; and 3) the fact that it symbolizes and fosters Church unity. In what way is the immutability of Latin an advantage? An immutable faith requires a proportionate linguistic instrument; namely, a language that is as immutable as possible and which can serve as a reference. Latin, which is no longer a modern language, no longer (or rarely) changes. In a modern language, on the contrary, words can rapidly undergo significant changes of meaning or tone (they can acquire a pejorative or derisive connotation which they formerly lacked). The usage of such a language can thus easily lead to errors or ambiguities, while the use of Latin preserves both the dignity and orthodoxy of the liturgy. In what way is the nearly bimillennial use of the Latin language in the liturgy an advantage? Used in the liturgy for nearly two thousand years, the Latin language has been, as it were, hallowed. It is a comfort to be able to pray with the same words that our ancestors and all the priests and monks have prayed for centuries. We feel concretely the continuity of the Church through time, and we unite our prayer with theirs. Time and eternity converge. How does Latin symbolize the unity of the Church? Latin not only manifests the Church’s unity in time, but also in space. Favoring union with Rome (its usage kept Poland from the Slavic schism), it also unites all Christian nations with one another. Before the Council, the Roman-Rite Mass was celebrated everywhere in the same language. On five continents, the faithful would find the Mass as celebrated in their own parish. Today, this image of unity has been shattered. There is no longer any unity in the liturgy, neither in language nor in rites. This is true to such an extent that someone attending a Mass celebrated in an unfamiliar language has a hard time even distinguishing the principle parts of the Mass. How might one sum up the utility of Latin? Our Church is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. The Latin language in its way contributes to each of these characteristics.53 By its native genius (an imperial language), its hieratic character (a “dead” language), and, especially, the consecration it received, together with Hebrew and Greek, on the titulum of the Cross, it perfectly serves the holiness of the liturgy; by its universal, supranational usage (it is no longer the language of any one people), it manifests catholicity; by its living link with the Rome of St. Peter and with so many of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church who were both the echo of the Apostles and the artisans of liturgical Latin (they forged not only its prayers, hymns, and responses, but Christian Latin itself, which is, in many aspects, a complete renewal of classical Latin), it is the guarantee of its apostolicity; by its official usage, lastly, which makes it the language of reference for the magisterium, canon law, and liturgy, it contributes efficaciously to the Church’s triple unity: unity of faith, unity of government, and unity of worship. Source: angeluspress.org/products/catechism-crisis

@@jesusaguirre3974 No it isn't. The eastern rites of the church celebrate the liturgy in the vernacular. Trent NEVER mandates as dogma that the mass be in Latin. Even before Trent there were some masses that were in the vernacular. And the liturgy used to be in Greek before it died out in the west and was replaced by Latin. Are you telling me that the eastern rites must say the mass in Latin?

The question is somewhat complicated. Canon 2335 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law said that the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae, reserved to the Holy See, was applied to any Catholic who joined the Freemasons. The New Code calls for the imposition of a just penalty for those who join a society which plots against the Church and an interdict for those who lead or promote such societies. The Freemasons are not mentioned explicitly. Since it is a "secret society" whose membership is not published, it would be hard to actually impose those penalties. The New Code, at least, does not explicitly consider membership in the Freemasons to carry a latae sententiae excommunication. To go into more detail would require a separate study.

Thank you for the reply. This is a very well done podcast series. On the surface it sounds like a free pass to the very people who are destroying our faith. Even though it’s a secret society it’s not that hard to identify people in it based on their behaviors. If it looks like a duck walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a duck! Just look at Pope Francis and Nancy Pelosi at the Vatican recently and how he should have publicly admonished her for her stance on abortion. He didn’t say a word…

Wrong. Schism would require a parallel hierarchy. You should change your handle to HoniriusLover, because during the Arian Crisis you would've rejected the proposition of the Nicene Creed.

Material schism.