A question or two. A latae sententiae excommunication is not decreed by person even if a heretic but occurs by the act itself, correct? Second, I suppose one may argue that since the 1983 Code of Canon Law was formed by heretics that this is indirectly an excommunication by heretics? Third, however, didn't the 1917 Code also have a latae sententiae excommunication for the same act and therefore if still in effect (since the 1983 code applied only to the Conciliar church) wouldn't that excommunication be in effect and not based at all on heretics? Fourth, in the absence of a pope wouldn't other justifications in Canon Law allow episcopal consecrations anyway? Finally, do you understand why Abp. Lefebvre despite saying the hierarchy had succumbed to modernist heresy would not extend his argument to formal sedevanctism?
In recognising Leo as their Holy Roman Pontiff the SSPX is involving itself in all kinds of absurdity.. They are rightfully declared to be in schism from their pope and his church but implicit in that schism is the heresy of the rejection of the doctrine of the Church’s indefectablity. The reason for their schismatic act is the heretical teachings of the conciliar synodal church and yet they refuse (even against the pleading of St Paul) to anathematise them and have no part of them.
The very least they and the RnR in general could be accussd of is material herrsy but the more knowledgeable among the bishops and priests of the society would be hard to escape the charge of formal heresy. But
For dpme unknown reason my comment is appearing multiple times and I dont have the means here to delete them. If you can delete those duplicates Sean feel free to do so.
Thanks for sharing this. When you have him on video tape proposing the same argument it knocks down one more obstacle to Priests actually reading your work because they don't trust sedevacantists.
In 1988, Pope St.John Paul II clearly commanded Mgr. Lefebvre not to consecrate those bishops. But he intentionally disobeyed the pope in the matter. Pope JPII said at the time that it was “a schismatic act”. And it clearly was. It was wrong then. And it is wrong now. Period.
You mean the notorious heretic who professed universal salvation, received the mark associated with several demons on his forehead, several times received a "blessing" by animists, kissed the Koran (a book which rejects the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, the Divinity of Jesus, the Crucifixion etc.), participated in abominable inter-religious prayers in Assisi with representatives of all kinds of false religions, including those who invoked demons, also permitting a pagan statue to be placed on the tabernacle, and many times confirmed non-Catholics in their errors and praised their false religions?
Certainly Abp. Lefebvre was not in union with that apostate, and that is something to praise. What is wrong is to stay in communion with a false church, so I would recommend that you use the opportunity of visiting this site to read and learn about the Catholic Faith as it always was, and this will show you that the Conciliar pretenders are not popes but heretical usurpers, and that the church which they rule is not the Catholic Church, otherwise the gates of hell would have prevailed over the Catholic Church and she would have become the purveyor of false doctrines and immoral practices, as the Conciliar Church manifestly is.
Look to the essence of things. Don't permit yourself to be fooled by the white clothes that the usurpers wear, and all the external trappings that they maintained of Catholicism while emptying it of its content. Only those who profess the integral Catholic Faith are members of Christ's Church and can hold authority in the Church.
Just a thought, Is it possible that “through some small crack”, the modernist, who deny The Unity of The Holy Ghost, had infiltrated the Papacy and Pope John Paul II was being controlled from within?
This behavior is not consistent with Pope John Paul’s Love of Christ and his dedication to The Cross and I have a feeling he was being controlled at some point by the modernists within, whereas Jorge Bergoglio was not in the Papacy when he defected from Christ’s Church.
Many things are possible - he could have been blackmailed, for example, but it is all just pure conjecture. What we know is that he did those things, and we have absolutely no reasonable cause to doubt that he unfortunately did them willingly. Many heretics have piety, but evidently not enough to prevent them from opposing their will to that of the Catholic Magisterium.
This is what St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, says in Book IV of De Romano Pontifice:
"Although Liberius was not a heretic, still it was considered that, on account of the peace made with the Arians, that he was a heretic, and from that presumption his pontificate could rightly be abrogated. For men cannot be held to thoroughly search hearts; yet when they see one who is a heretic by his external works, then they judge simply and condemn him as a heretic."
Questioning the fact that Vatican II, by doing away with Christ’s Charitable Anathema, which affirms God’s Call to Holiness is a Call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds and thus be Temples of The Holy Ghost in all our relationships and experiences, in order to Abide In Christ In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, is not a schismatic act, for the failure to use Christ’s Charitable Anathema is precisely what has led to the appearance that the modernist heresy, forming a “counterfeit” magisterium could possibly subsist within The One Body Of Christ, which is impossible, due to The Unity of The Holy Ghost.
“It is not possible to have Sacramental Communion without Ecclesiastical Communion.”
“The ambiguity of the moment is whether enabling an informal church-within-the-Church, while also affirming formal doctrine, constitutes an actual “public defection” from the Catholic faith.”
It certainly does because this informal church within the church, in denying The Unity of The Holy Ghost, exists in a state of apostasy.
“Error has no rights”, because it is not grounded in Truth and thus Reality, but it can often serve to illuminate what is True due to The Law Of Noncontradiction.
Thus there is no “ambiguity “ in this particular moment of Salvational History. A counterfeit magisterium, which denies the fact that Ecclesiastical Communion is necessary for Sacramental Communion, is attempting to subsist within The One Body Of Christ, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, Existing “Through Him, With Him, And In Him, Oh God, Almighty Father, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost”, The Spirit Of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ.
How can this be?
“You Cannot Be My Disciples if you do not Abide In My Word.”- The Charitable Anathema Of Jesus The Christ.
By no longer recognizing The Charitable Anathema of Jesus The Christ, Vatican II, changed The Key Dogma Of The Catholic Faith, the fact that in all our relationships and all our experiences , we are “Called To Be Temples Of The Holy Ghost”, permitting this relativistic counterfeit magisterium to subsist within The Body Of Christ, without being charitably anathema, in contradiction to Christ’s Charitable Anathema, eclipsing The True Magisterium Of The Catholic Church, Grounded In Sacred Tradition And Sacred Scripture, The Deposit Of Faith Christ Entrusted To His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, which serves for The Salvation of Souls, and thus for Human Flourishing.
The denial of The Unity of The Holy Ghost, The Spirit Of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ, Who Proceeds From The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ, In The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Complementary Love , The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, is the source of all Heresy, including the modernist heresy, which, in denying The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, denies not just The Divinity Of Christ, but denies The Divinity Of The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, and thus, by denying The Divinity Of Father, Son, And Holy Ghost, and the very essence of God’s Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Trinitarian Love, is an act of apostasy.
A Church that appears to be both for and against Christ is an oxymoron. Only by restoring Christ’s Charitable Anathema, by affirming The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, (Filioque) can the counterfeit magisterium attempting to subsist within The One Body of Christ that is currently eclipsing Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, In The Unity of The Holy Ghost, be restored.
It is not enough to simply state that Vatican II must be seen in the Light of The Church’s Tradition now that Our Blessed Mother Has Lifted The Veil exposing the modernists seeking to subsist within The One Body of Christ, while denying God’s Commandments are part of God’s Divine Word and Divine Will, and thus denying The Deposit of Faith Christ Has Entrusted to His Church For The Salvation of Souls. Furthermore, however misguided or misinformed the Popes of Vatican II may have been due to their failure to use Christ’s Charitable Anathema, no one can continue to deny that Pope Benedict XVI, identified the ramifications of Relativism:
“When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker Himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.” – Christmas Greetings to the members of The Roman Curia, December 21, 2012
Pope Benedict’s Final Christmas Urbi et Orbi - Catholic Insight
(Links to an external site)
And thus, any Faithful Catholic can know through both Faith and reason that Jorge Bergoglio’s “refusal of submission to the supreme pontiff (Pope Benedict) or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him“, was evident, prior to his election to the Papacy, when his heresy was manifested and made public ,in his book, On Heaven And Earth, on page 117, when he stated, in regards to same sex relationships and thus same sex sexual acts, “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.” – Jorge Bergoglio, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, which affirms God’s Divine Will and thus God’s Divine Law that we respect The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life from the moment of conception and the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage. Furthermore, Jorge Bergoglio denied sin done in private is sin, and claimed that we are not Called To Be Temples Of The Holy Ghost in private and in public, in all our relationships and all our experiences, and according to Jorge Bergoglio , we can thus simply dismiss our Call to Holiness in relationships that are of a private nature, which every Faithful Catholic affirms is a lie from the start, for it denies the very essence of Divine Love, which serves for The Good of all persons, and thus for Human Flourishing.
“It is a sin to accommodate an occasion of sin and cooperate with that which is evil”, and thus devoid of Love. All demeaning sexual acts are devoid of Love, regardless of the actors or the actor’s desires because they deny the Sanctity and Dignity of The Human Person Created In The Image Of God.
From The Catechism Of The Catholic Church: “1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as “an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.”121 1850 Sin is an offense against God: “Against you, you alone, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight.”122 Sin sets itself against God’s love for us and turns our hearts away from it. Like the first sin, it is disobedience, a revolt against God through the will to become “like gods,”123 knowing and determining good and evil. Sin is thus “love of oneself even to contempt of God.”124 In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.125“.
The election of Jorge Bergoglio to the Papacy is invalid due to the fact that Jorge Bergoglio, defected from The Catholic Church prior to his election to the Papacy, and demonstrated by a public act that he did not have the ability or the desire to accept the “forever” Office Of The MUNUS and thus The Ministerial Office. Furthermore, any cardinal who was aware of Jorge Bergoglio’s schismatic public statement but voted for Jorge Bergoglio, ipso facto, defected from The Catholic Church by affirming Jorge Bergoglio’s schismatic act.
You can only have a Great Apostasy from The True Church Of Christ, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
The so-called "Catechism of the Catholic Church" is not a Catholic but a Modernist source, and so should not be quoted except to condemn it.
The difference between Ratzinger and Bergoglio is not in substance but in degree. Both were Modernist heretics and thus incapable of being popes, which they proved with their doctrines and their actions, that could not come from the Church or the Apostolic See, which cannot err in faith or morals (otherwise all of the heresies that both taught in their official capacity as popes would have to be attributed to the Church and the See of St. Peter). In fact, Ratzinger was by far the more dangerous of the two, precisely because he had the veneer of Catholicism while espousing pure philosophical and theological Modernism.
Of course there's a difference in the administering the sacraments with that of exercising disciplinary measures. But does my logic still hold?
The SSPX's justification for directly disobeying the Pope is also exercising the Ad Hominem fallacy.
Either Pope Leo XIV is the duly elected Pope or he isn't. If he isn't, then I can understand the logic of the disobedience of the SSPX. And if this is the case, then why isn't the see of Peter currently empty in the minds of the SSPX leadership? Can you have it both ways? If the Pope is the duly elected Pope and errs when it comes to an aspect of faith and morals, he still has primacy and retains his authoritative role in matters of discipline. If his disciplinary measure is faulty or he didn't follow Canon Law exactly right, as Catholic Esquire points out, then the SSPX should remain under the Pope's authority and persevere in pointing out his errors....I just don't get it.
I also don't understand why the SSPX can't go the way of the FSSP who could also object to the ambiguity of the Vat II documents and work to get certain passages re-worded. Is noe the FSSP free to retain the purity of the faith and maintain the authentic traditions of the Church?
A question or two. A latae sententiae excommunication is not decreed by person even if a heretic but occurs by the act itself, correct? Second, I suppose one may argue that since the 1983 Code of Canon Law was formed by heretics that this is indirectly an excommunication by heretics? Third, however, didn't the 1917 Code also have a latae sententiae excommunication for the same act and therefore if still in effect (since the 1983 code applied only to the Conciliar church) wouldn't that excommunication be in effect and not based at all on heretics? Fourth, in the absence of a pope wouldn't other justifications in Canon Law allow episcopal consecrations anyway? Finally, do you understand why Abp. Lefebvre despite saying the hierarchy had succumbed to modernist heresy would not extend his argument to formal sedevanctism?
1. Yes, correct. That had implications for the principle defended, as explained in the pieces.
2/3. Maybe indirectly. The 1917 Code imposes suspension but Pius XII upped the ante there. Arguably it is still in force, though some would disagree.
4. That is debated.
5. No, I don't understand exactly. I can speculate on various possibilities, but it is in the past now of course.
In recognising Leo as their Holy Roman Pontiff the SSPX is involving itself in all kinds of absurdity.. They are rightfully declared to be in schism from their pope and his church but implicit in that schism is the heresy of the rejection of the doctrine of the Church’s indefectablity. The reason for their schismatic act is the heretical teachings of the conciliar synodal church and yet they refuse (even against the pleading of St Paul) to anathematise them and have no part of them.
The very least they and the RnR in general could be accussd of is material herrsy but the more knowledgeable among the bishops and priests of the society would be hard to escape the charge of formal heresy. But
For dpme unknown reason my comment is appearing multiple times and I dont have the means here to delete them. If you can delete those duplicates Sean feel free to do so.
Done. It kept wanting me to ban you. I told it no. Hopefully I didn't accidentally do that!
I'm still in full communion. I think.🙂
Thanks for sharing this. When you have him on video tape proposing the same argument it knocks down one more obstacle to Priests actually reading your work because they don't trust sedevacantists.
In 1988, Pope St.John Paul II clearly commanded Mgr. Lefebvre not to consecrate those bishops. But he intentionally disobeyed the pope in the matter. Pope JPII said at the time that it was “a schismatic act”. And it clearly was. It was wrong then. And it is wrong now. Period.
You mean the notorious heretic who professed universal salvation, received the mark associated with several demons on his forehead, several times received a "blessing" by animists, kissed the Koran (a book which rejects the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, the Divinity of Jesus, the Crucifixion etc.), participated in abominable inter-religious prayers in Assisi with representatives of all kinds of false religions, including those who invoked demons, also permitting a pagan statue to be placed on the tabernacle, and many times confirmed non-Catholics in their errors and praised their false religions?
Certainly Abp. Lefebvre was not in union with that apostate, and that is something to praise. What is wrong is to stay in communion with a false church, so I would recommend that you use the opportunity of visiting this site to read and learn about the Catholic Faith as it always was, and this will show you that the Conciliar pretenders are not popes but heretical usurpers, and that the church which they rule is not the Catholic Church, otherwise the gates of hell would have prevailed over the Catholic Church and she would have become the purveyor of false doctrines and immoral practices, as the Conciliar Church manifestly is.
Look to the essence of things. Don't permit yourself to be fooled by the white clothes that the usurpers wear, and all the external trappings that they maintained of Catholicism while emptying it of its content. Only those who profess the integral Catholic Faith are members of Christ's Church and can hold authority in the Church.
Just a thought, Is it possible that “through some small crack”, the modernist, who deny The Unity of The Holy Ghost, had infiltrated the Papacy and Pope John Paul II was being controlled from within?
This behavior is not consistent with Pope John Paul’s Love of Christ and his dedication to The Cross and I have a feeling he was being controlled at some point by the modernists within, whereas Jorge Bergoglio was not in the Papacy when he defected from Christ’s Church.
Many things are possible - he could have been blackmailed, for example, but it is all just pure conjecture. What we know is that he did those things, and we have absolutely no reasonable cause to doubt that he unfortunately did them willingly. Many heretics have piety, but evidently not enough to prevent them from opposing their will to that of the Catholic Magisterium.
This is what St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, says in Book IV of De Romano Pontifice:
"Although Liberius was not a heretic, still it was considered that, on account of the peace made with the Arians, that he was a heretic, and from that presumption his pontificate could rightly be abrogated. For men cannot be held to thoroughly search hearts; yet when they see one who is a heretic by his external works, then they judge simply and condemn him as a heretic."
Questioning the fact that Vatican II, by doing away with Christ’s Charitable Anathema, which affirms God’s Call to Holiness is a Call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds and thus be Temples of The Holy Ghost in all our relationships and experiences, in order to Abide In Christ In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, is not a schismatic act, for the failure to use Christ’s Charitable Anathema is precisely what has led to the appearance that the modernist heresy, forming a “counterfeit” magisterium could possibly subsist within The One Body Of Christ, which is impossible, due to The Unity of The Holy Ghost.
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2024/06/08/vindicating-the-filioque-is-an-exhaustive-study-with-an-ecumenical-focus/
“It is not possible to have Sacramental Communion without Ecclesiastical Communion.”
“The ambiguity of the moment is whether enabling an informal church-within-the-Church, while also affirming formal doctrine, constitutes an actual “public defection” from the Catholic faith.”
It certainly does because this informal church within the church, in denying The Unity of The Holy Ghost, exists in a state of apostasy.
“Error has no rights”, because it is not grounded in Truth and thus Reality, but it can often serve to illuminate what is True due to The Law Of Noncontradiction.
Thus there is no “ambiguity “ in this particular moment of Salvational History. A counterfeit magisterium, which denies the fact that Ecclesiastical Communion is necessary for Sacramental Communion, is attempting to subsist within The One Body Of Christ, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, Existing “Through Him, With Him, And In Him, Oh God, Almighty Father, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost”, The Spirit Of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ.
How can this be?
“You Cannot Be My Disciples if you do not Abide In My Word.”- The Charitable Anathema Of Jesus The Christ.
By no longer recognizing The Charitable Anathema of Jesus The Christ, Vatican II, changed The Key Dogma Of The Catholic Faith, the fact that in all our relationships and all our experiences , we are “Called To Be Temples Of The Holy Ghost”, permitting this relativistic counterfeit magisterium to subsist within The Body Of Christ, without being charitably anathema, in contradiction to Christ’s Charitable Anathema, eclipsing The True Magisterium Of The Catholic Church, Grounded In Sacred Tradition And Sacred Scripture, The Deposit Of Faith Christ Entrusted To His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, which serves for The Salvation of Souls, and thus for Human Flourishing.
The denial of The Unity of The Holy Ghost, The Spirit Of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Love Between The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ, Who Proceeds From The Father And His Only Begotten Son, Jesus The Christ, In The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Complementary Love , The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, is the source of all Heresy, including the modernist heresy, which, in denying The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, denies not just The Divinity Of Christ, but denies The Divinity Of The Most Holy Blessed Trinity, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, and thus, by denying The Divinity Of Father, Son, And Holy Ghost, and the very essence of God’s Perfect Divine Eternal Infinite Trinitarian Love, is an act of apostasy.
A Church that appears to be both for and against Christ is an oxymoron. Only by restoring Christ’s Charitable Anathema, by affirming The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, (Filioque) can the counterfeit magisterium attempting to subsist within The One Body of Christ that is currently eclipsing Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, In The Unity of The Holy Ghost, be restored.
It is not enough to simply state that Vatican II must be seen in the Light of The Church’s Tradition now that Our Blessed Mother Has Lifted The Veil exposing the modernists seeking to subsist within The One Body of Christ, while denying God’s Commandments are part of God’s Divine Word and Divine Will, and thus denying The Deposit of Faith Christ Has Entrusted to His Church For The Salvation of Souls. Furthermore, however misguided or misinformed the Popes of Vatican II may have been due to their failure to use Christ’s Charitable Anathema, no one can continue to deny that Pope Benedict XVI, identified the ramifications of Relativism:
“When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker Himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.” – Christmas Greetings to the members of The Roman Curia, December 21, 2012
Pope Benedict’s Final Christmas Urbi et Orbi - Catholic Insight
(Links to an external site)
And thus, any Faithful Catholic can know through both Faith and reason that Jorge Bergoglio’s “refusal of submission to the supreme pontiff (Pope Benedict) or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him“, was evident, prior to his election to the Papacy, when his heresy was manifested and made public ,in his book, On Heaven And Earth, on page 117, when he stated, in regards to same sex relationships and thus same sex sexual acts, “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.” – Jorge Bergoglio, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, which affirms God’s Divine Will and thus God’s Divine Law that we respect The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life from the moment of conception and the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage. Furthermore, Jorge Bergoglio denied sin done in private is sin, and claimed that we are not Called To Be Temples Of The Holy Ghost in private and in public, in all our relationships and all our experiences, and according to Jorge Bergoglio , we can thus simply dismiss our Call to Holiness in relationships that are of a private nature, which every Faithful Catholic affirms is a lie from the start, for it denies the very essence of Divine Love, which serves for The Good of all persons, and thus for Human Flourishing.
“It is a sin to accommodate an occasion of sin and cooperate with that which is evil”, and thus devoid of Love. All demeaning sexual acts are devoid of Love, regardless of the actors or the actor’s desires because they deny the Sanctity and Dignity of The Human Person Created In The Image Of God.
From The Catechism Of The Catholic Church: “1849 Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as “an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.”121 1850 Sin is an offense against God: “Against you, you alone, have I sinned, and done that which is evil in your sight.”122 Sin sets itself against God’s love for us and turns our hearts away from it. Like the first sin, it is disobedience, a revolt against God through the will to become “like gods,”123 knowing and determining good and evil. Sin is thus “love of oneself even to contempt of God.”124 In this proud self- exaltation, sin is diametrically opposed to the obedience of Jesus, which achieves our salvation.125“.
The election of Jorge Bergoglio to the Papacy is invalid due to the fact that Jorge Bergoglio, defected from The Catholic Church prior to his election to the Papacy, and demonstrated by a public act that he did not have the ability or the desire to accept the “forever” Office Of The MUNUS and thus The Ministerial Office. Furthermore, any cardinal who was aware of Jorge Bergoglio’s schismatic public statement but voted for Jorge Bergoglio, ipso facto, defected from The Catholic Church by affirming Jorge Bergoglio’s schismatic act.
You can only have a Great Apostasy from The True Church Of Christ, Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost.
The so-called "Catechism of the Catholic Church" is not a Catholic but a Modernist source, and so should not be quoted except to condemn it.
The difference between Ratzinger and Bergoglio is not in substance but in degree. Both were Modernist heretics and thus incapable of being popes, which they proved with their doctrines and their actions, that could not come from the Church or the Apostolic See, which cannot err in faith or morals (otherwise all of the heresies that both taught in their official capacity as popes would have to be attributed to the Church and the See of St. Peter). In fact, Ratzinger was by far the more dangerous of the two, precisely because he had the veneer of Catholicism while espousing pure philosophical and theological Modernism.
A heretical priest can still confect a valid Eucharisr. A heretical Pope can still validly excommunicate. The SSPX position is a weak one
Excommunication isn't a sacrament. I agree the way the SSPX is presenting the issue is weak. Read the sources linked.
Of course there's a difference in the administering the sacraments with that of exercising disciplinary measures. But does my logic still hold?
The SSPX's justification for directly disobeying the Pope is also exercising the Ad Hominem fallacy.
Either Pope Leo XIV is the duly elected Pope or he isn't. If he isn't, then I can understand the logic of the disobedience of the SSPX. And if this is the case, then why isn't the see of Peter currently empty in the minds of the SSPX leadership? Can you have it both ways? If the Pope is the duly elected Pope and errs when it comes to an aspect of faith and morals, he still has primacy and retains his authoritative role in matters of discipline. If his disciplinary measure is faulty or he didn't follow Canon Law exactly right, as Catholic Esquire points out, then the SSPX should remain under the Pope's authority and persevere in pointing out his errors....I just don't get it.
I also don't understand why the SSPX can't go the way of the FSSP who could also object to the ambiguity of the Vat II documents and work to get certain passages re-worded. Is noe the FSSP free to retain the purity of the faith and maintain the authentic traditions of the Church?
Thank you for your feedback
Mark
Colorado Springs