Papal Heresy and Loss of Office - SSPX Interview Series
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 жов 2024
- Welcome to the SSPX Podcast, and to the SSPX Interview Series. Today we’re speaking with Fr.
William MacGillivray on a topic that has gained renewed attention in recent days - the question
of the possibility of a heretical pope. What happens if a pope speaks heresy? This has been a
topic of controversy over the course of the pontificate of Pope Francis, and it has only grown
following a recent audience given by the Holy Father where he indicated that the Catholic
Church includes heretics, apostates, etc. So we’ll look at this statement - was it heretical? And if
it was, then what does that mean? Does it mean he loses the papacy automatically? Many saints
and theologians have discussed this issue over the centuries - but only in a theoretical manner. Is
there a theological or legal basis for the pope losing his office? This is the longest interview
we’ve done, because it’s such a complex topic. But Fr. MacGillivray has put together a
comprehensive overview, so we can determine once and for all, how Catholics should view the
possibility of a heretical pope. Let’s join Father now.
Resources:
Notes from this interview: sspxpodcast.co...
The Case of Nestorius: sspxpodcast.co...
Subscribe to the SSPX UA-cam channel here:
www.youtube.co...
Stay Connected on Social Media:
Twitter: / sspxen
Facebook: / sspxen
Instagram: / sspx_en
SSPX News Website:fsspx.news/en
Visit our website: sspx.org/en
I cherish the FSSPX &THANK GOD EVERY DAY FOR THE MASS THEY HAVE PRESERVED FOR US!
Amen
I was a sedevacantist for 12 years under Father Sanborn. I cannot thank you enough for publishing this video.
You're of bad will. You care more about the opinion of man than of God. This priest's analysis of the heresies of the Vatican II antipopes are correct and utterly fallacious to conclude that they are popes.
Can you explain what specifically made you reunite with the current pope?
You don't reunite with the current pope but with the office and the holy and apostolic church @@nickstanley396
Bishop Sandborn’s sedeprivationist theory is the only thing that makes sense to me
1917 Code of Canon Law 188.4 says that a public heretic automatically loses his office. It’s codified.
God bless you Father William MacGillivray for the talk you gave us and we pray for God's blessings upon you.
All thanks to the SSPX and the work of Archbishop Marcel LEFEBVRE for The LIGHT of the TRUTH in MAINTAINING the CHATHOLIC TRADITIONAL APOSTOLIC TEACHINGS. !! DEO GRATIAS. NOSTRUM In SAECULOR. SAECULORUM .! AMEN 🙏.
Pope Pius XII was the Pope of my childhood. Every loved that tall and gentle man...we had a Real Papa whom we felt loved us.
That the last Dogma proclaimed by him in 1950 was about The Holy Mother says a lot about what is needed to be continued in an age of universal deceit. I too was Christened into a church that is not found now because of the Modernist changes to Practice, the prayers, the Sacraments and the Liturgy. Satan is fine to move very slowly to persuade in small increments because he in not confined by time and contests what is Infinite in the Divine Providence.
Ditto. I was desololate when he died. And was unhappy with every pope since then, except for Pope Ratzinger which gave a bit of a respite. I was in Rome when the Peccorelli list came out and was deeply shocked. Nothing has surprised me since.
I think our spiritual life was much simpler and we were guided by the priest. The second Vatican council did not promote piety but a complete new church.
Berhoglio is a fraud through and through.
I thank God that I was catachised by the good Sisters of Mercy during the 1950s before the bombshell Second Vatican Council exploded leading to the shambles the Church finds herself in today.
It is very troubling territory to be in when these questions need to be asked. Thank you Father for taking this on.
The Holy Ghost is promised to the successor of Peter to keep deposit of faith not to create new doctrine to
@@fredswart1815 Yes, so Francis can't be the successor and that puts SSPX in a spot of bother also.
John Pauls 2 statements seem clear to me in that he means that all people have that potential if they find the true path that leads to the eternal way!
Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible?peace,
@@lufhopespeacefully2037 It does. Just not the word "Trinity". Purgatory is also in the Bible. However, it just doesn't say the word "purgatory"
The Pope constantly says shocking things. Pray for the office and him.
Some theologians would tell us that, even if a pope is a manifest heretic not yet declared, we have to accept his teaching and wait for a declaration… well, this is St. Paul in Gal. 1, 8: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, .” Where did he ask to wait for the declaration? 😂
What matters is what a Pope says EX CATHEDRA: all else, you can take with a grain of salt - especially if it contradicts prior teachings of thhe Church.
If anyone, including the pope, preach a doctrine different from the one taught by our holy Church, let him be anathema....
There was no declaration from Him in that manner... Though his works comprise the new Testament, they aren't the gospels... Also Paul may have corrected Peter but, he didn't go as far as to declare his primacy and papacy invalid.
God never said followers need to accept false teachings. We are to turn away from false teachers. We are to stay true to the word.
Only excathedra do we 'have' to listen too
Love the clarity of the SSPX!
I love the Bible The book the Catholic Church refuses to teach from. If the Catholic Church taught directly even from the New Testament My opinion is less Protestants more Catholics. Vatican11 has fooled them because of ignorance of Scripture. Cursed are you who follow men and abandon knowledge. Hirelings, Apostates, and Imposters will takeover the Vineyard.
John Pauls 2 statements seem clear to me in that he means that all people have that potential if they find the true path that leads to the eternal way!
Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible?peace,
I need an SSPX church near me, my soul is drowning in the NO Mass….
Hey I was in the same situation, really consider moving. Be willing to find a new job and move. If you have to live in poverty temporarily in order to uproot and go then do it. These times calls for it. It’s worth it. I moved after years of filling like I was in a barren wasteland, and not I finally have access to an SSPX. GOD BLESS
Unfortunately I am in no position to move at this time. Thank you for reaching out and I’m so glad you were able to relocate. God Bless
I do hope you find one. Many People have to drive a great distance to go to Mass, I would not put my faith in danger by going to the novus ordo, my husband as a child, stayed home, read the mass prayers and prayed their rosary out of necessity until they received a traditional priest. Ring the nearest sspx chapel and ask the priest for advice as to what to do may I suggest
I found the SSPX in 1982. I didn't like the new mass and there were not a lot of choices for a Traditional Liturgy. I found a home at Saint Vincent de Paul, KCMO.
Another brilliant series on the way. Every single Catholic should watch the crisis in the Church series.
Question: So, other clergy and layman can be judged and excommunicated from the Church from teaching/declaring heretical ideas but the Pope cannot be judged or removed from the Church for the exact same thing as long as he declares he is a Catholic and says that he believes in the doctrines of the Church when his teachings don’t align with those statements?
Nothing can be done when the Supreme Pontiff is scandalizing souls with false doctrines and has been admonished by subordinates but continues in his heresy? The Church must accept it and leave in place a heretical Pope when anyone else would be excommunicated?
Lay people can’t excumunicate people, If privet individuals could judge for them selfs who the Pope is , the Church would shatter in to a million sects over night
What a great question is!
Exactly!!
Obey the Council of Trent instead of the supporters of Vatican II and its Popes.
Council of Trent says that if clergy (priests,bishops or Pope) defected from faith avoid them to save your soul. Look at what St. Athanasius did.. he left the hierarchy to fight for the Faith.
St. Hermenegild (feast day,April 13th on your Missal) refused Communion from a heretic Bishop. You cannot receive the Blessed Sacrament from compromisers, heretics or praying the Canon together with a Pope who is teaching heresies. He is a traitor to God. Fight for your Faith! Stay with God and His saints.
There is no question, he is ipso facto deposed.
Thank you for making this clear! My mother's father was a nephew of S. S. Venerabilis Pivs pp XII on his mother's side and a 3 times great nephew of S. S. Leonis pp XIII on his father's side. I can't imagine either of them resting in peace with this Pope.
Respectfully,
Dr. Gennaro Giammarino, III
As a lay Catholic, I do not have authority to label Francis a heretic and say he is not pope. However, I also am NOT forced to follow Francis away from Jesus Christ✝️! This requires me to study and know my faith and understand when I must follow and when I MUST say, “Holy Father, I disagree and I will not follow you on this specific issue.” Yes, there are a lot of specific issues in which I must not follow Francis, but not following should not include rejecting him as pope, because I have no authority to proclaim that rejection. This is a good thing for me because it keeps me safely embraced by the Church.
There's a really good book printed by tan publishers.... Called Pope's against modern errors
Brilliant and True❤
It has been unanimously held by theologians that a heretic must be removed in one way or another. John of St. Thomas observed that theologians (and nearly all canonists) were unanimous on the need for removal, but dissgreed in the manner of removal/deposition. There are rulings and teachings of popes (which I cite in my two volumes) which declare that a pope cannot be judged except for heresy. A pope, for so long as he validly holds office, has "full and supreme jurisdiction" (Pastor Æternus), and cannot be judged by his subordinates. Judgment on doctrinal matters are reserved to the pope's jurisdiction according the Vatican I and the Second Council of Lyons. This otherwise irresolvable contradiction is solved in the doctrine Bellarmine, Ballerini, and Pope Gregory XVI. Their teaching is rooted in the doctrine of Innocent III and the canons of the Church. For so long as an indubitably valid pope holds office, it is infallibly defined that absolutely all judgments on doctrinal questions are reserved to the jurisdiction of his primacy. This is a dogma of faith. There can exist no exception. The exception, as I have explained at length in my books, is made in the canons and papal teachings precisely because a heretic is per se an incapable subject of the papacy, who therefore cannot validly hold the papal munus. St. Alphonsus, following exactly the doctrine of St. Robert Bellarmine’s fifth opinion, pronounces on the question of judging a pope, saying: “We answer, that if ever a pope as a private person would fall into heresy, then he would immediately fall from the papacy; for since he would be outside the Church, he could no longer be the head of the Church. Whence in that case the Church would have to not in fact depose him, because no one has power over the pope, but declare him to have fallen from the pontificate.” (Alfonso Maria de’ Liguori, Vindiciae pro suprema pontificis potestate adversus Iustinum Febronium, Torino, 1832, p. 142) He adds, “Pope Symmachus said: The Pope is the supreme pastor, subject to no judgment except in the case of heresy. Tom. 2. Concilior.” It is in this sense that Ballerini (De Potestate Ecclesiastica, Cap. IX § I no. 5) explains the meaning of the canonical exception of heresy in judging a pope: “In the sacred canons, where the scandals of the Pontiffs are discussed, we read that it is decreed that they are not to be obeyed, nor is their example to be followed, where they act or command anything contrary to the divine law, but they never indicate that they are to be subjected to the judgment of anyone, unless perhaps they are devious from the faith. The exception of heresy is due to the fact that, on account of the heresy itself, falling ipso facto from the pontificate, they would lose their jurisdiction of primacy".
@@michaelspeyrer1264 Can you be more precise about your meaning? What proposition do you maintain is only opinion? How does it contradict Vatican I?
what are your books called? i would like to give them a read.
This is so confusing, and Pope Francis is not helping , actualy making it much more confusing, is he the king of confusion as far as pope history goes? I'm 70, catholic at birth, and boy, the Vaticans, all lead us to perdition.
Question: So if there is a priest, Bishop, Pope who during their homilies proclaim that there is no Holy Trinity and that Jesus is not the Son of God, we are to ignore those statements and continue to allow our family to attend those homilies and be subjected to false teachings because The Church has not declared that person a heretic?
Are we to ignore the fact of what is being taught goes against Sacred Scripture and what the Church has always taught? That doesn’t really seem prudent to me.
Similarly, like a parent would not allow their children to be catechized or participate in a mass with a priest that is a known pedophile, that The Church has not removed from their office and has ignored. Again to ignore something that is known is a lack of prudence.
'Question: So if there is a priest, Bishop, Pope who during their homilies proclaim that there is no Holy Trinity and that Jesus is not the Son of God, we are to ignore those statements and continue to allow our family to attend those homilies and be subjected to false teachings because The Church has not declared that person a heretic?'
No, you can attend an SSPX service and be taught proper doctrine.
'Are we to ignore the fact of what is being taught goes against Sacred Scripture and what the Church has always taught? That doesn’t really seem prudent to me.'
No, you are supposed to pray for the Pope and the hierarchy - believe it or not, prayer does work.
'Similarly, like a parent would not allow their children to be catechized or participate in a mass with a priest that is a known pedophile, that The Church has not removed from their office and has ignored. Again to ignore something that is known is a lack of prudence.'
So what is your solution?
Solution: Do not attend that chapel to receive Sacraments. And if they have a portrait of Bergolio, do not enter that chapel.
Lord have mercy!
Everyday, I am more and more thankful for the SSPX, I wish you were here at the new jersey shore!
I’m on the Jersey Shore, I drive the hour up to North Caldwell.
PRAISE GOD for the SSPX!!!😁 My life has been thoroughly changed and redeemed from an incredibly dark past as a result of their presence and their ministry. May He be glorified!📿📿📿
Velox Versutus Vigilans😅
The teaching of the Church was the Catechism. That dealt with right and wrong. The Catechism needs to extend teaching to specify sins of this era.
Joined the SSPX in February. Keep your Kum-by-ya in the Novus Ordo. I'll take my Latin Mass ANY DAY!!!
Velox Versutus Vigilans
For years I didn't go any church. We were having so many catholic churches around us, but none offers the Latin mass.
I have been in sspx since 1996, No doubt I was going to hell. I'm so grateful to them
1.) Why are so many comments missing
2.) What's this video for, as I understood from the father's explanation, that we basicly are "stuck" with a possible heretical pope, as noone can remove him anyhow? Is that correct?
3.) If we hypothetically assume the pope is a "heretic" we can't remove, are we then going to follow his destruction of our church?
4.) I'd like clarification if possible!
Yes, we are basically 'stuck' with a possibly heretical Pope.
No one is asking you to 'follow his destruction of (your) church' - you can go to an SSPX church and be taught proper doctrine.
Can it be that what you say is in fact correct and this pope will be Gods tool to bring about the purification as Our Lady of the Good Event of the Purification has said?!
We get the leaders we deserve and God allows Satan his reign to bring about the purification of His church.
I like the way you put your comment, frank and to the point, for some reason we can’t get clergy to speak in the same way😞
THEY remove comments that they don't like.
"If a future Pope teaches heresy, do not follow him." Pope Pius IX
So it is ok for SSPX not to follow Francis? What else SSPX does to recognize him as the Pope besides mention his name in the Mass and hang his picture on the wall?
@@danpan001 She quoted Pius X, she is not the voice and official decider for SSPX
Blessed Pope Pius IX said that. (not by the sspx)
Yes Daniel Pan , do not follow anyone in their Heresy.
That's good enough for me. I honestly don't care whether his heresy remains "occult" or "juridically manifest" - I hear his words. I see his actions. He is teaching evil and I guard my mind/heart from it - let the Lord of history sort out the rest.
I think your considerations, while difficult for many to follow, are, carefully listened to, are quite clear. Pope Francis' recent appointment to the head of doctrine of the faith, seems scary to me as this soon to be a cardinal holds that he would be open to blessing same sex unions. Yikes. Some German prelates have already approved the same.
Dangerous times. Your discourse is very needed.
Thank you Father MacGillivray and Andrew. These interviews are extremely helpful in this troubling time.
Jesus, Mary, I love you save souls!
Excellent deep dive into Canon Law, but to keep it simple, refer to the gospel itself for the final word. #Galatians 1:8 - 9 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. [9] As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema." Anathema: excommunicated OR IGNORED. Like charity, it's up to each individual to decide for himself & His flock. If heresy is clear & obvious, then IGNORE THE HERETIC until replaced.
Jeremiah said David’s throne would be perpetual and unbroken too. But there were 700yts between the last king and the first coming of Jesus…
Don't forget John Paul II's heresy when he denied the descent into hell, an article of the creed, on 11 January 1989.
The Seat is most definitely vacant.
Lord, God, provide us, your children, a pure, brave and saintly Pope for our time.
Viva Cristo Rey
Ave Maria
The Papacy is so important that we must do everything we can to preserve it while remaining within the bounderies of the truth - even if that implies some mental gymnastics.
Whether the Pope can be canonically declared a heretic is something of a moot point: what truly matters is his extraordinary magisterium or ex cathedra teachings.
Many Popes have been material heretics throughout history - although none so much, admittedly, as the post-Vatican II Popes.
Having said this, the last time a Pope (Pius XII) used his charisma of infallibility was in 1950 to define the dogma of the Assumption of Our Blessed Mother, the Holy Virgin Mary.
None of the heretical pronouncements of Pope Francis, for example, have any binding authority upon the faithful - we should never lose sight of this most important fact.
The example Father McGillivray chose to illustrate his point is very powerful because the excommunications by Nestorius fall in the same category as the excommunication against Mgr. Levebvre: it is not because the hierarchy had lost its jurisdiction that these excommunications were nul and void but simply because they were unjust - i.e., punishing a nonexistent crime.
How can we tell if someone is ready to receive instruction unless he is admonished by his legitimate superior?
Very well put indeed - the Pope having no superior this side of Heaven, that IS a problem...
Best commentary on this issue that I have heard yet!!! Thank you!!!
It’s far easier to believe in reincarnation than the ‘whole darn lot’ of humanity making it straight to the communion of saints. I think it would be impossible for most of us to endure in the close presence of God. We need to work on our spiritual capacity to be ready, don’t we? Unless, like a child, one died in a state of perfect innocence.
Reincarnation is false and who would in their right mind believe in it
I would like to see something of a debate with other faithful traditional priests
Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible?peace,
Once the FSSPX knocks it out of the park!! Thanks so much for providing balance for so many in the Church today!! Truly the FSSPX is a godsend for helping Catholics to keep our footing in these bizarre and dangerous times!!
Very well said...
My thoughts, exactly!
This was a year ago, insane what he's done since then. God, please help us all.
Pray for him
@melmckenna4599 oh I do and i pray for our deliverance "from him".
At about 1 hour in the priest asked the question "Is he a heretic or not?" Anyone has any doubt Bergoglio is a heretic or not?
Notwithstanding if Bergoglio is a heretic or not, the goal of this pope is to eliminate THE MOST POWERFUL prayer on Earth--- Holy Mass, the "Tridentine Mass", from the face of the Earth. That exposes Pope Francis' true colours. The second-most powerful prayer on Earth is The Rosary. Thank God for Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X !
That is not for us, as the laity, to formally declare and charge the Pope with. Saying material heresy is one thing, being formally declared a heretic is another matter entirely
But the people have a right to shout ‘malfeasance’. If the leader of the people is abusing his position, and changing things that he has no business changing.
@@alexanderthegreat2678 That's exactly right!
@@alexanderthegreat2678 So IF he is truly not the pope can he be Judged? Can we not judge the others that claim to be pope? Can we judge their actions and/or their teachings. Are popes above the dogmas of The Church the dogmas that would excommunicate you or I? Can you be the head/leader of any group to which you do not belong? Can a former council judge a future pope?
I concede the fact that he is pope of the New Order Mason Sect
I love SSPX. I have to say though we aren't dealing with papal heresy but apostasy. Francis holds nothing of Catholic Faith other than popes have power
Amen…agreed!
Since Justin Trudeau publicly said the Shahada prayer at a mosque, is he formally excommunicated under Canon 188?
And if so, what is the culpability of the Archbishop of Montreal having Trudeau address the congregation from the sanctuary?
And what about the participants in the Pachamama ritual and the indigenous ritual at the cathedral in Quebec in 2022?
Great questions!
Dear Father MacGillivray and Andrew,
Thank you for taking the time to make this interview about arguably the most important question in Traditional Catholicism.
As a former sedevacantist, however, I regretfully must say that this video failed to address some key arguments made by sedevacantists, which is a common critique that they make of the SSPX. One example: few sedevacantists argue that the last six popes lost the papacy, but rather that since Divine Law (not just Canon Law) forbids heretics from becoming pope, and they were all heretics at the time of election, they never had the papacy. I'd say that most sedevacantists actually hold Bellarmine's first opinion, rather than his fifth. Also, from what I've read, an imperfect council, declaration, etc. wouldn't judge the pope; it would judge whether or not he is the pope. The declaration would only reveal what in fact was already true; this is the same with ex cathedra declarations.
I also worry that, by not saying that Pope Francis's heresies excommunicate him from the Catholic Church (at least spiritually, if not juridically), you unintentionally defend his claim that "No one can exclude themselves (not even heretics - my note) from the Church." Canon 2265 from the 1917 Code of Canon Law gives, in my opinion, the perfect defense of the R&R position. It shows that Francis (and other undeclared latae sententiae excommunicated heretics) hold their offices illicitly, but validly. Just like confession with the Orthodox, we can therefore recognize their validity, but resist them due to a lack of liceity. We do, however, utilize them on the rare occasion when they are not illicit - for the Orthodox, this is in danger of death; for the heretical pope, this is all of his acts which cannot be prudently foreseen to help the cause of heresy. I call this "Pseudovacantism," rather than Sedevacantism. This is distinct from the Cassiciacum Thesis, because Pseudovacantism recognizes them as popes, whereas the Thesis does not.
Canon 2232 shows that the latae sententiae excommunication isn't legally binding until it is declared, but it also says that a declaration is retroactive; so a declaration would indeed completely invalidate the last six papacies. Canon 2223, SS. 3, n. 4 says that "...a declaratory sentence must be given either at the request of an interested party or when so required by the common good." So the competent "judge" of this matter, whoever that may be, is legally required to canonically nullify the last six popes if we ask him. However, we all know that the authorities who would make the declaration aren't going to do this, since most of them probably agree with his heresies. The million-dollar question is: in such a situation, where the Church is in an absolute crisis due to the heresies which the popes espouse, and the mechanism of a canonical deposition is also run by heretics, would either of the canonical principles of intrinsic cessation/epikeia allow us to forgo the process of warnings/declarations and regard a heretical pope as an anti-pope for the sake of ending the crisis? I would say that this is by far the strongest sedevacantist argument, and I would be very interested to see a response.
May God Bless you,
Dean Barker
Regarding the comments of Mr. Barker:
I do not see a great difference between holding that a “manifest heretic” loses office automatically and saying that he is ineligible to be elected in the first place. Both opinions rest on the same foundation, namely, an alleged metaphysical impossibility for the “manifest heretic” to hold office. This is true regarding one who is a manifest heretic in the judgment of the Church, but not prior to that judgment. Christ the Lord can sustain jurisdiction in one who holds heretical opinions, even with malice, and preaches them publicly. Such a one is deserving of being removed from office-removendus, but not yet remotus.
I am not denying that Pope Francis may be severed from the Catholic Church according to the internal bonds of faith and charity. Nor do I affirm it; it is not my place to judge. What is of interest here is whether he still belongs to the Church juridically as its head; and there I affirm that he does.
I thank Dean for pointing out canon 2265, which is an important complement to canon 2264, and specifies that someone who has been excommunicated but without a declaratory or condemnatory sentence can still validly be elected and take possession of an ecclesiastical office.
There is an important distinction between jurisdiction tacitly given to Orthodox priests for hearing confessions (which is the opinion of many theologians) and the jurisdiction given by Christ the Lord to a heretical pope prior to separation from the Church. In the first case, the Orthodox do not hold office in the Church, and they receive a kind of supplied jurisdiction that is transient and only given for the act itself of hearing confessions. But in the case of a heretical pope (or heretical bishops), before they depart from the Church of their own accord or are juridically declared to be heretics, they retain their office in the Church and possess what is known as ordinary jurisdiction. This jurisdiction is stable or habitual, and not merely transient.
Furthermore, the retroactive effect of canon 2232 §2 does not invalidate acts which were validly placed prior to the declaratory sentence. Such a concept (a truly retroactive effect, undoing the past) is metaphysically impossible. When a canon stipulates a retroactive effect this must be understood as a “fiction of law”, fictio iuris, such as occurs in the healing of a marriage in the root (sanatio in radice, canon 1138 §1) or the legitimation of children born out of wedlock (canons 1116-1117). Such retroactive legislation has regard only to certain canonical effects, without being in any way able to overturn the past and make it not to have happened.
In other words, if a subsequent pope or ecumenical council were to declare invalid all the previous papacies, this could only be because they were in fact invalid to begin with, independently of any declaratory sentence. It would be the mere recognition of a fait accompli.
If, on the other hand, loss of office is impossible prior to a declaratory sentence, then the acts of the heretical pope were valid and nothing can change that as a historical reality, even if by a fiction of law certain acts might later be regarded as if they had never taken place.
Finally, to address the last point, it would not seem helpful at all for the laity, or some scattered groups of priests and a handful of bishops, to assume power to judge the pope a heretic on the basis of epikeia, and subsequently to regard him as an antipope and his adherents as heretics or schismatics. This is precisely the danger of schism of which I am warning. As long as the Pope continues to be recognized by the Church at large, there is no question of regarding him as a manifest heretic, no matter which theological opinion one follows (Bellarmine, Cajetan).
In Christ,
Fr. William MacGillivray | FSSPX
@@SSPX It's good to know the SSPX isn't falling for Vigano's views.
thank you, that was a very interesting response. as an inquiring sede, why did you stoo being sedevacantist? did you assume this pseudo vacante position? what is your opinion on la sallette and the third secret of Fatima?
Hypothetically, can a Freemason, Satanist, Muslim, Jew, etc. be elected Pope or is the election null & void?
The Vatican II Popes still lean towards an “everybody is saved” mentality. I believe at times they are throwing this out there to capture those that want to hear this or are ignorant about being in and maintaining a state of grace.
It shouldn't be surprising. The surest way to avoid martyrdom is to say that everyone is saved.
They need to read of Jesus speaking about Judas. It is NOT favorable. It is in one of the Gospels… and Judas is not alone! I can not judge who else as that is GOD’S WILL. I hope people realize that ALL WILL BE JUDGED. Presently souls go to Heaven ( few directly), to Purgatory or to hell.
COME HOLY SPIRIT ENKINDLE ALL SOULS TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, YOUR ❤️
I am reading “The Synodal Process is a Pandora’s Box” forward by Cardinal Burke, it has shed light on this synodal topic.
This is great! Oh what joy, that the Church visible as our Lord promised, hell will never prevail. God reward you all, Mary seat of wisdom and star of the sea pray for us.
I have a difficult time understanding some of these arguments with logic. I believe that this video was sincere, but it remains difficult to understand what the heck is going on. Bergoglio has been an abject heretic for most of his “pontificate.” Not many people can really deny that. All you have to do is listen to him, read his drivel, and see the fruits. Seeing this, I have a very tough time not siding with Sedevacantism. Nobody wants to be a Sedevcantist. We not only have a bad “pope,” we have a heretic trying to act like one. I find it difficult to believe the Holy Spirit has anything to do with putting Bergoglio in the Vatican. It simply doesn’t make sense. Where is the good fruit? Is it in the German churches? No. Is it in these Moto Proprios? No. Is it at the clown masses? No. The SSPX speaks in terms of the problems with Sedevacantism…yes I agree it’s an enormous problem. But just because it’s a problem doesn’t make it false. Stop beating around the bush and face it; Bergoglio cannot be a pope. Go compare Bergoglio writings with St Pope Pius X. They aren’t even in the same vicinity. How does the Vatican II religion jive with anything before that? I’m telling you right now that Bergoglio or his followers will make all Catholics decide. Are you in the Novus Ordo sect or are you not? It’s just a matter of time. He despises tradition. Therefore he despises the Magesterium of the Church. That cannot be acceptable.
Remember that every ruler gets power from God. Evil monarch or pope God allows as a punishment for the nation, country , etc and as a tool to wake up people and change the ways
This pope was allowed for the purification of the Mother Church.
You are right
I love the papacy, but no matter how you try to explain it, the True Catholic Religion has had no true pope on the Seat of St. Peter since Pope Pius XII! The conciliar popes have all been heretics and influenced by luciferian freemasonry! Bergoglio is the final straw. He has converted to luciferianism and is a Freemason, himself. He does not even try to hide that he is an Idolator, heretic, and best friend to Sodomites!! He cannot be pope as he has doubtless renounced his Catholic faith by his wicked deeds in using his office to lead trusting Catholics down the wide road to Perdition. I pray for his immortal soul, as well as the rest of the Vatican 2 popes.
@@eileenmurray737 It seems you have not listened to any of the compelling facts presented in this video.
John Pauls 2 statements seem clear to me in that he means that all people have that potential if they find the true path that leads to the eternal way!
I feel like I had a better chance at being saved when I was invincibly ignorant, than trying to find the narrow road in this mess. I guess we don’t deserve the treasure we rejected.
Invincible ignorance is not a saving grace...
My only argument would be that worshiping Traditionally (the same way the Church has taught for over a thousand years) would be a very safe bet for your soul. Follow the words of Christ regarding Salvation, and it doesn't matter what The Vatican says or does(I don't recall Christ mentioning Pachemama). Being Excommunicated by a Heretic isn't REALLY Excommunication.....is it? ;-)
I've heard it say that people get the rulers they truly deserve. Perhaps His Holiness is the ruler we deserve for submitting so meekly to the errors of our time
The narrow path is looking at us in the face,hold the hand of Jesus Christ,honour his Mother Mary,St Joseph Patriarch of the church Jesus founded....The Holy family.....The wide road is narrowing...O angel of God my guardian dear. To whom Gods love commits us here, forever this day be at my side to light and guard To rule and guide . Amen... We have the truths ...Jesus is in control...Our homes with Sacred Heart and Immaculate Heart pictures honour and protect ....pray and implore mercy, Love God with all your heart and love one another As I have loved you.....Stand firm,correct error ...the truth will set us free.......May the joy of The Lord fill our souls with gentle kindness.....Amen....
@@mikemcchesney2555if any religion is as good as the next, no need to convert, no need to teach dogmas, why would/should anyone care about being excommunicated? Gaslight city
Quality Content. Thank you (SSPX) for clarity in this time of confusion.
It sounds as though the Canon Laws have never conceived of the possibility of an infiltration/subversion at the highest levels. We cannot say it's impossible for the Magisterium to be captured by the enemies of Jesus because it is always possible. Is there truly no mechanism to recognize such a situation and correct it? What took place at V2 still has never been corrected or even acknowledged.
What a wonderful talk given by Fr. MacGillivray, what a knowledgeable priest! His parishioners are a blessed people and if I may be so bold how handsome as well! God bless you all.
May the Good Lord keep those that adhere to Catholic Tradition and live the Faith they know comes from the right source. Truly the Sspx tries to reach out to Catholics who may given the grace from God to know the true Faith of the Catholic Church. Keep searching and God will surely lead you to the right group, the Sspx for one, that will help you sanctify your soul to earn heaven in God's time.
Listening from New Hampshire
It was a juncture of real happiness to me when (2009, aged 63) I refound what I'd been seeking for decades. Namely, (F)SSPX. I'd suddenly realised that the upshot of 1962-1965 was my strong sense that the Roman Catholic Church in which I'd been brought up and educated had been changed in a manner that I, as a layman, could not comprehend. I just "knew" that the "sacraments", as celebrated and practiced under this new regime, were something I should avoid at all costs, if I did not want to risk antagonising the Lord. Since my (re)entry into the SSPX Roman Catholic community I felt the stability of being housed in this rock of a church. However, around 2011, (F)SSPX entered into "negotiations" with Rome, with the object of attaining recognition by and integration into the main body (mainstream?) of the Roman version of the church as it was then. Very fortunately the attempt failed but made patently clear, that the regime holding power in the Vatican then and still now, would have been a contradiction in itself for any self-respecting (F)SSPX. Notwithstanding my views on the subject being treated in this video, the stance occupied by Fr. MacGillivray and his apparent attitude (especially as a young member of the SSPX clergy) have further deepened my fear that there is a "soft" wing in (F)SSPX whose adherents could attempt once more - at any given point in time - to carry (drag?) this, my church, back into the "embracing and loving fold" of the modern Vatican regime. The ensuing suicide of (F)SSPX would prompt 1) my heels being no longer visible due to the dust they'd whirl up and 2) my becoming instantly once again bereft of any church homeland.
I think your worst fears may be unfounded. The Society is trying to stay a bit above the fray. I sense the Vatican is now simply trying to ignore them out of existence so to speak. Which may be a calculated strategy to avoid having to confront all the troubling doctrinal issues raised by the Council and its promoters.
They have connections with Rome. They ask the approval of Novus Ordo Bishop regarding the Sacrament of Matrimony.
We are bound to avoid those who defected from the Catholic Faith.
This is the best explanation I have heard concerning this topic.
This video basically supports the material/formal thesis of Bishop Des Lauriers. Prepare for the thesis show of the Roman Catholic Institute.
The Thesis of Cassiciacum
@@dariusclovis1374 It has absolutely nothing to do with it...
I can't believe it... Whenever some people hear of the distinction between 'material' and 'formal' they immediately think of Cassiciacum...
It is not the Papacy which is in question here but the supposed heresy of the Pope - can you see the difference?
Do you do this on purpose?
Might you be 'Protestant', by any chance?
Dear Father, why choose a theological opinion such as that of Cajetan et al which cannot be applied to the sitting Pope? Does it not put one in an.impossible place? Since no one can.judge a.Pope, why do we Insist that he needs to be judged first? Who will do it?
There are many examples throughout the history of the church of various scenario that make clear what is important in the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
My list of ideas from this conversation is:
The church is merciful dealing with sinful men.
Heresy or apostasy is not a cause to remove a pope.
A pope can remain a pope as long as he declares himself a Catholic no matter his teaching.
Those who sit in the pews have no say in chastising or removing an heretical pope or other prelate.
The times we live in, the teaching of pope or bishop, nothing is reason to refute or call scandalous actions taken by pope, or any other prelate or priest. We must suck it up.
This is my short list. Thank you for your efforts.
As to material heresy, Francis takes the cake. So, who is he to judge?
Thanks for sharing.
Crucial examination.
Thank you immensely for such a comprehensive study addressing all the questions thoroughly. God bless you. Grateful to Christ for the SSPX.
Thank you for this, it definitely quelled some of my fears about schism.
To be logically consistent, sedevacantists need to go all the way back to Pius 1X, Pio Nono, and the declaration of Vatican Council 1 that a pope is infallible when he speaks ex cathedra. This pernicious doctrine began the long sorry history of papolatry which is reaching its apogee in the heretical reign of Bergoglio.
Thank You for the talk !
Wow Over 2 hours and not one mention of the elephant in the room. The elephants name is Novus Ordo. The creation of a New order church or a Protestant church one that is in protest against the Catholic Church. Heretical utterances is one thing, changing the solemn and approved rites of The Church in altogether new ones is quite another. I will concede Francis is pope of The New Order Church but definitely not that of The Holy Roman Catholic Church.
If you can reconcile the following for me.
The Council of Trent
Seventh Session, First Decree and Canons
ON THE SACRAMENTS
Celebrated on the third day of the month of March, MDXLVII.
CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by every pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema.
If you have never had the faith than you can’t be a heretic, therefore who can say that the new order popes ever had the faith?
Wow! Andrew! This is very tough stuff to understand for a bear of little brain such as me. I will need to re-listen to this many times to get it into my head but, thank you, and may you be blessed by God.
Mrs Darley, SSPX Third Order, Manchester,
SSPX Diocese of Great Britain and Scandinavia
Looking at this a year later . In my limited circle, I have only known two Catholics who have defended this pope; and neither one practices the Catholic Faith.
Really enjoy the information being provided thank you. If I may suggest a way to improve the transfer of information i would suggest that: Tell us what your going to say, say it, then tell us what you just said.
Respectively, here we are a year later and we are still approaching his one world religion as prophesied a few thousand years ago in my bible?
You say very truly that the pope is judged by no one, and yet, that’s precisely what the SSPX does since it’s very beginning, shifting the Pope Magisterium, accepting what is Catholic and rejecting what is heresy…🤔🤔🤔
That's not "judging th Pope", that's refusing to compromise the faith on a personal basis. I'm not going to go out and buy a Pachamama idol and parade it around on top of my Missal at Mass. That does not put me in the position of "judging the Pope". It just means that I am Catholic and I will not knowingly apostatize.
There is a talk on obedience on Sensus Fidelium that is worth listening to. It talks about obedience to the Pope and the “Borgia Pope”, pinned as the worst Pope in the history of the Church. It gives a lot to ponder. For Christ built HIS Church with an imperfect human at its command and promised to defend It, do we believe His Statement who decide for ourselves without the Pope He chose to govern it what is or is not to be done in His Church. There are canonical steps designed to correct errors. St Paul did not turn his back to Peter when he was wrong, he corrected him but remained obedient to him, preserving the unity of the Body of Christ! Let us pray for unity and not our own perceived correctness.
My thought exactly. I will definitely have to relisten several times.
It seems more certain that in 1958 cardinal Siri was elected pope and deposed, if that's the case then perhaps the judgement on the church springs from this. If it is judgement and in the OT judgement was 70 years, let's pray things may change in 2028
I think Siri either just outright refused election (didn't want it) or taking all things into consideration (geopolitics wise) willingly stepped aside. All he ever said in an interview was "the secret" which tells you something got discussed in the conclave. But for the notion a validly elected pope was removed or intimidated into resignation you either have to believe everyone else in the conclave was in on it; or that you had a room full of cowards. I personally cannot believe that if it were true someone would have gone running to the news media to tell the whole world (with no regard for being excommunicated) all h&ll would have then broken loose and deservedly so. But the fact such a tale never came to light until almost 20 years later seems more a fabrication to rationalize the sede / trad movement
Many, many years ago I was present at the St. Ignatius Retreat House in Ridgefield, CT when Bishop Williamson (remember him?) was asked by a professed SeVac "Your Excellency, do you think that Karol Wojtyla is a heretic?" The good Bishop replied "He may very well be, that is, he may believe things that are actually against the Faith, but he has not sat upon the Throne of Peter attempting to bind the world's Catholics to any error; and that, my friend, is the work of the Holy Ghost!"
I don't think that BXVI was denying the resurrections (11:00) He is not using traditional terminology, but When he says that Jesus' body was no longer subject to "space and time" it could be interpreted as a body that has the gifts of Impassibility, Subtlety , Agility, and Clarity. The language is problematic, and most defiantly inflected by Teihard de Chardin, but I don't think it could be concluded that he was denying the resurrection. However, he was defiantly inflected by modernists, What this shows, is that the infiltration in the Church is more than anyone can imagine who was raised in the NO Church far from any influence of Tradition, (like me)
I don’t believe Bergolio’s utterances could mean “tacit resignation,” but simply arrogant demeanor after over 10 years of doing and saying whatever his agenda dictates him with no serious resistance whatsoever by any one in the Catholic Church. Thus, why not to continue doing it for other decade longer???
All my questions have been answered. There have been problems in the past. The Church has the authority and we must trust the words of our Lord "The gates of hell"
Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible?peace,
Let us hope that God gives Pope Francis a long life and keeps the Holy Spirit close to him.
Remember when paul called out Peter to his face .we are allowed to talk about pope Francis Francis he is not untouchable
We have a great Pope, thanks be to God.
A couple things on Pope Paul IV's document "Cum Ex." Father's point about its negation with the promulgation of the CIC 1917 is well made. I would say it was superseded earlier with St Pius X's legislation on conclaves. Also in regards "Cum Ex," in paragraph 1, before Pope Paul gets into his canonical and legislative decrees on heretical hierarchs (starting paragraph 2), he talks about the importance and grandeur of the office of the Supreme Pontiff. He then adds a strong "nevertheless" and states that even the Roman Pontiff can be contradicted if he has been detected to have deviated from the Faith. This is stated as a principle, plain and simple. I think its an important apologetic for Abp Lefebvre and traditionalists in general.
Exactly it was obviously a matter of discipline made by a paranoid pope which was disregarded almost immediately. Leo XIII appointed John Henry Newman as a Cardinal. Now Newman was obviously a heretic before his conversion. But being made a Cardinal he could have been elected pope. I.e. Leo XIII clearly disregarded Paul IV's bull.
Code of Canon 1917 - This was under the reign of Pope Benedict V, a spiritual son of Cardinal Rampola, a Freemason..
@@bobbie8059 The 1917 Code was compiled by Pope Pius X and Pope Benedict XV. In any case, James Holm has made a big mistake because Cum Ex is in the code of canon law in the footnotes everywhere, and those canons in the code are not abrogated or derogated but are in force by virtue of canon 6. Fr McG made many big mistakes as SSPX always does on these things and James Holm only looked at one line of Cum Ex and took it out of context of the rest of the document which is quite clear if any honest person reads it.
thessalonians 2;7. For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.(that happened in 1958. look up withsmoke1958) the true Pope was taken out of the way.
This is pius x and like groups?
Apocalypse 17;16-17 and the ten horns which thou sawest in the beast: these shall hate the harlot, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and shall burn her with fire
For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.
And when you see sspx join the novus bogus church remember this
Apocalypse 18;4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues.
Become a sedevacantist. It's the only catholic position. Lafever would be by now.
Father is brilliant
Awesome podcast. I LOVE YOU GUYS!!! Keep the faith and continue pumping out the truth!!! May GOD BLESS YOU FATHERS!!!
Velox Versutus Vigilans
Even if Bergoglio claims to be with our Catholic Church, his actions don't show it... Lord have mercy!!
Deposing a Pope is self-defeating. Why not let him suffer the consequences of his errors from righteous men until God chooses to end his reign? What hell!!!
Has Pope Francis even read the Bible?? What he is saying is directly opposed to what Christ and the apostles say right there in Scripture. I pray for his conversion before he dies.
We must trust in the Loving Father, even when sinful men killed our Lord and evil men taught against Him, God showed us and them His glory and power. The Truth and His Church grew.
Looks to me like Satan is laughing about how we use these things and trip over ourselves, trying to stay true to our church, and still he stays in charge, destroying our church.
Isn't Holy mother church the bride of Christ ? She too must go through her crucifixion just as Jesus did....... She will be resurrected to her former glory as Our Lady is going to triumph over evil. God is in charge
Boy how that priest is so fond of the word “seems”.
That's because it would be inappropriate for him to make judgements regarding matters that may be apparent, but are not necessarily proven or certain.
This was excellent. Thank you. It would also be great if you could do a video similar to this on Beneplentism, particularly a response to the work of Dr. Edmund Mazza & Patrick Coffin. Their arguments are very good but I'm curious to get a well explained analysis like this one. God bless.
Thank you Father for speaking about this .
LET'S GO
It would be interesting to see how the FSSPX responds to Francis’ authority should he eliminate the TLM altogether, and dissolve the FSSPX.
Is there a difference between sspx and fsspx?
They would just keep doing what they are doing......
Didn’t Archbishop Vegano speak out calling the Pope a “ bad Pope “ ?
Yes he did but he is in retirement i.e no longer an active Archbishop!
He has said we have a "non Catholic" Pope .... which is an oxymoron.
Archbishop Vigano may be in retirement but he's still a Catholic.
Just asking, could you have closed caption for deaf and hard of hearing people, Thank you. God bless SSPX
Tap video while playing in top right corner is "cc" tap that and captions will be on
Why does the Trinity not appear in the Bible?peace,
All through Catholic History we have had Pope's do and say incorrect things and that did not negate that they were legitimate Pope's. Christ remains with the church. Christ allows Himself to be in the Eucharist through Priests whether or not the priest is in State of Grace or saying wrong things. God would not allow Pope Francis to speak heresy ex cathedra or change any Doctrines. Remember too that even Christ picked a bad Apostle. Judas.
There's been no Catholic Pope since Pope Pius XII. THEY have all been Modernist. And as we were taught by Pope Saint Pius X Modernism is the SYNTHESIS of all heresies. Just listen to the sermon by Saint Lawrence of Port Maurice entitled "The Fewness of the saved." Saint Paul said "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling."
It seems to fall to competent authority to act; to take necessary and concrete steps, according to canon law, to address and to resolve such a situation as has persisted now for 64 years. Who bears this burden and responsibility, and if they do not act, what is their culpability for not acting?
OK for juves and paigans but how about county festivals in las vegas??
Love the St. Anselm example of a saint not being 100% correct. The Ontological Argument.
So, if Pope Francis declares that all religions lead to God, would that be a heretical statement? If he says that he does not accept the title "Vicar of Christ", is that a tacit renunciation of his papacy? If he openly puts a statue of the heretic Martin Luther in a place of honor in the Vatican, is he promoting Lutheranism? Blessing gay marriages? Adoration of The Pachamama idol? To me this appears to be a clue that something is rotten in St. Peter's. And, if the Pope cannot be judged, then how can the hierarchy call out the heresies and stop them?????