God bless you for creating this crisis series. Logical, thoughtful and non-emotional answers to the toughest questions the faithful have ever had to deal with in the history of the Church. These all have been tremendously helpful.
I'm very thankful for and impressed by the information/explantions given by Fr. McGillivray. His knowledge and tretament of the subject matter are a testimony to the formation of SSPX priests. May God bless them all!
Thank for Fr for faithful wisdom in Jesus Christ. Keep informing and clarify the faithfuls with moral intelligence. We pray for our faith in the TRUTH-JESUS CHRIST against evils within the Church.
Thank you Father! Your very detailed information concerning this matter, which has been interpretated incorrectly by many Catholics, especially those who condemn the stance and position of the FSSPX, clears up a lot of confusion. Many of these misinformed Catholics overlook and ignore, or are simply unaware that Pope Paul VI stated himself, that Vatican Council II was not a dogmatic Council, and hence not infallible and non binding. His statements concerning his New Mass would also indicate its non infallibility. The duty and purpose of the Magesterium is to guard the Church's hold of Faith and morals, from the errors and manipulation of men. For it is the temporal aspect of the Church, not its divine indefectable aspect, which is subject to human error.
The true church is where you find the faithful Bishop. A bishop that practices and teaches the faith handed down by the apostles. Faith will always be greater than obedience.
God bless you Andrew and Fathers. I have a question: has the FSSPX had cases of private revelations of Jesus or Mary or the saints between its members, since the beginning of the fraternity?
If it is possible for any liturgy to contain error, then on what basis can anyone claim to have the authority to reject the pope’s authority to impose the Novus Ordo Mass on the Church? If we say it is because of the errors it contains, but we also admit that any liturgy could contain error because no liturgy is infallibly issued, then how does someone legitimately decide how many or what kinds of errors relieve the rest of the Church from obedience to the pope’s direction to use the Novus Ordo?
The common reasoning for rejecting attendance of the Novus Ordo implicitly covers this. It would be decided by comparison to other liturgies in the gravity of the errors (protestantizing the Mass is graver than if it were made onerously long out of misguided reverence), the motives with which the new liturgy was developed or is being mandated, and whether it is a demonstrated danger to the salvation of souls, the highest law.
I think Vatican 2 apologists like Michael Lofton have turned their gaze towards the SSPX in a critical way. I think it would be great if you could address directly some of his criticisms
Does canon 13 of session VII from the Council of Trent prove that not even the pope can change the received and approved rites of the Church (“whomsoever of the pastors of the churches…”)?
As we see today in the church at every level is the spirit of the underworld and him Jesus the light of lights is coming to clean his and I mean his church . Then and only then will the world be in peace for a short time before his 2 coming.✝️🙏🏼🔥🇨🇦🐝
I personally don't get why the SSPX says that the second Vatican council is not infallible, that's irrelevant, It's still authoritative and requires your submission.
Excellent distinction father. The Church did not give us a bad rite of mass. No, of course not. You are making a critical distinction. Pope Paul VI gave us a bad rite of mass. And the current Pope, in his recent Motu proprio, is severely limiting the growth of the traditional Mass, limiting celebration of the traditional Mass and requiring an oath of allegiance to the New Mass. Pope Paul gave us a bad rite and the current Pope demands an oath of allegiance to it. So where does this put us father?
Unfortunately the Priests of the conciliar Church ,when in seminary, were/are taught flawed and erroneous philosophy. Seems like strange subjective way of thinking, like phenomenology. They are no longer taught the correct common sense way of thinking by the great scholastic Tradition purified by the Church
Greetings Father, @SSPX Podcast There are multiple instances in this video where you imply that, 'if X is not infallible, therefore X may be gravely harmful, dangerous, faith destroying, etc.' However, this does not follow in logic, for not all errors are equal, and some may be barely harmful at all; indeed, having consulted multiple pre - Vatican II manuals of theology, and teachings of preconciliar Popes, I have yet to encounter a single instance of any teaching to the effect that non-infallible discipline could thereby by gravely harmful to the faithful, leading to loss of faith, and ultimately loss of souls, as does the Novus Ordo Mass. Therefore, we cannot simply leave the matter here; more explanation is required. Can you please address this issue? (FWIW I appreciate your statement towards end rejecting the attribution of blame to the Church. I hold to a moderate sedevacantist position, which, I believe, in the final analysis, is the only way to avoid laying blame on the Church for the Vatican II revolution.)
Just a thought. I am new to the Catholic Church. Is it possible that when Paul VI set aside the Papal Tiara, he abdicated the Papacy? Sounds kind of similar to what a king would do to abdicate his throne. Let’s take it one step further, is it possible that any Bishops he promoted to Cardinals were invalid? The more I see the more questions I have.
I think that if we use the principles given to us in this video, the answer would bet that if such a thing were possible it would at this time not be a certainty - and so we should act based on what is certain. That being said, I don't think that doing so was a giving up of his papacy, because he continued to sign documents as pope. I personally think it is more of divine providence showing us that the pope would no longer be favoured by the world in Christendom - that we were entering into a new era where religion would be no longer seen as part of the social sphere.
Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, on the Church of Christ) Chapter 3: On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff 2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world. 3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd [50]. 4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation. So then, if the Holy Mass is a matter of discipline then based on the above canons from Vatican I how can the Novus Ordo be questioned; or worse, rejected and hence being disobedient in a matter of discipline. Full disclosure, I am a regular attendee at the Tridentine Mass. Thank you.
We are bound to submit to authority of Rome, but not necessarily to obey each particular command, since evil command is misuse of authority. We must have the right understanding understand of what submission means... For example, child is bound to be submitted to a parent, even a bad one, but that doesn't mean that he is obliged to obey evil commands. There are actually more convincing arguments for infallibility of NOM, but they have been answered in the video and comments above...
Gentlemen, the archbishop's importance cannot be denied. But perhaps you can acknowledge that the "American Nine" had a better perspective on how bad things would become. Your presentations are really exhausting exercises in fence walking. I wonder if the SSPX could continue to avoid Bergoglio s wrath without what can be described as a teacher's pet relationship.
@@soniamartin2007 Pure schism is habitual disobedience to the Roman Pontiff. And you are pretty much in schism from Francis as the American Nine are. It’s just that the latter understood this better than you.
The tridentine Mass is not really old! Where are Holy Chants? Holy hymns? Pews, no prostrations, women do not cover, instruments, priests without beards, etc....ALL LATE INNOVATIONS!
@Zachary Trent Pews are wrong, no matter if the greeks use them or not. Instruments are forbidden completely. The ancient chant was acapella monophon chant. Men and women were seperated. Unbaptised were not allowed to enter the Temple and participate during the Holy Mysteries.
@@AveChristusRex There was a Pope called Gregory who changed a few words of the roman eucharistic canon and the people of old Rome were so upset that they wanted to kill him.
@@AveChristusRex Nativitas Dei Genetrix...this hymn almost every Orthodox kid knows! Where is it in the latin church? No one knows it? Where is Holy Iconography?
One church, one body, one head. Is God divided into X churches? No. Wherever there are X churches with different doctrines there are X-1 churches with wrong doctrine because the Holy Spirit will only guide the one church Jesus founded. Truth doesn't contradict itself. So there can only be one church with correct doctrine and its certainly not whatever church you're part of.
These SSPX priests are young and brilliant young men. Thank God for blessing us with these Holy priests.
God bless you for creating this crisis series. Logical, thoughtful and non-emotional answers to the toughest questions the faithful have ever had to deal with in the history of the Church. These all have been tremendously helpful.
The SSPX should be prepared for a big influx of new parishioners.
I'm very thankful for and impressed by the information/explantions given by Fr. McGillivray. His knowledge and tretament of the subject matter are a testimony to the formation of SSPX priests. May God bless them all!
Thank for Fr for faithful wisdom in Jesus Christ. Keep informing and clarify the faithfuls with moral intelligence. We pray for our faith in the TRUTH-JESUS CHRIST against evils within the Church.
Thank you Father this episode has helped me immensely! 🙏🏽
A great insightful and informative podcast on the current issues at hand. Thank you! Keep posting these talks.
Thank you Father! Your very detailed information concerning this matter, which has been interpretated incorrectly by many Catholics, especially those who condemn the stance and position of the FSSPX, clears up a lot of confusion. Many of these misinformed Catholics overlook and ignore, or are simply unaware that Pope Paul VI stated himself, that Vatican Council II was not a dogmatic Council, and hence not infallible and non binding. His statements concerning his New Mass would also indicate its non infallibility. The duty and purpose of the Magesterium is to guard the Church's hold of Faith and morals, from the errors and manipulation of men. For it is the temporal aspect of the Church, not its divine indefectable aspect, which is subject to human error.
Very helpful! Thank you very much ❤️🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
A wonderful and insightful episode. Thank you.
The true church is where you find the faithful Bishop. A bishop that practices and teaches the faith handed down by the apostles. Faith will always be greater than obedience.
The Church can not give us any defective teaching. The Modernist kabal did. It's time to speak up clearly again as Archbishop Lefebvre did.
God bless you Father.
Great series. This discusión by this inteligent Priest is way over My pay grade.
God bless you Andrew and Fathers. I have a question: has the FSSPX had cases of private revelations of Jesus or Mary or the saints between its members, since the beginning of the fraternity?
If it is possible for any liturgy to contain error, then on what basis can anyone claim to have the authority to reject the pope’s authority to impose the Novus Ordo Mass on the Church?
If we say it is because of the errors it contains, but we also admit that any liturgy could contain error because no liturgy is infallibly issued, then how does someone legitimately decide how many or what kinds of errors relieve the rest of the Church from obedience to the pope’s direction to use the Novus Ordo?
The common reasoning for rejecting attendance of the Novus Ordo implicitly covers this. It would be decided by comparison to other liturgies in the gravity of the errors (protestantizing the Mass is graver than if it were made onerously long out of misguided reverence), the motives with which the new liturgy was developed or is being mandated, and whether it is a demonstrated danger to the salvation of souls, the highest law.
It seems like the best answer comes at 1:09:45.
I think Vatican 2 apologists like Michael Lofton have turned their gaze towards the SSPX in a critical way. I think it would be great if you could address directly some of his criticisms
Paul V1 gave us a defective liturgy, not the Holy Church. Thank you again.
we just have to stay away from doubtful sacrament or in this case "defective" liturgy
Agree. It was Montini and the powers behind him.
Was the defective liturgy embraced by the Church?
Does canon 13 of session VII from the Council of Trent prove that not even the pope can change the received and approved rites of the Church (“whomsoever of the pastors of the churches…”)?
As we see today in the church at every level is the spirit of the underworld and him Jesus the light of lights is coming to clean his and I mean his church . Then and only then will the world be in peace for a short time before his 2 coming.✝️🙏🏼🔥🇨🇦🐝
I personally don't get why the SSPX says that the second Vatican council is not infallible, that's irrelevant, It's still authoritative and requires your submission.
Thank you. I was tempted to dismiss the entire V2 Church.
As you should. Disobedience may be required to maintain a proper faith.
Going Orthodox is no answer. It would be to discard the biblical and traditional reality that there is a Papacy with real jurisdiction
Father are you saying that the Holy Ghost inspired Anibale bugnini to create the new mass?
Thanks for quoting Auctorem Fidei. Pius VI could not have been more clear. You are in error.
Excellent distinction father. The Church did not give us a bad rite of mass. No, of course not. You are making a critical distinction. Pope Paul VI gave us a bad rite of mass. And the current Pope, in his recent Motu proprio, is severely limiting the growth of the traditional Mass, limiting celebration of the traditional Mass and requiring an oath of allegiance to the New Mass.
Pope Paul gave us a bad rite and the current Pope demands an oath of allegiance to it. So where does this put us father?
Is the Liturgy merely disciplinary? It seems like this would have to be established before arguing disciplinary infallibility.
Unfortunately the Priests of the conciliar Church ,when in seminary, were/are taught flawed and erroneous philosophy. Seems like strange subjective way of thinking, like phenomenology. They are no longer taught the correct common sense way of thinking by the great scholastic Tradition purified by the Church
Greetings Father, @SSPX Podcast
There are multiple instances in this video where you imply that, 'if X is not infallible, therefore X may be gravely harmful, dangerous, faith destroying, etc.'
However, this does not follow in logic, for not all errors are equal, and some may be barely harmful at all; indeed, having consulted multiple pre - Vatican II manuals of theology, and teachings of preconciliar Popes, I have yet to encounter a single instance of any teaching to the effect that non-infallible discipline could thereby by gravely harmful to the faithful, leading to loss of faith, and ultimately loss of souls, as does the Novus Ordo Mass. Therefore, we cannot simply leave the matter here; more explanation is required.
Can you please address this issue?
(FWIW I appreciate your statement towards end rejecting the attribution of blame to the Church. I hold to a moderate sedevacantist position, which, I believe, in the final analysis, is the only way to avoid laying blame on the Church for the Vatican II revolution.)
What about sedeprivation? That’s the only way I can square the circle
Just a thought. I am new to the Catholic Church. Is it possible that when Paul VI set aside the Papal Tiara, he abdicated the Papacy? Sounds kind of similar to what a king would do to abdicate his throne.
Let’s take it one step further, is it possible that any Bishops he promoted to Cardinals were invalid? The more I see the more questions I have.
I think that if we use the principles given to us in this video, the answer would bet that if such a thing were possible it would at this time not be a certainty - and so we should act based on what is certain.
That being said, I don't think that doing so was a giving up of his papacy, because he continued to sign documents as pope. I personally think it is more of divine providence showing us that the pope would no longer be favoured by the world in Christendom - that we were entering into a new era where religion would be no longer seen as part of the social sphere.
Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, on the Church of Christ)
Chapter 3: On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff
2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.
3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd [50].
4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.
So then, if the Holy Mass is a matter of discipline then based on the above canons from Vatican I how can the Novus Ordo be questioned; or worse, rejected and hence being disobedient in a matter of discipline. Full disclosure, I am a regular attendee at the Tridentine Mass.
Thank you.
We are bound to submit to authority of Rome, but not necessarily to obey each particular command, since evil command is misuse of authority. We must have the right understanding understand of what submission means... For example, child is bound to be submitted to a parent, even a bad one, but that doesn't mean that he is obliged to obey evil commands.
There are actually more convincing arguments for infallibility of NOM, but they have been answered in the video and comments above...
Gentlemen, the archbishop's importance cannot be denied. But perhaps you can acknowledge that the "American Nine" had a better perspective on how bad things would become. Your presentations are really exhausting exercises in fence walking. I wonder if the SSPX could continue to avoid Bergoglio s wrath without what can be described as a teacher's pet relationship.
Agreed. Lets cut the BS at this point and cut straight to the point.
@@soniamartin2007 Pure schism is habitual disobedience to the Roman Pontiff. And you are pretty much in schism from Francis as the American Nine are. It’s just that the latter understood this better than you.
The tridentine Mass has nothing to do with the Old Roman Liturgy!
That's not true.
The tridentine Mass is not really old! Where are Holy Chants? Holy hymns? Pews, no prostrations, women do not cover, instruments, priests without beards, etc....ALL LATE INNOVATIONS!
@Zachary Trent The whole rite is quite new! Study the old Roman Liturgy.
@Zachary Trent Pews are wrong, no matter if the greeks use them or not. Instruments are forbidden completely. The ancient chant was acapella monophon chant. Men and women were seperated. Unbaptised were not allowed to enter the Temple and participate during the Holy Mysteries.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Tragedia.
sspx mythology
The problem is the false teaching of infallible popes!
Papal infalliblity never meant that popes can't give false teaching.
@@AveChristusRex Than the teaching is unnecsesary. What is it for?
@@AveChristusRex There was a Pope called Gregory who changed a few words of the roman eucharistic canon and the people of old Rome were so upset that they wanted to kill him.
@@AveChristusRex Nativitas Dei Genetrix...this hymn almost every Orthodox kid knows! Where is it in the latin church? No one knows it? Where is Holy Iconography?
One church, one body, one head. Is God divided into X churches? No. Wherever there are X churches with different doctrines there are X-1 churches with wrong doctrine because the Holy Spirit will only guide the one church Jesus founded. Truth doesn't contradict itself. So there can only be one church with correct doctrine and its certainly not whatever church you're part of.