Is the SSPX Schismatic?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 жов 2024
- Is the SSPX Schismatic? w/ Andrew Mioni
Purchase Andrew's book here: enroutebooksan...
📖Top 10 Lies About Pope Francis EXPOSED (Free Ebook): reason.podia.c...
📖Answering Orthodoxy: shop.catholic....
🎓Logical Fallacies in Apologetics (Course): reason.podia.c...
🎓The Theological Notes (Course): reason.podia.c...
💰Go Fund Me: gofund.me/fb9d...
💰Donate: www.paypal.com...
👪Patreon: patreon.com/reasonandtheology
👪Locals: reasonandtheology.locals.com
DON'T FORGET TO SUBSCRIBE AND LIKE!
Exactly right! You either Catholic or you are not. No need to call yourself traditionalist.
Great episode. Please bring Andrew back on the show soon. Thank you and God bless!!!
I pray we can all stay together and be the change we want to see in the Church. Separation is not the answer. We can work within the system to affect the Church leadership. Great interview.
@@Freeze4545 what they should be doing is working to make the ordinary mass on their parish as reverent as it was intended to be. This nonsense of disobeying the pope, rejecting a Church Council and spreading nasty tantrums online is only damaging the Church.
@@sacredartsource8297 agree
Neither is excommunication
Exactly 💯
When talking about the dangers of heresy vs the dangers of schism, I recalled a quote from Star Trek: The Next Generation. “Villains who twirl their mustaches are easy to spot. Those who clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged.”
Great discussion you two, dropping some serious truth bombs in this one.
This guy has all the cheek bones.
Cillian Murphy got some of them cheek bones too.
Having attended a SSPX church it's definitely concerning. The people I met and interacted with had this attitude of smug superiority as being the "better Catholics" and that people who were brought in via Norvos Ordo are lesser Catholics.
He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.” - Luke 18:9-14
Small world.
Hence the schismatic mentality people speak of
Yes I agree. My experience of them as well.
I had this too
Excellent guest
Schism is like contraception: you celebrate the Eucharist as the sacrament of unity, while frustrating its natural effect to bring all the faithful into union.
This is a brilliant comment.
For a moment I thought you were referring to the dwindling number of Novus Ordo Mass goers, or the empty seminaries, or the falling numbers of those who believe in the real presence. Almost like Vatican 2 was contraception inside the Church...
@@andrewbartel12 it's not a good comment because it applies to the Novus Ordo and Vatican 2.
@@Straight-Outta-Scripture ?
The Novus Ordo, being approved and promulgated by the papal authority of Pope Saint Paul VI, and Vatican II, being an authoritative Ecumenical Council, approved and promulgated by Pope Paul VI (and every pope since) *cannot* be schismatic, as the pope (head of the visible Church on earth) cannot be opposed to the Body of Christ.
What would the Body be without the Head that Christ Himself promised to us to the end of time?
@@susand3668 I never said the NO was schismatic. I'm referring to the NO as a contraception in the Church. Failing masses and parishes, lack of Mass attendance, little belief in the true presence... this list goes on.
Andy cuts through all the trad side quests and gets down to the main issues, refutes them and shows why continuing the "alternate" path leads to nowhere but complete separation
Independent Rite catholic, or in other words- traditional Protestant
Very helpful. I have friends trending this way and this is very useful information
Irony: transposing the principle of judgement to yourself is the principle of Modernism (ie. Immanence). The ones decrying the "conciliar church" as Modernist are themselves Modernist.
But not if they have objective evidence that followed up by the authentic unchanging magiaterium of the Church
The thing is, to be 'Traditional' in the Church historically and geographically would have meant:
Receiving in the Hand
Receiving on the tongue
Receiving while reclining on the floor or sofa.
Praying in Greek
Praying in Latin
Praying in 'Frankish'
Being a "Mass of St Jerome" Catholic
Being a "Mass of St Gregory" Catholic
Being a "Sarum Canon" Catholic
Attending Mass where the opening and closing prayers were made up on the spot since there were no missals to speak of.
BTW, the rosary was an innovation. Now it's as traditional as you can get.
What you’re describing is Antiquarianism, not Traditionalism. It is not traditional to make the 21st century Church the same as the 1st century. That’s antiquarian and faux primitivism. Traditionalism for the 21st century Church is to build off the recent previous centuries and expand like a tree. I understand your sentiment, and myself have never attended and will never (unless necessary) attend Mass at a SSPX chapel, but it is important we approach our opponents correctly.
@@christophersalinas2722 OK there is clearly confusion about what I am saying as I did not spell it out explicitly so let me clarify.
I am obviously not advocating antiquarianism. I was, in a gentle 'ribbing' kind of way, pointing out the dual standards used by the 'Lefverists' which become shown up when matched against history.
Essentially the Lefverists behave as of the Church started in 1570 and ended in 1969. Once you look back prior to 1570 their 'logic' falls to pieces.
The dual standards are:
The Liturgy was allowed to develop up to the Tridentine but then it must stop. Yes, I know some Lebverfists will talk of organic development but they do not really mean it given their 'resistance' has already fragmented over which version of the Missal must be used - 1962, 1955, 1570? They all have a 'cut off point' for development and argue among themselves as to where it is.
When the Pauline Rite borrows from ancient liturgies the Lebveritsts call this antiquarianism. But when the Tridentine rite does the same this is 'Tradition.'
When the Pauline rite restores ancient practices the Lefverists calls this 'innovation.' When the Tridentine adds in new prayers and novel practices this is 'development.'
The Lefverists are also fine with Gallian rites, the Sarum Canon, the Missal of Pope Gregory the Great being banned by the most beloved Council of Trent to usher in the Tridentine but the Tridentine is 'special' and must be the Mass of the Church forever which, again, is a dual standard.
Communion in the hand is 'antiquarianism' which has been superseded by the 'superior development' of communion on the tongue (which clergy do not actually do not like. They are not fans of peoples' tongues being stuck out of them all the time) but switching to Ad populi is an innovation and corruption when... it's the same thing. Only one is designated development and the other a corruption - when both are actually only disciplines! The Lefverists are forever confusing disciplines and policies with dogma. It gets even more crazy when we note the discipline of reclining at agape meals.
These dual standards really become obvious when matched against history. That's what I am showing. The Lefverists get around history by a MASS of dual standards and special pleading. They reject Antiquarianism but they actually impose it around 1570 and want the Church 'frozen.' Yes, even in relation to Vatican 1 that they generally implicitly deny.
In short, the record of history shows the Church can change disciplines and the Liturgy quite radically. The Lefverists use the Antiquarianism ‘card’ to get out of the fact even the Tridentine was an innovation. It’s all a mass of dual standards.
That was my point. I hope that clears things up.
@@jedipadawan7023Sorry but your arguments paint a diluted image and caricature of what the SSPX actually advocates. Firstly, you are wrong, the SSPX all use the 1962 Missal, so no there is no confusion or disunity as to the end point.
Only the Ecclesia Dei are allowed to use the 1954 Easter Liturgy.
Also you are neglecting that Trent and its missal was not a rupture but a continual development of the Mass that already existed.
I recommend you to read about the Liturgy and its organical development over far more than 1000 years. There is a difference between whether the Church CAN introduce a different liturgy (arguably yes) and whether it is GOOD & legitimate to do so (the rotten fruits in large parts of the world suggest no)
@@jedipadawan7023I feel you have not really studies the positions of the SSPX carefully. What you have is more a distorted image
@@karlheven8328 I didn't mention the SSPX.
However, I have read their OWN documents and the 62 reason you cannot attend the Pauline rite. There's no doubt the SSPX are schismatic in heart.
Vatican II and the Pauline rite have opened the Church up to the world - not just Europe and the West. The Rad-Trad wax lyrical about the collapse of the Church - which was according BEFORE Vatican II under the Tridentine. They completely ignore the genuine new springtime of the Church everywhere.
I am an ex=pat Brt. I have seen the Churches empty. I have sen churches literally smashed and turned to rubble. The church I was baptised in no longer exists. I know the worst.
I come out to Indonesia, the Mass in the Pauline rite and (horror!) vernacular and I cannot move for people! The basements are adapted to handle the numbers! There are video screens to display the Mass not only in the basement but the halls and outside to the canopies on occasion! Church growth, Church numbers are greater than ever before and conversions FAR outstrip population increases. South Korea has had 1,200% growth since 1970. Yes, 1970, the arrival of the Pauline rite and the vernacular. You can trace the fall of the West from 1955 with the arrival of Elvis and then again from 1963 with the Beatles. The Pope star prophets brought the doom of the West.
You can also trace DIRECTLY the growth the Church outside of the West from 1970 with the arrival of the Pauline Rite. I was looking up the churches in my local area and you can see the new church buildings from.... 1970. BTW, my sister in law was baptised this Easter. Her parents both own a mosque. Gives a clue.
And that's before we even talk about 'organic development of the Mass,' Clue: Before 1570 and the printing press it was liturgical chaos. There was no organic development. It was a free for all.
I experienced my “reversion” under the context of traditionalist culture and TLM about 14 years ago. There was a a definite beauty to participation in the TLM which complimented my spiritual development as a Catholic “neophyte”. But as I continued to grow and develop in my knowledge and faith, my eyes became more open to the elitism and the exclusivity among many of my spiritual friends and mentors who embraced a traditionalist lifestyle/practice. This eventually led to a distressing period involving a sort of cognitive dissonance for me, a definite “wrestling with an angel” moment. Surprisingly, more distressing because of the fact that I was part of their IN crowd! Too much to go over all my experience but the final moment for me came when I was leading a youth group for young girls and teenagers at my parish. I was facilitating a sort of “teaching moment” about the use of chapel veils during Mass (which I wore at that time). What I thought started off as good eventually led to one of the older teenaged members proclaiming the necessity of wearing one to be a good Catholic among the younger members of the group.😳 My immediate response was “well actually, more important than the chapel veil is the girl under the chapel veil!” Sure, one could say this was a natural response of a run-of-the-mill, egotistical teenager. However, I was close enough to her parents and many others who I observed fostering this exact same attitude among their children. It was active fostering of an “us vs them” mindset which worked against any sense of community or fellowship with people who were “not like us”. In the end, this may be a special type of spiritual infection or St. Paul’s thorn that afflicts these particular groups as their individual members travel on their own spiritual journeys. However, no humility = no charity = no fellowship = no “communion”…so not sacramental.
I started wearing a veil a few years ago, and do like it for various reasons. Mainly aesthetics, and very minutely cause it means I don’t have to do much with my hair 😅
However, I would never consider myself “better” or “more holy” for wearing it because I see so many other wonderful and great Catholic gals who don’t wear it and have a great love for the faith. I also hear stories from older people who say that if a gal forgot her veil for mass, she would be gawked at or made to wear something else on her head, like a handkerchief or napkin. My college director said that sort of rigid, unspoken rule is what drove his sisters away from the faith because their grandmother was very uncharitable with them when they forgot their veils.
It’s okay for us to have personal devotions and piety, but we definitely need to remember that Jesus said “it is what comes out of a man that defiles him” and that we should not be “white washed tombs” like the Pharisees were.
Great interview!!
These different split off groups are just plainly new protestants.
Hmm more like new Orthodox
@@paulswrath5472 yes also Orthodox. The orthodox question was happening outside of Europe and for the man in the street it did not make much difference. The Western world was thrown into wars because of the protestant schism and we are confronted daily on every level with the result until now . When you live in the Eastern Mediterranean countries , it is Orthodoxy which is more visible.
It is my humble and unqualified opinion that every agent working to sow division by undermining the authority of the Magisterium, of the Pope and therefore of the one true Catholic Church is the anti-Christ because by extension they undermine Jesus Christ Himself who while on the cross said:
"I ask not only on behalf of these but also on behalf of those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one," (John 17: 20-22)
Question: must the anti-Christ necessarily be an individual or can it be a collective movement that does not fully confess Jesus Christ? That is, not only confesses who Jesus is but also what Jesus asked of us and for us?
I humbly agree.
Any SSPX I've ever interacted with online have all been "bogus ordo" and Ive seen ppl on Twitter say their priest told them not to attend NO but say the rosary or Divine Office if they cannot attend TLM.
@@mpkropf5062they do accept VII Popes up to and including Francis, they just think they don't have to listen to anything they say.
Also the Rosary is a medieval devotion, St. JP II added the Luminous mysteries which a lot of trads reject.
@@Carlos-M Some don’t acknowledge any of the Popes since Vatican 2. They seem to have a heart issue. Which is one reason Pope Francis does what he does to bring the church together but they want to tare it apart.
@@juantoomany7202 don't get me wrong, I'm not with the SSPX. I'm just stating what they say about themselves. It is nonsensical.
@@Carlos-M this is what I dislike about them the most, they say "oh no we do believe in the popes after v2" but we can kinda reject them and go with everything Lefebrve said (which is strictly against v2) so it's paying lipservice to "obedience" to claim membership. It's deliberately grey area to justify their position.
@@Carlos-M the Luminous Mysteries are facultative.
I almost never pray them - I only pray them when I'm praying with other people.
I had a long conversation with my parents this morning about how Protestantism doesn't align with the early church and may be considered unbiblical or heretical by the earliest Christians. I pointed out that people often create their own version of Jesus based on their opinions and comfort level. However, my parents dismissed my concerns, saying that I was overthinking it, and that everything would be sorted out when Jesus returns.
Keep up the good work brother! We are all behind you.
@@matthewschmidt5069thanks. it's a very trying time and at some times feels hopeless
@@josh39684I will pray for you. It is never hopeless. Remember that the Lord will be with you.
@@mpkropf5062encouragement is better than triumphalism.
That was perfectly put to your parents. Hopefully they will see the light. You have spiritual wisdom. God bless you in trying to save them.
The first mass was not in Latin, and much different than the TLM
a protestant argument that you are employing here. And Pius Xii rejected this false antiquarianism
@@karlheven8328 oh? What did Pius XII say? As for the ordinary Mass, yes that is just as valid as the TLM and the first Mass.
@@sacredartsource8297 It is just as valid but it is also less sacred. In the new mass a lot of forms of sacredness have been removed. This is seen and follows through in modern architecture, song and music. These are objective criteria of beauty
I agree w the guest and its funny to know that i am in one degree of separation with him by way of the priests of ssj and i also went to the Winona seminary to discern my vocation in the spring of 91. I just go to my diocesan mass but i follow all of this stuff still. I want to put out there that one of the things that influenced me in the early 90’s to go to sspx seminary vs st johns in camarillo was an encyclical by st pius x, where he draws a picture of what is now the novus ordo and condemns the attempt to turn around the alter as a modernist sham. It was eerie picture. But it was an encyclical and thats the rub. We mustvstruggle to discern the “true magesterium” and it simply cant be confined to the independents or the sspx. Now. Some folks in these camps are indeed very holy and i do think God and our lady have this sorted out. We should stay in the visible fold, and not take matters into our own hands.
An encyclical, yes, but one that spoke of disciplinary matters, which change with Society's norms.
Thank God, we need only hold with the pope to know what is the "true Magisterium", and what is not.
Thank you for your faithfulness, staying in the "visible fold"! God bless you!
Communion is Thanksgiving, being thankful for the priests who feed us our Lord as we humbly submit to the Magisterial Authority established by Christ and sustained by the Holy Spirit. To reject the banquet feast by embracing a feast of rebellion is to say, "I WILL NOT SERVE." Such an act of divorce is not praising God no matter how good it may feel at the time. It's no different than the fornicator who thinks he is not sinning because he is convinced he is in love. So many are greatly misled these days so we must all pray diligently during these trials or we too will fall 🙏
Great conversation. I would point out that Vatican II did not create the new Mass, it was created after the Council. And it seems to me that the Novus Ordo goes beyond what Sacrosanctum Concilium calls for. So one can't directly say the way the NO turned out is what the Council Fathers called for.
A distinction and claim I'm well aware of.
wonderful video. just purchased andrew's book.
Ordered!
Just ordered mine!
This young man is brilliant.
The Church is a family. What family has two suppers?
There are different Rites within th church!
Such a good question; "When will the crisis end?" I've also been thinking about that too. More specifically what is the end game of the SSPX? Will they perpetually be just doing what they're doing until Jesus comes back? I asked this question to a lay person that attends an SSPX-Resistance chapel, and they basically replied, yes. The SSPX will continue to do what they're doing because Triumph of the Immaculate Heart is fast approaching. I'm not sure what that translates to in terms of time
The Church is in a crisis though. It is a fact
My first mass ever was TLM at an FSSP parish. My second mass was TLM at a regular parish. I'm a convert of just over a year, and I've been to both NO and TLM several times. Love them both! I have no contention with either.
Receiving communion on the tongue versus the hand, heard that there are more issues with the latter.
Perhaps some things shouldn't have changed.
Communion on the hand is the dominant form of reception in the first millennium and also it is apostolic. I have a video on it.
@ReasonandTheology I stand corrected. That's good to know. Maybe with all this information buzzing around we need a new ecumenical council to squash all the dissenting and misleading information that is recycled without being put down decisively.
Presentation has a lot to do with this and people's unwillingness to change when an argument or evidence suggests they ought to.
@@ReasonandTheologyI just think communion on the tongue or in the hand is acceptable if done with a sincere heart. Too many people policing what others are doing is wrong. I was once told I was crossing myself wrong from a parishioner (right to left and hand formation). Having a bi-ritual priest years back explained it to me this way and it makes me more mindful of what I am doing and not just a rote thing. I stopped for awhile but decided I don’t worship to please others. How others cross themselves or receive communion in their own desired way is their business.
Awesome video.Can't wait to get this book!
Great video. Very informative. God bless you both🙏
How about addressing Modernism? Seems like a pretty bad heresy to me.
32:45 ............. excellent!
Yes they are as the church has repeatedly said
Great video!
This is just a very good conversation!
The Second Vatican Council did not condemn Communism or even mention it, in an agreement between the Holy See and the Soviet Union in order to have Russian Orthodox observers present, Surely, one would think that the greatest threat & enemy of the Church & mankind (Communism) would have been condemned.
bought!
Me too!
David Gordon did an excellent debate on this subject that is worth watching for anyone who has not yet seen it
Hi, Thomas!
@ReasonandTheology would you say the SSPX are formally in schism or practically?
The new intro is dope!
Thanks
Three base ideologies have infected the Church.
1. Relativism (feelings equal to facts, "my truth" equal to The Truth)
2. Hubris (Contemptful Pride/self-righteousness/self-centeredness)
3. Gynocentrism (men, life, and The Church must be oriented towards the wants and feelings of women.)
These are causing the split on both sides...woke and sedevacantist/traditionalists.
And both sides are wrong!
@@mz2535Traditionalists are not wrong though when they follow th authentic Magisterium of all time.
@@karlheven8328 traditionalists follow their distorted view of the teachings of Christ. There is nothing of the migesterium in what they obey besides there own.
@@mz2535 Define Traditionalist. There are a lot of different groups and motivations. We must distinguish and not generalize entire groups/movements
This was a fantastic show. I will be buying this book!
Yes
Very interesting thank you, coming from protestant background back to Catholic church and am weary of schism or cult type mentality. however, The latin mass informs the new mass more, its more in depth, fleshed put,, people are more into the faith, into unpacking the mass, so far Ive gotten a lot out of attending both regular parish and sspx parishes. why cant the Vatican incorporate more of their tastes and welcome them back to the faith? it seems like they are facilitating a revival or sorts among catholic youth as well...that being said I love vatican 2, would never switch to just latin.
The SSPX has consistently refused to return.
The theological problem is that SSPX rejects the documents of Vatican II. Further, many of them preach against others who are faithful to the Church. They claim to be faithful to the Pope because they pray for him, but they won't do as he says.
The Vatican is eager to welcome them back!
The SSPX will never come back into the church on any terms but their own. It isn’t about taste - the FSSP and ICKSP exist. And I’ve witnessed many beautiful NO Masses which incorporate the smells and bells and postures. The SSPX rejects VII entirely.
"Alter against Alter"- by a guy who wrote a book lol. I'm still learning so it might be a good read for me. Where's the best place to get it?
It's "altar" as in what the Eucharist is consecrated on, not alter which is a verb that means to change. The link to where to buy the book is in the video description.
I've heard that Vatican 2 also impacted the Eastern Catholic rites. Any truth to that?
They dropped their Latinazatio and other imposed items.
@@ronselgrath1235Now there is the Society of Saint Josaphat (SSJK) who disagree with the De-Latinization of the byzantine Rite. And they strongly support Old Church Slavonic
Yes SSPX has had issues for a very long time and I think Pope Francis is following Cardinal Bernadin and "The Seamless Garment" which was a massive movement in the 80s.
@@MS-pm4dc You think? Why?
there has always been a war for issues or prioritizing in the US. Prolife is a major issue for many but Cardinal Bernadin said it is a "seamless" garment" where all issues have equal value and the Pope seems to align in that manner.@@halleylujah247
One thing that we should remember or also consider is that sspx reasoning involves the protection of Jesus in the Blessed sacrament, from their perspective. So from their view, they would dissuade the new mass because they perceive it as a mistreatment of the same jesus, so that is what they see is bad. Its a distinction i think. I think tyey woukd say the new mass is valid, but say that that is the problem. But i still go back to Jesus made a visible church. And i agree with the guest, its not for us to take matters into our own hands
My priest said they aren't, but they will be. But if they're not, their Mass should be an option for Catholics when the TLM is restricted more (which was always the plan IMO).
Your priest is wrong. They are in schism per the Church.
@@ReasonandTheology So can one attend an SSPX Mass? I wouldn't think so, but this would be good for Catholics to know when the inevitable happens.
Their Eucharist is illicit; it is sinful, sacrilegious even, for their priests to celebrate Mass. To attend their Masses and receive communion would be to create a rupture in the Body of Christ, as their Masses are celebrated in opposition to the Church. And so no, you cannot attend.
@@clelia8885 to say their Eucharist is sinful, or sacrilegious, maybe you had best inform the Pope of this, since he gave them faculties for marriages, which they do during Mass. Best hurry! he must not know this. 🥴
The sacrament of marriage and the sacrament of the Eucharist are two different sacraments. Wedding Mass is optional, and they only have permission to do marriages where the bishop has given them permission. I know several places where the SSXP does not have permission to witness marriages, yet they do so anyways. Granted permission to witness marriages where the bishop has given permission is completely different than granting faculties to say Mass.
If I am invited to weddings done by the SSPX (which I have been many times), I attend if they have permission from the bishop, but do not attend the Mass.
Lofton, best avoided
Care to engage the conversation of the video or are you commenting for the algorithm ?
Not true.
No.
What is no? You sound like the modernist on CNN. Just saying random things hoping someone listens, but not adding anything.
@@nomassgoer8350 You clearly know what "No" was referring to, the title of the video, or else you wouldn't have become so mad.
I got mad due to the blatant lies of the “no” that you said. Every single Pope has said that the SSPX are in schism. Thus they are in schism. But that’s also the traditional view, and not the modernist view. So unless you are a modernist you would have to agree that they are in schism.
@@nomassgoer8350 Ok, you've admitted that I was right. You knew what "no" was referring to, dishonestly pretended otherwise, and became mad. Not very charitable!
I was not dishonest with you. I was simply pointing out how you have no actual argument thus forcing you to acknowledge that you don’t believe in the Church Christ established. Maybe instead of one word answers you could engage with the arguments that are presented in the video.