Is this Mass Intrinsically Evil?
___________________________________________________________________
John F. Salza, Esq.
June A.D. 2022
Recall what we learned in Part I of this article, that Fr. Reuter’s (and the SSPX’s) position is that it is impossible to interpret the documents of Vatican II in confirming with traditional doctrine (a hermeneutic of continuity, proposed by Pope Benedict XVI, is not possible, they say). Fr. Reuter articulated this position in Episode 30 of the Society’s Crisis in the Church series, called “Hermeneutic of Continuity: Big Word, Big Logical Leap.” However, as we have consistently seen in other podcasts of this series, when SSPX priests attempt to prove their thesis, they immediately contradict themselves, by referring to examples of someone’s faulty interpretation of the council, and not their analysis of the actual text. We saw this repeatedly in Fr. Wiseman’s podcast (Episode 48, “The 4 Questions You Should Ask Yourself about the Crisis”), which I exposed in my article “A Refutation of the SSPX’s Four Answers on the Crisis.” Continue reading...
Exposing the SSPX’s Rejection of the Hermeneutic of Continuity
John Salza Responds to Fr. Reuter, SSPX – Part I
John F. Salza, Esq.
June A.D. 2022
In Episode 30 of the Society’s Crisis in the Church series, called “Hermeneutic of Continuity: Big Word, Big Logical Leap,” Fr. Steven Reuter attempts to explain why the Society of St. Pius X rejects the approach of interpreting the documents of Vatican II in light of Tradition, or what Pope Benedict XVI called “the hermeneutic of continuity,” and instead believes the conciliar documents must be thrown out altogether. The SSPX’s position is based on the view that the documents don’t merely contain ambiguous statements that allow for an interpretation that is contrary to Tradition, but instead are full of teachings that positively teach error, and or even heresy, and therefore cannot be reconciled with Tradition, no matter how hard we might try. Consequently, the SSPX advocates that the documents of Vatican II should be rejected in toto (as a whole), rather than understood using a hermeneutic (or method of interpretation) in light of the Church’s prior teaching. Continue...
A Refutation of the SSPX’s Appeal to Canonical Equity
John Salza Replies to Fr. Peter Scott
To justify their ability to operate without a canonical mission, and also to allegedly receive supplied jurisdiction, the clergy of the SSPX appeal to a principle called “canonical equity,” which is addressed in canon 19 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. In the SSPX article “Supplied Jurisdiction and Traditional Priests,” Fr. Peter Scott states the question as follows: Continue reading...
For decades, the Society has fallaciously appealed to the historical case of St. Eusebius of the fourth century, to justify the illicit episcopal consecrations of Marcel Lefebvre in 1988. In this article, we will see misrepresented the sources it references for the case of Eusebius and inserts fake quotes to further mislead their readers. Continue...
What if Traditional Priests are Suspended?
John Salza Replies to Chris Jackson
John F. Salza, Esq.
February A.D. 2022
Exposing the SSPX’s Errors on Collegiality
John F. Salza, Esq.
February A.D. 2022
In Episode 48 of the Society of St. Pius X’s Crisis in the Church series, Fr. Alexander Wiseman gave a podcast entitled “The 4 Questions to Ask Yourself about the Crisis.” The purpose of the podcast was to explain to Catholics what is the “right position to adopt in the face of this crisis” and, naturally, why the SSPX has adopted the correction position. The four questions Fr. Wiseman asks are: (1) Is there a crisis in the Church?; (2) Is the root of the crisis found in Vatican II and the New Mass?; (3) Should we publicly reject Vatican II and the New Mass?; and, (4) Should we recognize as Catholic the Roman authorities responsible for the crisis? Continue reading...
Collegiality in Light of Tradition
Is Collegiality a Novelty of Vatican II or the Traditional Doctrine on the Episcopate?
By
Robert J. Siscoe
Part I
After years of hearing about the heresy of
collegiality, but admittedly never quite understanding it, I finally decided to
delve into the controversial topic to find out exactly what Vatican II taught
and why it is wrong. To my surprise, what I discovered is that collegiality, as
taught in Lumen Gentium, chapter III, and in the new Code of Canon law, is
entirely traditional from start to finish. There is absolutely nothing
novel about it, and nothing that conflicts in the least with Pastor Aeternus, or anything
else taught in Vatican I. Quite the contrary, as we will
see. Continue reading...
John F.
Salza, Esq.
19 January A.D. 2022
Our Statement on the Society of St. Pius X
Many have asked why we have changed our position on the SSPX, since we frequented their chapels for many years, and particularly since the Society publicly endorsed our book True or False Pope?. To be clear, we have no personal hostility toward the SSPX and the many good men in their ranks. We also continue to attend the Traditional Mass exclusively and hold the Recognize & Resist position, properly understood.
However, our extensive study of ecclesiology and Sedevacantism led us to the inescapable conclusion that the SSPX is in the same canonical and ecclesiastical position as the Sedevacantist and other independent clergy (outside of its delegated faculties), who are not part of the Roman Catholic Church, have no juridical mission from the Church, and hence cannot lawfully exercise their priestly powers. In fact, we were forced to recognize that the Society advances the same erroneous arguments as the Sedevacantists do, to justify their operation without mission, which is contrary to the divine law.
In the course of our study, we also realized that the SSPX embraces other critical theological errors (on the Profession of Faith, juridical mission, supplied jurisdiction, Collegiality, sacramental intention, the nature of the Church, etc.) which we are addressing in our series of articles. Because many of these errors are rooted in an erroneous understanding of the Church itself (errors in ecclesiology), they are actually graver than the Liberal errors on the Left, and that is because they lead Catholics out of the Church, outside of which there is no salvation.
It is our firm hope and prayer that the Society renounce its doctrinal errors and accepts the Church’s Profession of Faith, so that it can be reconciled with the Roman Catholic Church, and given a canonical mission to carry out its ministry lawfully. It is for this purpose that we make our position public, so that the Society’s leadership (and those who support the SSPX) will see the truth, and take the necessary steps toward achieving the long-awaited reconciliation.
John Salza & Robert Siscoe
John Salza Responds to Fr. Zuhlsdorf
on SSPX Masses
January A.D.
2022
On December 23, 2021, Fr. Zuhlsdorf posted the following
question, which he received concerning John Salza’s article on whether Masses
offered by the SSPX fulfill the Sunday and holy days obligation under canon
1248 (Salza’s article demonstrates that SSPX Masses do not fulfill the
obligation):
"Does
attending an SSPX Mass fulfill one’s Sunday obligation? I’m asking because I
ran across the linked article below written by John Salza in November of this
year arguing that attending an SSPX Mass does NOT fulfill the Sunday obligation
to assist at Mass. The article threw me for a loop, as I’ve heard about the
9/27/2002 letter from Msgr. Perl, but not his 4/15/2002 letter; nor had I heard
about the 2012 and 2015 letters from Ecclesia Dei, which seem to cast doubt on
such attendance fulfilling the Sunday obligation."
John Salza replied to Fr. Z privately via email, but as of yet has not received a reply. We are therefore publishing Mr. Salza's email, which can be read here .
Does Assisting at an SSPX Mass
Fulfill One’s Sunday Obligation?
There has been much confusion concerning the question of whether assisting at Masses offered by the Society of St. Pius X on Sundays and Holy Days satisfies the obligation as defined in canon 1248 of the Code of Canon Law. Many efforts to answer this question have fallen short of a proper and thorough interpretation of the law. For example, in a recent podcast entitled “Am I Allowed to Attend an SSPX Mass?” (Episode 47, Crisis series[1]), Fr. Michael Goldade provided no analysis of canon 1248 (other than displaying the canon’s language on screen), which is the only canon directly relevant to the question. Notwithstanding the purpose of the podcast, Father Goldade explained neither the canonical requirements of canon 1248, nor how SSPX Masses satisfy the requirements. Instead, his primary argument was that Catholics can attend an SSPX Mass, and presumably fulfill the obligation, because Catholics have a right to do so (which is a logical fallacy). Continue reading...
The SSPX Rejects All
Church-Approved Traditional Groups
November 2021
In Episode 46 of the Society’s Crisis in the Church series, called “What About the Other Traditional Mass Communities?,” SSPX priest Fr. John McFarland put the SSPX’s schismatic mentality on full display by stating that the Society, in principle, rejects all traditional groups in communion with the Church... Continue reading here
Does the Society of St. Pius X Have an Extraordinary Mission?
John Salza Responds to Fr. Jonathan Loop, SSPX
October 2021
In Episode 44 of the Society of St. Pius X’s Crisis
in the Church series, Fr. Jonathan Loop, SSPX, gave a podcast entitled
“How Can the SSPX Justify its Ministry in the Church?” The purpose of Fr.
Loop’s video was to explain how the SSPX clergy can justify the exercise of
their priestly ministry when they have no permission from the Church to do so.[1] After all, while the bishops of the
SSPX have valid episcopal ordinations (giving them an ontological share in the
sacred functions of Christ), they do not have a canonical mission given
by hierarchical authority, which is required for such functions to become
active and lawful.[2] Further, the priests of the SSPX are
not incardinated (attached or “hinged” to a particular Church or religious
institute in communion with Rome), which is contrary to canon law (“Every
cleric must be incardinated…unattached or transient clerics are not allowed at
all”).[3] (Continue reading)
The SSPX Says Sedevacantist Masses are Less Dangerous than Resistance Masses
October 2021
A few months ago, the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) published a video (Episode 28 of the Society’s Crisis in the Church series) in which Fr. Robinson, as a spokesman for the SSPX, addressed whether Catholics could attend non-SSPX traditional Masses (I just discovered the video this week). While we don’t wish to downplay the crisis in the Church, particularly in light of Pope Francis’ latest assault on tradition (Traditionis Custodes), the notion that a priest with no canonical permission to say Mass could sit in judgment on whether Catholics could attend traditional Masses offered by priests with canonical mission seems odd enough. Indeed, this is evidence of... Continue here
DO SEDEVACANTIST
CLERGY RECEIVE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION FOR CONFESSIONS?
Part I
September 2021
Part I
September 2021
A few weeks ago, in Episode 34 of the Society of St. Pius X’s Crisis in the Church series, Fr. Mauro Tranquillo of the SSPX was interviewed on the subject of Sedevacantism. In the interview, Fr. Tranquillo attempted to highlight a contradiction in the Sedevacantist position. After correctly explaining that all ordinary jurisdiction (i.e., power of governance) in the Church comes through the Pope, Fr. Tranquillo made some troubling statements. Continue here
DO SEDEVACANTIST
CLERGY RECEIVE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION FOR CONFESSIONS?
Part II
September 2021
In the first installment, we examined recent
statements made by Fr. Mauro Tranquillo, SSPX in an interview given for the
Society of St. Pius X’s Crisis in the Church series (Episode 34), in which Fr.
Tranquillo claimed that Sedevacantist priests receive supplied jurisdiction for
confessions even for those not in danger of death, on the ground that we are in
a “state of necessity.” We demonstrated that Fr. Tranquillo makes an erroneous
extrapolation of the suppletory principle by extending its application from
extreme cases of danger of death to cases where there is no danger of death, which
has no basis in canon law or the canonical tradition of the Church.
We further showed that common error, which is another condition that triggers supplied jurisdiction, also does not apply to Sedevacantist and other independent clergy, because... Continue here
Answering the Objection to "The True Meaning of Bellarmine's Ipso Facto Loss of Office Theory"
Two
Contrasting Errors: Sedevacantism and Excessive-Papalism (False
Obedience).
- Resistance Podcast 95: Errors of Sedevacantist in Ecclesiology (8-1-2020)
- Resistance Podcast 97: Sedevacantism is a Revolutionary Idea (7-28-2020)
- Resistance Podcast 121: Pope Francis & the Errors of Benevacantism (9-26-2020)
* Br. Bugnolo’s Attempt to Redefine Dogmatic Facts Backfires: He Ends by Proving Francis is the Pope
* Cardinal Ratzinger: "Benevacantists" are outside the Church
* More Flagrant Dishonesty from Br. Alexis Bugnolo
* Br. Alexis Bugnolo redefines "dogmatic facts" to justify "Benevacantist" schism
* Ann Barnhardt is a Liar and a Fool (2-21-20)
* Fr. Kramer's Canonical Confusion (Siscoe vs. Kramer) (1-21-20)
* Can we Recognize and Resist? (CFN)
* Fr. Kramer's Error on the Unfailing Faith of St. Peter (11-27-19)
* Peaceful and Universal Acceptance quotes- from the 15th to 21st Century
The Bonds of Unity with the Church (Reply to John Lane) 10-13-19)
* What is the intention to "do what the Church does"?
* Five Opinions of Bellarmine on the Loss of Office for an Heretical Pope - Part I (9-4-19)
* 19th Century Treatise on the question of an heretical Pope, by Dominique Bouix (5-14-19)
* Dogmatic Fact: The One Doctrine that Proves Francis is the Pope Part I (5-11-19)
* The Error of Pope Celestine on the Indissolubility of Marriage (4-4-19)
* Chapters 1 & 2 of True or False Pope (2-26-19)
* The Unfailing Faith of St. Peter, and how it applies to a Pope. (1-22-19)
* Formal Reply to the Never-ending Lies of Fr. Paul Leonard Kramer: Part I Part II (Jan./Feb. 2018)
TRUE OR FALSE POPE?
Refuting Sedevacantism and Other Modern Errors
By John Salza and Robert Siscoe (700 pages)
Refuting Sedevacantism and Other Modern Errors
By John Salza and Robert Siscoe (700 pages)
The authors begin by demonstrating that Sedevacantism logically results in a denial of the attributes (visibility, indefectibility, infallibility) and marks (especially apostolicity) of the Catholic Church. After explaining the bonds that unite man to the Church, the authors explain the distinction between heresy and lesser errors, and how the sin of heresy alone does not sever one from external union with the Church. The authors then go on to provide the most detailed analysis in print of what the Church does in the case of a heretical Pope, based upon the teachings of all the classical theologians who addressed the topic. After a very important explanation of the scope of infallibility (papal, conciliar, disciplinary, New Mass, canonizations), the authors address Sedevacantist arguments against the new rites of episcopal consecration and ordination. The authors conclude by affirming the Recognize & Resist position of Traditional Catholics, and expose in great detail the bitter fruits of Sedevacantism.
This groundbreaking work proves the Sedevacantist thesis is an overreaction to the crisis in the Church, akin to the reflexive “faith” of Protestantism. This explains why Sedevacantists are divided into many competing factions and sects (some of which have elected their own "Popes) that contradict and condemn each other. The book also underscores that the Church is currently suffering a mystical Passion similar to that of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Like those who lost faith in Christ during His Passion, Sedevacantists have lost faith in the Church, His Mystical Body, as it passes through a similar Passion of its own. Having lost their faith in the Church, they have become among her most bitter persecutors. No matter what one’s perspective is on the crisis of the Church, anyone who reads this book will conclude in no uncertain terms that Sedevacantism – one of the great modern errors of our times – far from being a “solution” to the crisis, cannot be held or defended in good faith by any true Catholic.
- “PROFESSION OF THE TRUE FAITH”: CATHOLIC DEFINITION VS. SEDEVACANTIST DEFINITION (3/19/16)
- A RENOWNED 17TH CENTURY CANONIST REFUTES SEDEVACANTISM
- SEDEVACANTISTS REJECT PRE-VATICAN II POPE
- MEET THE SEDEVACANTIST ANTI-POPES
- SALZA AND SISCOE INTERVIEW WITH LOUIE VERRECCHIO TRANSLATED INTO SPANISH (2/10/16)
- A RENOWNED 17TH CENTURY CANONIST REFUTES SEDEVACANTISM
- THE WEBSITE FROM ROME REVIEWS “TRUE OR FALSE POPE?”(2/1/16)
- MEET THE SEDEVACANTIST ANTI-POPES (1/18/16)
- Part II: Gloria.TV Interviews Robert Siscoe and John Salza about the book (1/18/16)
- BRIAN MCCALL ON FR. CEKADA: HE FEARS CRITIQUES OF SEDEVACANTISM
- Gloria.TV Interviews Robert Siscoe and John Salza about their New Book, "True or False Pope?" (1/6/16)
- THE SEDEVACANTIST’S IRRATIONAL RESPONSE TO THE BOOK, TRUE OR FALSE POPE? (1/5/16)
- LOUIE VERRECCHIO INTERVIEWS JOHN SALZA AND ROBERT SISCOE ABOUT THEIR NEW BOOK (12/18/15)
- CFN INTERVIEWS SALZA & SISCOE ON THE BOOK (12/15)
