Alea iacta est
SSPX Announces Names of future bishops, including one American.
10,973 Views |
210 Replies |
Last: 10 hrs ago by fc2112
Pope Leo could not make it more clear that this is not an emergency and would clearly be schismatic. SSPX going the way of the Old Catholics - into oblivion.
As an Episcopalian considering crossing the Tiber, this has been interesting to learn of and follow. Does seem to invite the question if falling out of communion with Rome and taking on excommunication over an intent to follow personal conscience is a back door re-validation the Reformation.
The SSPX has quickly responded to Pope Leo XIV's “Final Appeal” letter. The SSPX Superior General Fr Pagliarani responded to the Holy Father’s letter within hours of having received it:
— Dr Taylor Marshall™️ (@TaylorRMarshall) June 30, 2026
A father and son speak to one another in the open forum: pic.twitter.com/JafsP3lf3g
Beautiful dialogue between father and son. Holy Spirit we need a miracle and fast
Fitch said:
As an Episcopalian considering crossing the Tiber, this has been interesting to learn of and follow. Does seem to invite the question if falling out of communion with Rome and taking on excommunication over an intent to follow personal conscience is a back door re-validation the Reformation.
Would be more similar to the rift in 1054, with questions over jurisdiction and discipline, than fundamental doctrine.
To be honest I don't know why reconciliation doesn't take the same form. The Vatican relaxes norms for the African Churches frequently. We've got eastern Catholic Churches who don't accept the Filioque or original sin. The Ordinariate has their own use.
I think the SSPX's issue is they're too honest and refuse to waver. The FSSP says "so if we promise we accept everything in Vatican II, you won't make us do hardly any of it right? If so we accept"
The German church says "lol, we don't dissent from church teaching we're just going to publish guidelines that break both the letter and the intent of the law, in direct disobedience, but we'll say it's pastoral discretion"
Vox Clamantis said:Fitch said:
As an Episcopalian considering crossing the Tiber, this has been interesting to learn of and follow. Does seem to invite the question if falling out of communion with Rome and taking on excommunication over an intent to follow personal conscience is a back door re-validation the Reformation.
Would be more similar to the rift in 1054, with questions over jurisdiction and discipline, than fundamental doctrine.
To be honest I don't know why reconciliation doesn't take the same form. The Vatican relaxes norms for the African Churches frequently. We've got eastern Catholic Churches who don't accept the Filioque or original sin. The Ordinariate has their own use.
I think the SSPX's issue is they're too honest and refuse to waver. The FSSP says "so if we promise we accept everything in Vatican II, you won't make us do hardly any of it right? If so we accept"
The German church says "lol, we don't dissent from church teaching we're just going to publish guidelines that break both the letter and the intent of the law, in direct disobedience, but we'll say it's pastoral discretion"
As I said, it's been interesting dig in and peel the onion layers back. Your examples are a few of the [many] subjects which promote the recurring thought "ok so what's the big deal here". (Said with a genuine good will, not mockery, to be clear)
W/r/t why reconciliation doesn't take the form of more laxity, that seems to be a circular dead end in this case. No?
Fitch said:Vox Clamantis said:Fitch said:
As an Episcopalian considering crossing the Tiber, this has been interesting to learn of and follow. Does seem to invite the question if falling out of communion with Rome and taking on excommunication over an intent to follow personal conscience is a back door re-validation the Reformation.
Would be more similar to the rift in 1054, with questions over jurisdiction and discipline, than fundamental doctrine.
To be honest I don't know why reconciliation doesn't take the same form. The Vatican relaxes norms for the African Churches frequently. We've got eastern Catholic Churches who don't accept the Filioque or original sin. The Ordinariate has their own use.
I think the SSPX's issue is they're too honest and refuse to waver. The FSSP says "so if we promise we accept everything in Vatican II, you won't make us do hardly any of it right? If so we accept"
The German church says "lol, we don't dissent from church teaching we're just going to publish guidelines that break both the letter and the intent of the law, in direct disobedience, but we'll say it's pastoral discretion"
As I said, it's been interesting dig in and peel the onion layers back. Your examples are a few of the [many] subjects which promote the recurring thought "ok so what's the big deal here". (Said with a genuine good will, not mockery, to be clear)
W/r/t why reconciliation doesn't take the form of more laxity, that seems to be a circular dead end in this case. No?
It's funny, because in this case it's a laxity on an extreme adherence to the traditional teachings of the Church, and an uncompromising stance regarding the Church's praxis.
I think the SSPX makes a great case for themselves. The Vatican dispatched both Abp Vitus Huonder and Athanasius Schneider to liase with the SSPX, and both of them came back and said "okay, these guys are fantastic". Huonder actually got permission to stay with them for the rest of his life, and is buried in one of their cemeteries, next to Abp Lefebvre despite not being a member of the Society.
I think, in this case, unfortunately, the Vatican is made of Humans. The SSPX are an extremely easy target, and all that happens when you attack them is you piss off the people who are already rabid catholics, and aren't going to leave. There is no institutional bulkwark protecting the Society, like there is the New Ways Institute, The German Church and their massive tax donations, or the SJW Immigration/Refugee machine. They're very low risk.
Vox Clamantis said:Fitch said:Vox Clamantis said:Fitch said:
As an Episcopalian considering crossing the Tiber, this has been interesting to learn of and follow. Does seem to invite the question if falling out of communion with Rome and taking on excommunication over an intent to follow personal conscience is a back door re-validation the Reformation.
Would be more similar to the rift in 1054, with questions over jurisdiction and discipline, than fundamental doctrine.
To be honest I don't know why reconciliation doesn't take the same form. The Vatican relaxes norms for the African Churches frequently. We've got eastern Catholic Churches who don't accept the Filioque or original sin. The Ordinariate has their own use.
I think the SSPX's issue is they're too honest and refuse to waver. The FSSP says "so if we promise we accept everything in Vatican II, you won't make us do hardly any of it right? If so we accept"
The German church says "lol, we don't dissent from church teaching we're just going to publish guidelines that break both the letter and the intent of the law, in direct disobedience, but we'll say it's pastoral discretion"
As I said, it's been interesting dig in and peel the onion layers back. Your examples are a few of the [many] subjects which promote the recurring thought "ok so what's the big deal here". (Said with a genuine good will, not mockery, to be clear)
W/r/t why reconciliation doesn't take the form of more laxity, that seems to be a circular dead end in this case. No?
It's funny, because in this case it's a laxity on an extreme adherence to the traditional teachings of the Church, and an uncompromising stance regarding the Church's praxis.
I think the SSPX makes a great case for themselves. The Vatican dispatched both Abp Vitus Huonder and Athanasius Schneider to liase with the SSPX, and both of them came back and said "okay, these guys are fantastic". Huonder actually got permission to stay with them for the rest of his life, and is buried in one of their cemeteries, next to Abp Lefebvre despite not being a member of the Society.
I think, in this case, unfortunately, the Vatican is made of Humans. The SSPX are an extremely easy target, and all that happens when you attack them is you piss off the people who are already rabid catholics, and aren't going to leave. There is no institutional bulkwark protecting the Society, like there is the New Ways Institute, The German Church and their massive tax donations, or the SJW Immigration/Refugee machine. They're very low risk.
Bishop Huonder
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDP1MXg96rBVP3pt7M1FDZyRptqJNEGfJ&si=Evrz0FF9GSwIpRQt
It's telling that you understand some things so differently than they are actually. I think the most telling aspect is the insistence by SSPX to ordain bishops. The other groups you mischaracterize are far from that level.
It seems obvious to me that the need for these ordinations is ensure the society continues especially as the current bishops are aging out.
I'm genuinely praying that SSPX remains and things work out for all.
It seems obvious to me that the need for these ordinations is ensure the society continues especially as the current bishops are aging out.
I'm genuinely praying that SSPX remains and things work out for all.
Out of a curiosity to learn, what is the necessity driven by when there are other associations which practice / keep alive all the components of TLM and maintain full alignment with Rome (e.g. FSSP)?
Fitch said:
Out of a curiosity to learn, what is the necessity driven by when there are other associations which practice / keep alive all the components of TLM and maintain full alignment with Rome (e.g. FSSP)?
A question I've often asked -and yet to get a satisfactory response.
fc2112 said:Fitch said:
Out of a curiosity to learn, what is the necessity driven by when there are other associations which practice / keep alive all the components of TLM and maintain full alignment with Rome (e.g. FSSP)?
A question I've often asked -and yet to get a satisfactory response.
Reducing this conflict to merely liturgical considerations indicates that you haven't heard what the SSPX has been saying for decades.
747Ag said:fc2112 said:Fitch said:
Out of a curiosity to learn, what is the necessity driven by when there are other associations which practice / keep alive all the components of TLM and maintain full alignment with Rome (e.g. FSSP)?
A question I've often asked -and yet to get a satisfactory response.
Reducing this conflict to merely liturgical considerations indicates that you haven't heard what the SSPX has been saying for decades.
Furthermore, the formation of the FSSP, ICKSP, and other Ecclesia Dei communities exist as a result of the 1988 version of what is happening in 2026. Had the consecrations of 1988 not happened, we very well might not have those groups.
PabloSerna said:
It's telling that you understand some things so differently than they are actually. I think the most telling aspect is the insistence by SSPX to ordain bishops. The other groups you mischaracterize are far from that level.
It seems obvious to me that the need for these ordinations is ensure the society continues especially as the current bishops are aging out.
I'm genuinely praying that SSPX remains and things work out for all.
I have no clue what you're talking about . Of course the SSPX is consecrating bishops because they risk extinction if they can't confirm Catholics or ordain Priests and their rapidly aging bishops pass.
I don't know what relevance that has to anything I said.
Fitch said:
Out of a curiosity to learn, what is the necessity driven by when there are other associations which practice / keep alive all the components of TLM and maintain full alignment with Rome (e.g. FSSP)?
The innovations that came of Vatican II attack the very heart of Catholic life. Whether it was the abuse of the documents or the documents themselves matter not, certain aspects of Vatican II has been absolutely cancerous to the faith, and they cannot be ignored.
Anyone who says that ideas of religious liberty, separation of church and state, and the idea that elements of sanctification exist outside the Catholic Church is anathema. That's Catholic 101. We should not appreciate the kernels of truth that Judaism and Islam is, we should work to convert the entire world to Christ. We should not dialogue and move with the spirit of the Age but rather be the rock in which modernity diverts around.
Notice I haven't mentioned the liturgy once. The problems with Vatican II go far deeper than the liturgy.
To add, all of this makes sense when you realize that Vatican II was largely a brainstorm session where Protestant and Jews advised us how to Catholic better.
What did you get? A lot of Protestant enlightenment mumbo jumbo about freedom of religion, and the voice of the laity, and false ecumenism. If you want to see real ecumenism look at how the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox dialogue. If you want to look at real ecumenism see how Peter and Andrew treat each other. None of this "respect what is good in Zoroastrianism" garbage.
What did you get? A lot of Protestant enlightenment mumbo jumbo about freedom of religion, and the voice of the laity, and false ecumenism. If you want to see real ecumenism look at how the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox dialogue. If you want to look at real ecumenism see how Peter and Andrew treat each other. None of this "respect what is good in Zoroastrianism" garbage.
" Anyone who says that ideas of religious liberty, separation of church and state, and the idea that elements of sanctification exist outside the Catholic Church is anathema. That's Catholic 101."
+++
Well it's not Catholic 101, and soon you will have to refrain from saying so lest you venture into bearing false witness. Better to state that is where you draw the line and move on.
If it ends as one can imagine- in excommunications being handed out- I pray you too move on from trying to reinterpret Vatican II from without and focus on the mission.
Still holding out hope- but trust this is all in God's hands.
+++
Well it's not Catholic 101, and soon you will have to refrain from saying so lest you venture into bearing false witness. Better to state that is where you draw the line and move on.
If it ends as one can imagine- in excommunications being handed out- I pray you too move on from trying to reinterpret Vatican II from without and focus on the mission.
Still holding out hope- but trust this is all in God's hands.
" To add, all of this makes sense when you realize that Vatican II was largely a brainstorm session where Protestant and Jews advised us how to Catholic better."
+++
This sounds bitter and woefully uninformed.
+++
This sounds bitter and woefully uninformed.
I'm glad several of you have come out of the closet and admitted it's not just the Tridentine Mass, but actually belonging to the Catholic Church that you reject.
Yes, I say belonging to the Catholic Church because if you reject the teachings of Vatican II, you reject the Catholic Church.
And come later today, your rejection of the Catholic Church will be recognized in full/. Enjoy becoming the new Old Catholics and wallowing in "whataboutisms" forever. Maybe y'all can go ahead and elect your own pope, too.
Yes, I say belonging to the Catholic Church because if you reject the teachings of Vatican II, you reject the Catholic Church.
And come later today, your rejection of the Catholic Church will be recognized in full/. Enjoy becoming the new Old Catholics and wallowing in "whataboutisms" forever. Maybe y'all can go ahead and elect your own pope, too.
fc2112 said:
I'm glad several of you have come out of the closet and admitted it's not just the Tridentine Mass, but actually belonging to the Catholic Church that you reject.
Yes, I say belonging to the Catholic Church because if you reject the teachings of Vatican II, you reject the Catholic Church.
And come later today, your rejection of the Catholic Church will be recognized in full/. Enjoy becoming the new Old Catholics and wallowing in "whataboutisms" forever. Maybe y'all can go ahead and elect your own pope, too.
Lol. There are legitimate questions about ecumenism and religious freedom and the approach taken after the council versus before to begin with. And these are two of the biggest points the SSPX has tried to discuss with Rome. Yes, sure, interpret the documents in line with the received Tradition. But praxis is another matter and it's often hard to square with the teachings of the Church.
Popes John XXIII and Paul VI stated that it wasn't a dogmatic council either. As such, they aren't defining doctrine and dogma like other councils have. Yet, we are constantly harangued about it. If there is nothing new doctrinally, what's the problem if prior definitions of teaching are preferred?
Let's take ecumenism... the Church has always said that you should be Catholic to be saved. Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. The praxis that has fallen out of the council is stuff like "Christ is the privileged path" or "you don't need to convert, just be a good<whatever you are>." High ranking prelates speak this way. Even popes have. It's a diminishing of the Church our Lord founded. Ultimately, this is a "rule" for humanity. It's not a limitation on God. I reject the idea of I'm ok, you're ok ecumenism. You should too. Yet Church leaders often say it and will claim it's of The Council.
Sigh. Vatican II is not a super dogma.
fc2112 said:
I'm glad several of you have come out of the closet and admitted it's not just the Tridentine Mass, but actually belonging to the Catholic Church that you reject.
Yes, I say belonging to the Catholic Church because if you reject the teachings of Vatican II, you reject the Catholic Church.
And come later today, your rejection of the Catholic Church will be recognized in full/. Enjoy becoming the new Old Catholics and wallowing in "whataboutisms" forever. Maybe y'all can go ahead and elect your own pope, too.
You're too shallow to deal with if you thought all of this was about the mass. It was always about Vatican II.
You say this as some sort of gotcha, but with the ICKSP and the FSSP celebrating the Latin Mass it doesn't make any sense.
But again, none of this will permeate your cell wall. You want to spike footballs on Catholics, and celebrate victory in what will be another massive wound in the Church.
The only good news is that maybe when the SSPX is actually in schism, they'll be treated as well as the Anglican lady larping as a bishop, or the homofabulous New Ways Ministry and invited to the Vatican.
SSPX Consecrations: Asked if the four bishops have the apostolic mandate, the notary replies --
— Michael Haynes 🇻🇦 (@MLJHaynes) July 1, 2026
“It is the Catholic & Roman church, always faithful to the traditions received from the apostles, who in entirely exceptional circumstances demands that we provide for the upholding… pic.twitter.com/jNT9kQXIuA
Vox Clamantis said:SSPX Consecrations: Asked if the four bishops have the apostolic mandate, the notary replies --
— Michael Haynes 🇻🇦 (@MLJHaynes) July 1, 2026
“It is the Catholic & Roman church, always faithful to the traditions received from the apostles, who in entirely exceptional circumstances demands that we provide for the upholding… pic.twitter.com/jNT9kQXIuA
Yeah, they indicated as such in their YouTube playlist about the consecrations.
They only have themselves to blame when they're excommunicated again. Like I said before.... not much sympathy if that happens.
Self-assured "justified" schismatics are still schismatics. I pray that Jesus brings them back to His church.
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to Me’
EXCLUSIVE JUST IN: Cardinal Fernández tells this morning me re Vatican & SSPX:
— Michael Haynes 🇻🇦 (@MLJHaynes) July 1, 2026
“They didn’t consider useful the dialogue we’ve proposed.
But we hope in future, thanks to the action of the Holy Spirit, it’ll be possible.
I’m sure, but we’ll need time.” pic.twitter.com/2MHhuIUQCX
Vox Clamantis said:
You want to spike footballs on Catholics, and celebrate victory in what will be another massive wound in the Church.
Not at all. I want the SSPX people to join the rest of the church in truly embracing the Catholic faith.
But it won't be a "massive wound" - just a splinter pulling itself out since the SSPX is such a small, insignificant sect.
fc2112 said:Vox Clamantis said:
You want to spike footballs on Catholics, and celebrate victory in what will be another massive wound in the Church.
Not at all. I want the SSPX people to join the rest of the church in truly embracing the Catholic faith.
But it won't be a "massive wound" - just a splinter pulling itself out since the SSPX is such a small, insignificant sect.
Such a small insignificant sect it monopolizes the entirety of your discourse on the subject of religion. I've never seen you post about Catholic teaching, philosophy, morality, Protestantism, Judaism, or any other of the myriad topics that are in play today.
Just a small insignificant sect that draws you like a moth to a flame.
fc2112 said:Vox Clamantis said:
You want to spike footballs on Catholics, and celebrate victory in what will be another massive wound in the Church.
Not at all. I want the SSPX people to join the rest of the church in truly embracing the Catholic faith.
But it won't be a "massive wound" - just a splinter pulling itself out since the SSPX is such a small, insignificant sect.
Good grief boomer, look at your posting history. Every single post you've made on the religion and physiology board this year is about the SSPX. There isn't a single one with a different title or subject.
Insignificant? They're all you think about
RAB91 said:
They only have themselves to blame when they're excommunicated again. Like I said before.... not much sympathy if that happens.
Plenty of sympathy here, but can't disagree with the first part. I wish they hadn't gone through with it.
Curious how BQ Jock is doing. Would love for him to chime in about today's events.
Today, the Vatican has moved to excommunicate SSPX bishops who consecrated four new bishops along with those four. Beyond that, all priests and all Catholics who "adhere formally" to SSPX are now considered in schism and excommunicated.
https://www.ewtnnews.com/vatican/vatican-formally-notifies-sspx-bishops-of-excommunication
https://www.ewtnnews.com/vatican/vatican-formally-notifies-sspx-bishops-of-excommunication
It's funny that the bishop proclaiming the excommunications is the same one who wrote the book "Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art of Kissing"
Well, this is all very sad. But I am not a bit surprised the Holy Father has recognized the schismatic act the SSPX has committed. And now the people in their "parishes" have some hard choices to make.
The good news is there are plenty of locations at which worship through the Tridentine Mass can be experienced. And there are FSSP parishes in Dallas, Fort Worth, Tyler, El Paso and Houston to belong to AND be in communion with Rome.
I'll have to email my high school classmate who is a SSPX priest and ask him as to his plans. I've prayed for him to come back to the Catholic Church for years. Maybe there will be a silver lining in all this.
The good news is there are plenty of locations at which worship through the Tridentine Mass can be experienced. And there are FSSP parishes in Dallas, Fort Worth, Tyler, El Paso and Houston to belong to AND be in communion with Rome.
I'll have to email my high school classmate who is a SSPX priest and ask him as to his plans. I've prayed for him to come back to the Catholic Church for years. Maybe there will be a silver lining in all this.
Featured Stories
See All
Unsolicited recommendations for A&M's SECMD representation
by Olin Buchanan
9:21
4h ago
939
71:10
2d ago
9.8k
Lunch with Looch: Texas A&M football's leadership group
by Billy Liucci
16:52
6h ago
1.4k
Local underclassmen to keep on the recruiting radar
by Ryan Brauninger
Objective Aggie
Sitting next to Coach Eli Drink at a hotel bar in FL…
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
29