Wednesday, October 24, 2012

SSPX Mini-Schism. 25 October,2012 Feast of St. Chrysanthus and Daria, Mm

SSPX  Mini - Schism ( a transcription from the video by Bro. Peter Dimond, Most Holy Family Monastery )

__________________________________________________

"This is Bro. Peter Dimond ( www.vaticancatholic.com ), I would like to offer some comments about the recent mini-schism within the society of St. Pius X - apparently a few weeks ago, a group of approximately 25 priests separated from SSPX as a result of their frustration of how the current leadership is handling negotiations with apostate Vatican II Rome.



Fr. Francois Chazal and Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer who leads the breakaway group
Normally the internal schismatic squabbles of SSPX are not worth a persons time to consider.  However, since the Declaration ( August 10, 2012 ) made by these priests is so revealing about the doctrinal bankruptcy of the SSPX's position in general, it's worth discussing.   It also caught my attention that this breakaway group being led by the priests and Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer in particular - Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer is one of the most outspoken members of the SSPX on the issue of "Baptism of Desire," "Salvation Outside the Church," and arguments that you don't need the Catholic faith for salvation.  [ other priests include Fr. Ronald J. Ringrose, Fr. Richard Voigt, Fr. David Hewko, Fr. Francois Chazal ]

Those arguments have all been refuted, but I find it very interesting a heretic such as this, is the one leading the charge against the movement within SSPX to fully reconcile with apostate Rome.  That really tells you how pathetic the SSPX is as a whole.

Now, in this Declaration, these priests speak of the Vatican II Church as another entity, as a non-Catholic entity - they say there is an illusion that one can join the Vatican II Church without accepting Vatican II.    Well, if it's a non-Catholic entity, the individual who leads it, Benedict XVI, cannot also be the head of the Catholic Church - there is only one fold and one shepherd - that principle applies to a true pope over the true church.   He cannot be the true pope over a non-Catholic Vatican II Church and also the true Catholic Church.    It's just another example of the striking inconsistency in their false position.

They also speak of the adherents of the Vatican II Church as not having the Catholic faith. They say they need to come back to the Catholic faith.   Well. in case they did not know, it's a dogma that there is only one faith in the Church.  If someone does not have the Catholic faith he cannot hold office in the Church - that's a dogma.   The position they express here is heretical - it's actually doctrinal puke as we mentioned in our article on Bishop Williamson's false positions and explanation.

But it doesn't even matter to the followers of the SSPX at large, because, sadly, almost all of them only care about externals and community and the Mass.   They don't care about whether their positions make sense, whether they are true, whether they are faithful to Catholic dogma - it's truly pathetic!  


In this same Declaration, this group criticizes the SSPX current leadership as abandoning the flock to the "wolves" of the diocesan bishops. So, according to them, you should have nothing to do with these wolves, these diocesan bishops. I find this particularly outrageous, because these same priests would officiate at churches which had bookstores that offered materials such as "Sedevacantism - A False Solution To a Real Problem" - which essentially declares that people who do not regard the diocesan bishops as legitimate, and Benedict XVI as the legitimate pope are schismatics.

The priests making this Declaration would still adhere to the position described in that book, namely that the sedevacantist position, which rejects the diocesan bishops as illegitimate, is schismatic.   So while they say that that position is schismatic, and that you must recognize the diocesan bishops, they simultaneously declare that to have anything to do with the diocesan bishops they all recognize or to want to join up with the diocesan bishops they all regard as legitimate, is to abandon the flock to the "wolves"  - it's just pure schism and heresy.   And this is not something they've held for a week or a month or even a year, this is something they've promoted year after year, after year, after year, in the face of the evidence.

In the Declaration, these priests also describe the false teachings of the Vatican II Church as more new heresies - they are correct - there are many heresies in the Vatican II Church's teachings.
Well, if they teach heresies and they adhere to heresies, they are heretics and cannot hold office in the Church.   They even admit that the officials who promote these new heresies are obdurate in this regard - that means obstinate or stubborn or pertinacious.    This undercuts and in fact destroys their claim that the officials who adhere to these new heresies are only material heretics, because their argument that they are only material heretics hinges on their claim that they are not obdurate - but they're admitting that they are obdurate or stubborn or pertinacious, therefore they are formal heretics, therefore they cannot be legitimate occupants of Catholic offices.

It's just one mass of inconsistency and contradiction of Catholic truth after another - it's just doctrinal puke - and they can get away with it, because people don't care about the truth, that is, the people who support them - they only care about externals and community.

Perhaps the most revealing false statement in this Declaration is that they criticize the leadership's use of ambiguous language that refers to two opposite Magisteria - Magisteria is the plural of Magisterium.  What they are saying is that the post Vatican II Church has a Magisterium which contradicts the Magisterium of the pre- Vatican II Church.   That's heresy!

It's a dogma that the Magisterium is infallible, hence the idea that there can be two opposite Magisteria or that the Magisterium can contradict itself, is equivalent to saying that the Catholic Church can defect.

Here are the papal quotes on how the Magisterium is infallible - just a few-  Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri (#16), Dec 31, 1929..." Upon this magisterial office Christ conferred infallibility..."  The magisterium is infallible - if something is magisterial, it's infallible.  The magisterium cannot contradict itself, it cannot oppose it's own teaching.  He says in the same document, "God Himself has made the Church sharer in the divine magisterium , and, by a special privilege, granted her immunity from error..."

Pope Leo XIII, in Caritatis Studium #6, July 25, 1898, says that there is "a living perpetual "magisterium", and that it could by no means commit itself to erroneous teaching.

Therefore, what we have in this Declaration is blatant heresy - and it also speaks to the fact that the SSPX is very deceiving, because people think that they really understand dogmatic principles- they don't at all!   At their seminaries, they focus on liturgy  - they really understand almost nothing about Catholic dogmatic teaching, and the reason for that is, priests who teach at their seminaries, and the people who lead their group, believe in Salvation Outside the Church.  The dogmas aren't important to them, because they don't even believe in the dogmas.

What's important to them are the external aspects of Catholicism, and by denying the truth of the faith they reveal themselves to be non-Catholics.   So, I just wanted to comment on this as really a revealing example of the doctrinal bankruptcy of the SSPX, and what I'm saying even though it's in regard to this separated group, it applies equally as well to the main SSPX - they hold the same kinds of illogical positions as we pointed out in our file on the SSPX - you can read the documentation of their heretical teachings on Salvation Outside the Catholic Church - they say, over and over again.
  
Lefebvre says that souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions; Schmitberger said it; Fellay said it - it's in their publications - that's what all their priests believe - they hold that the non -Catholic Vatican II Church is non - Catholic, yet it is still the Catholic Church and it's leaders are Catholic!

And what's so outrageous is that these priests are upset that their leaders would actually consider joining up with the bishops they all agree are the legitimate bishops - it's just so stupid!   Another point is the fact that, if these priests are going to take a step to separate from the SSPX, they would have a prime opportunity to tell the truth, at least about the sedevacantist position, and say, there's no way we can regard these guys as popes, it's just doctrinally untenable - they're heretics - they are obdurate in their heresies, because one of the things that ties people down to false positions is human attachment - that's one of the most frequent examples of what keeps people in a false or compromised position.

Hence, if they are going to reject the attachment to the SSPX's larger group, then they have a prime opportunity now, to tell the truth about what's going on in Rome.  But NO, they're so bad- willed that they still convince themselves that these members of the Vatican II Church, who don't have the Catholic faith, by their own admission, are the Catholic leaders.    It's really pathetic, and I just wanted to comment on the inconsistency of this position, and why those who would adopt this position or support it, reject the Catholic faith!"

 END


Postscript:

Father Feeney, when in the 1940's and 1950's most of the world's bishops had embraced the idea that salvation could be attained outside the Catholic Church, which paved the way for the acceptance of Vatican II with little resistance, was severely persecuted for upholding the dogma Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation.


 

 



11 comments:

joematties said...

I have a lot of problems with this article. Yes I go to the SSPX. But I feel this article severely misrepresents us. You call out several priest for being heretics and contradictory. It's curious to me that you can write and article one day about the anti pope and then blast them for saying the same thing... I'm also curious about your stance and theirs on baptism of desire and salvation outside the church. Baptism of desire was something taught out of the Baltimore catechism. Not meaning that anyone who desires it is baptized, but if the circumstances are right and there is no other possible way for them to get baptized, then there is Baptism of Desire. I also tried reading up on your credentials to find out who you are to cast such judgments? A religious of some sort? I'm really disappointed in this article, because now I have to go back and verify how much of anything else is true that you have written.

catholic2007 said...

The SSPX unfortunately hold and teach various heresies such as (1) souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions. (Archbishop Lefebvre in "Against the Heresies," ..."Evidently certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the catholic religion..."

There have been at least seven ex cathedra Papal statements that Outside the Catholic Church there is No Salvation ...

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council 1, session 2, Profession of Faith, 1870, ex cathedra: "This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold..."

(2) SSPX obstinately operates outside of communion with the Novus Ordo hierarchy, even though it recognizes it as the Catholic hierarchy. This is actually schismatic.

(3) SSPX holds the Catholic Church has become a "New Church," a modernistic sect - a non-Catholic sect - which is impossible. The Church is the immaculate Bride of Christ, which cannot teach error.

(4) SSPX rejects the solemn canonization of the Vatican II popes it recognizes. This is terribly schismatic, for it asserts that a true pope of the Catholic Church has officially erred in canonizing saints.

(5) SSPX priests hold and teach the heresy of baptism of desire and the Society of St. Pius X has published many books and articles which show that baptism of desire is the teaching of the Catholic Church, such as 'Baptism of Desire' by Fr. Jean Marc Rulleau and 'Is Feeneyism Catholic?' by Fr. Francois Laisney.

There is only one baptism, not three as the dogmatic Nicene Creed in the Roman Rite reads, "I confess one baptism for the remission of sins..."

Many Popes have infallibly defined this same dogma...Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov 18, 1302. "One is my dove, the perfect one...And in this one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph 4:5)

Baptism of desire was taught in the fallible Baltimore Catechism, which of course proves nothing except that catechisms are not necessarily protected from error, and in fact many teach heresy such as the Baltimore Catechism, which teaches that souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions, after having contradicted itself:

The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism, No 2. Q.320- "Why is Baptism necessary for the salvation of men? A. Baptism is necessary for the salvation of all men because Christ has said: 'Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'"

Notice how the catechism reiterates the universal and constant teaching of the Catholic Church, but the fallible Baltimore Catechism then contradicts this truth in the next question: The New Baltimore Catechism, No2, Q. 321 - "How can those be saved who through no fault of their own have not received the Sacrament of Baptism. A. Those who through no fault of their own have not received the sacrament of baptism can be saved through what is called baptism of blood or baptism of desire."

This statement blatantly contradicts the truth taught in Q.320, that baptism is absolutely necessary for all men to be saved, and is incompatible with defined dogma - not to mention its own teaching on the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation.

With reference to your 'cast judgements' accusation, also known as the "Can't Judge" heresy, commonly used by people such as yourself, God has already revealed His judgement to us...to say that one cannot be sure or "can't judge" if all who die as non-Catholics go to hell, is simply to reject God's judgement as possibly untrue - heresy and blasphemy and pride of the worst kind.

It is to sinfully judge as possibly worthy of heaven those whom God has explicitly revealed He will not save.

All of these false positions on the post Vatican II situation are a result of the SSPX's unwillingness to see the truth that the Vatican II sect is a counterfeit Church from top to bottom, and that the post-Vatican II "popes" are actually invalid antipopes.

catholic2007 said...

The SSPX unfortunately hold and teach various heresies such as (1) souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions. (Archbishop Lefebvre in "Against the Heresies," ..."Evidently certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the catholic religion..."

There have been at least seven ex cathedra Papal statements that Outside the Catholic Church there is No Salvation ...

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council 1, session 2, Profession of Faith, 1870, ex cathedra: "This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold..."

(2) SSPX obstinately operates outside of communion with the Novus Ordo hierarchy, even though it recognizes it as the Catholic hierarchy. This is actually schismatic.

(3) SSPX holds the Catholic Church has become a "New Church," a modernistic sect - a non-Catholic sect - which is impossible. The Church is the immaculate Bride of Christ, which cannot teach error.

(4) SSPX rejects the solemn canonization of the Vatican II popes it recognizes. This is terribly schismatic, for it asserts that a true pope of the Catholic Church has officially erred in canonizing saints.

(5) SSPX priests hold and teach the heresy of baptism of desire and the Society of St. Pius X has published many books and articles which show that baptism of desire is the teaching of the Catholic Church, such as 'Baptism of Desire' by Fr. Jean Marc Rulleau and 'Is Feeneyism Catholic?' by Fr. Francois Laisney.

There is only one baptism, not three as the dogmatic Nicene Creed in the Roman Rite reads, "I confess one baptism for the remission of sins..."

Many Popes have infallibly defined this same dogma...Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov 18, 1302. "One is my dove, the perfect one...And in this one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph 4:5)

Baptism of desire was taught in the fallible Baltimore Catechism, which of course proves nothing except that catechisms are not necessarily protected from error, and in fact many teach heresy such as the Baltimore Catechism, which teaches that souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions, after having contradicted itself:

The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism, No 2. Q.320- "Why is Baptism necessary for the salvation of men? A. Baptism is necessary for the salvation of all men because Christ has said: 'Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'"

Notice how the catechism reiterates the universal and constant teaching of the Catholic Church, but the fallible Baltimore Catechism then contradicts this truth in the next question: The New Baltimore Catechism, No2, Q. 321 - "How can those be saved who through no fault of their own have not received the Sacrament of Baptism. A. Those who through no fault of their own have not received the sacrament of baptism can be saved through what is called baptism of blood or baptism of desire."

This statement blatantly contradicts the truth taught in Q.320, that baptism is absolutely necessary for all men to be saved, and is incompatible with defined dogma - not to mention its own teaching on the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation.

With reference to your 'cast judgements' accusation, also known as the "Can't Judge" heresy, commonly used by people such as yourself, God has already revealed His judgement to us...to say that one cannot be sure or "can't judge" if all who die as non-Catholics go to hell, is simply to reject God's judgement as possibly untrue - heresy and blasphemy and pride of the worst kind.

It is to sinfully judge as possibly worthy of heaven those whom God has explicitly revealed He will not save.

All of these false positions on the post Vatican II situation are a result of the SSPX's unwillingness to see the truth that the Vatican II sect is a counterfeit Church from top to bottom, and that the post-Vatican II "popes" are actually invalid antipopes.

catholic2007 said...

The SSPX unfortunately hold and teach various heresies such as (1) souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions. (Archbishop Lefebvre in "Against the Heresies," ..."Evidently certain distinctions must be made. Souls can be saved in a religion other than the catholic religion..."

There have been at least seven ex cathedra Papal statements that Outside the Catholic Church there is No Salvation ...

Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council 1, session 2, Profession of Faith, 1870, ex cathedra: "This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold..."

(2) SSPX obstinately operates outside of communion with the Novus Ordo hierarchy, even though it recognizes it as the Catholic hierarchy. This is actually schismatic.

(3) SSPX holds the Catholic Church has become a "New Church," a modernistic sect - a non-Catholic sect - which is impossible. The Church is the immaculate Bride of Christ, which cannot teach error.

(4) SSPX rejects the solemn canonization of the Vatican II popes it recognizes. This is terribly schismatic, for it asserts that a true pope of the Catholic Church has officially erred in canonizing saints.

(5) SSPX priests hold and teach the heresy of baptism of desire and the Society of St. Pius X has published many books and articles which show that baptism of desire is the teaching of the Catholic Church, such as 'Baptism of Desire' by Fr. Jean Marc Rulleau and 'Is Feeneyism Catholic?' by Fr. Francois Laisney.

There is only one baptism, not three as the dogmatic Nicene Creed in the Roman Rite reads, "I confess one baptism for the remission of sins..."

Many Popes have infallibly defined this same dogma...Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov 18, 1302. "One is my dove, the perfect one...And in this one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph 4:5)

Baptism of desire was taught in the fallible Baltimore Catechism, which of course proves nothing except that catechisms are not necessarily protected from error, and in fact many teach heresy such as the Baltimore Catechism, which teaches that souls can be saved in non-Catholic religions, after having contradicted itself:

The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism, No 2. Q.320- "Why is Baptism necessary for the salvation of men? A. Baptism is necessary for the salvation of all men because Christ has said: 'Unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'"

Notice how the catechism reiterates the universal and constant teaching of the Catholic Church, but the fallible Baltimore Catechism then contradicts this truth in the next question: The New Baltimore Catechism, No2, Q. 321 - "How can those be saved who through no fault of their own have not received the Sacrament of Baptism. A. Those who through no fault of their own have not received the sacrament of baptism can be saved through what is called baptism of blood or baptism of desire."

This statement blatantly contradicts the truth taught in Q.320, that baptism is absolutely necessary for all men to be saved, and is incompatible with defined dogma - not to mention its own teaching on the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation.

With reference to your 'cast judgements' accusation, also known as the "Can't Judge" heresy, commonly used by people such as yourself, God has already revealed His judgement to us...to say that one cannot be sure or "can't judge" if all who die as non-Catholics go to hell, is simply to reject God's judgement as possibly untrue - heresy and blasphemy and pride of the worst kind.

It is to sinfully judge as possibly worthy of heaven those whom God has explicitly revealed He will not save.

All of these false positions on the post Vatican II situation are a result of the SSPX's unwillingness to see the truth that the Vatican II sect is a counterfeit Church from top to bottom, and that the post-Vatican II "popes" are actually invalid antipopes.

catholic2007 said...

Well, I suppose you will now have problems reading my rebuttal X3!

joematties said...

Ok I'm just going to comment on a couple of things that you say that contradict things you have said. This is how I feel personally when I read your stuff.

First off, if there was a situation were someone wasn't catholic and they were about to die. Lets say, by some miracle or example they saw that they were wrong. They got down on their knees And publicly beg God for forgiveness and with The purest intentions in their heart and then they were shot. Would they go to heaven? I would think so. God is Just and all merciful. Your an educated person. Why wouldn't he allow that soul to be saved? God would never turn his back on the pure of heart. That's just common sense.

Ok moving on.

In (3) you talk about How the SSPX says the New church has become modern, non catholic and materialistic. But I just read an article from you calling the Novus Ordo Mass invalid. The pope is an Anti Pope. In other words,"Non-Catholic."

As far as the baptism of desire I will lay out another example for you. This one has some truth to it. So there is a priest on a mission in Africa. And he is preaching to a tribe that hates Catholics. He preaches about the mercy of God, the forgiveness of sins and about Baptism. A little girl states that she wants to be baptized and follow Christ. Her dad hearing this curses her and cuts her throat and she dies. What happened to the little girl? Did our all merciful lord cast her into hell because she wasn't baptized?

How Many times did Christ forgive sinners and cure them. Non Catholics and non religious people. Would he not know better than anyone else what was truly in someone's heart?

(4) The Vatican is trying to canonize Paul XXIII... The one I believe you said on here," was face down in his grave." An anti pope, that probably went straight to hell. As it was explain to me by a priest, " The Vatican is canonizing new people and calling them saints so that people will think it is ok to follow the new ways and still get into heaven. This is the devils plan of attack on the Catholic church. Your very own Articles on The predictions of Our Lady of LaSalette, state that The priest and leaders of the church would be the worst examples of Impurity and sin. I absolutely loved that article of yours BTW. But I don't understand how your bashing The SSPX for recognizing the times for what they are. This is the chastisement of the Church that our lady predicted would happen. God has turned his Back on the world. And it is because we work on Sundays and don't pray.

And so I close, until next time, with these thoughts.

Is it possible to contain God's infinite Mercy and wisdom, all in the books of the church? Is It possible for us to fully understand him? His infinite Mercy and wisdom?

The other thing to think about. Think of baptism like the holy trinity. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. All one and the same God.

catholic2007 said...

At the moment your thinking demonstrates that you are not really a Catholic, you only think you are...

You reject EENS (extra ecclesiam nulla salus )...

You believe the New Mass is a true Mass - it is not, and must be avoided.

You still believe in BOD...

You appear to accept the Vatican II Church and it's "popes" as true popes, when they are not, and so their "canonizations" are meaningless.

My criticism of the SSPX is not "bashing" but a charitable attempt to point out the errors of the SSPX and to warn others.

You need to look into the matter more seriously than you have obviously done to date because your soul in eternity depends upon it.

All the hypothetical cases you raised have been well aired on the MHFM website, which you should have studied by now.( http://www.vaticancatholic.com )

joematties said...

I'm really beginning to wonder about you. 0_o Do you not Know how to read and comprehend what I'm saying?

I never said I believe in the New Mass. As a matter of Fact, I'm whole heartedly against it.

Second, I don't agree with almost anything that happened after Vatican 2.

Go re-read what I wrote. I said that the SSPX says and defends the exact same things you post on here. The only thing that we believe differently than you write is, the B.O.D. We don't believe in the canonization of the new saints or whatever they call them these days. I was agreeing with you! I was simply explaining why the anit popes are canonizing new saints.

Then you say that everything the church has been doing is wrong. But then you turn around and say the church can't be wrong. What were all your articles about?

I think that your pride has made you feel too intelligent to be wrong. Which is very unfortunate because most of the stuff on your site I find that I agree with. But instead of debating with me to find out truth you went straight to insulting me.

I will say my morning rosary for you.

catholic2007 said...

Firstly, while The SSPX have done many good things, and have been an avenue for many to return to the traditional Latin Mass, they unfortunately hold onto many heresies, which I have already covered, especially the BOD heresy.

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent 1547 ex cathedra, "If anyone says that baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema."... Pope Leo the Great, Council of Flavian, 451, "...the Spirit of Sanctification and the Blood of Redemption and the Water of Baptism. These Three are One and remain Indivisible. None of them is Separable from its link with the others." [Please note that heretics are not members of the Catholic Church... Catholic dogma]

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, 1943: "For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to severe a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy..."

I beg your pardon! SSPX don't defend the same things I hold! ['pot calling the kettle black!"]

and further misquoting me..."the New Church has become modern and materialistic...." ['pot calling kettle black'" again]
The "New Church" is NOT the Catholic Church!

You are demonstrating bad will besides holding obstinately on to heresy in spite of having had it pointed out to you and directing you to further study at MHFM to correct your errors.

And besides this is wasting my time, ink and paper!

"A man who is a heretic, after the first and second admonition avoid: knowing that such a man is subverted and sins, being condemned by his own judgement." Titus 3:10-11.

catholic2007 said...

...the "pot calling the kettle black" bit strictly relates to your accusation that I am guilty of what you are guilty of, for example, to quote from you..."I'm really beginning to wonder about you...Do you not know how to read and comprehend what I'm saying.?"

... it is pretty clear from your ramblings that you have understood little of what I have presented to you as Catholic teaching, and you then accuse me of the same thing....'the pot calling the kettle black'

It's actually difficult to work out what you believe in from your incoherent ramblings except that you still obstinately hold onto the BOD heresy.

oops..you have your two admonitions!

catholic2007 said...

...had!

That's enough of this....!