Previous Posts

Michael Voris almost gets the SSPX!

Louie,

In a recent segment of MIC’D UP, Michael Voris and company obsess over the SSPX and so-called “Reactionary Catholic Media,” sounding alarms and tossing around wild accusations from unnamed sources, but the good news is, Voris is on the verge of getting it. Well, maybe…

Blog Post

Comments (25)

  1. I hope so, as Michael Voris and Church Militant come across as not credible, in fact, plain mad, bizarre, as they daily discuss the crisis in the Church and what to do, whilst wholly ignoring the blatant and continual and major attacks on faith and morals from the pope, all available in the public square. The time to leave denial behind is long past due.

  2. My understanding is that if a Catholic rejects one doctrine of the faith, he becomes a heretic. Catholics are to flee heretics–i.e. if Martin Luther was one’s parish priest, one would not submit to him “whenever he said something in line with the magisterium”, but otherwise disobey him (one could be a Lutheran w/that philosophy!). Unfortunately, since VCII contains heresy and the pope (and his bishops including Burke) adheres to it, he is not a Catholic, cannot therefore be a pope and one must have nothing to do with him. All this navel gazing and going to lay people (including Voris) to expose/hand wring about the latest heresy of bishops and pope is also leading to Protestantism (while FSSP & SSPX priests say nothing to keep making deals w/popes who are heretics). In the U.S. there are Catholic priests and societies that have broken completely with Rome, that don’t accept the new mass, the new morality or the new theology. If you want the faith, go there.

  3. Dear Louie,
    You seem to be attempting to bring clarity to some confusing issues and assumptions that are made about the SSPX and their status with the Pope and Hierarchy in Rome.. We coincidentally came across a blog today that had an article on Pope Francis, and noticed the owner had a separate page listed, explaining his thoughts on the SSPX. The in-depth analysis covered problems from two points of views he had experienced personally–that of a loyal member and that of someone who changed his views over time but still sees all the things that are wrong with the Church today.
    ____
    We think it highlights the contested and confusing areas we’ve seen being discussed here and there;, but don’t have the expertise on this subject that you seem to have, to tell if the things he proposes as facts about the roles of the Magisterium and Theologians, for example, are accurate or not. It might be of help to you in your work on that next video, or for a post.
    __
    He says he was in an SSPX seminary for 4 years and personally was asked to translate the biography of Lefebvre, as well as the documents on what is wrong with the N.O.. Here’s the link in case you’re interested;
    http://thesensiblebond.blogspot.com/p/why-i-left-sspx-milieu.html

  5. The Voris Group say, ‘You don’t want to pretend that there are no problems…’ It is clear that pretending is pretty much what those bound to the Novus Ordo group-mind do as a matter of course, barring the Grace of God. Taking up the word ‘reactionary’ – if the Voris group’s presumption of who and what a reactionary is is correct, then Pope Saint Pius X was a reactionary – he was teaching error because what he taught has been rejected wholesale by the New Religion that has occupied the Vatican for decades. If Pope St. Pius X was wrong, so too his predecessors all that way back to Peter who we have never considered heretics. But now, the heretics speak ‘with authority’. This slipperly Voris piece pretty much teaches that modernism and defection from the True Faith is ‘authentically’ Catholic if someone wearing a white cassock demands it. In doing so the Voris group slander all those who have held to the True Faith and rejected, rightly, the modernist interlopers. Simon Magus reigns in the Novus Ordo Group Mind born and nurtured at Vatican II, which, by the way, discarded the centuries old Papal Oath to keep the Faith. As one True Bishop said, ‘The Pope is the pilot. The passengers go where he goes. To follow a false-pope is to follow falsehood.’ Lies have no spiritual authority. Here’s a quote from a talk last year by Bishop Williamson: ‘They [the Vatican II/Novus Ordo Modernists] tried to mix oil and water. They tried to mix the Church with the world and the attempt belongs to satan.’
    –
    Jurisdiction is not affected by bad personal Morals. Jurisdictional authority is removed automatically from any who teaches falsehood; he defects from the Faith the moment he does so. Your Novus Ordo or any other ‘Bishop’ has no jurisdictional authority if he supports/teaches modernism. i.e. the dissolution of marriage in words or actions, the sovereignty of the state over Christ’s Church in words or actions, or the gay-lifestyle, contraception, if he supports communion in the hand, or any of the forms of modernism and protestantism that make up the Novus Ordo ideology; all things condemned by the True Church in Her doctrine, practice and worship. The NO is substantially removed from the Doctrine, discipline and worship of the Faith that has been divinely protected and continued by those the NO considers ‘outside’. It is ironic. Even Benedict commented that those ‘outside’ the Church seemed more inside – I wonder to whom he was referring.
    –
    The True Church is not reactionary – it continues to teach and worship the unadulterated Faith. People have left the Novus Ordo Vatican II Schism to return to the True Faith. Voris and company would have no experience of the True Faith if everyone had jumped the Barque of Peter for the VII Modernist speed-boat and stayed there. No heretic, schismatic or apostate has ‘jurisdiction’. Christ told us, by their fruits you will know them. It was VII and its Novus Ordo that reacted against all that had been handed to it. It is the NO that is reactionary, schismatic, heretical and apostate. Simon Rafe says, “These groups openly battle against Church doctrine.” It is the Novus Ordo ideology that openly battles against doctrine, worship and discipline authentic to the True Faith. The Novus Ordo is a unity of modernism at battle with the True Faith. It has since day one, reacted against the revealed Truths of the Church and Her True Popes. There is simply no escaping this daily fact that the Novus Ordo Religion and its heirarchy are ERROR parading as Christ’s authority. We don’t have to go along with the parade. And in 2017 that parade will celebrate protestantism with all its errors.
    –
    From the ‘Dogmatic Constitution from Vatican I “Pastor Aeternus” Session 4 : 18 July 1870′ : ‘For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might faithfully set it forth. Indeed, all the venerable fathers have embraced their apostolic doctrine, and the holy orthodox Doctors have venerated and followed it, knowing full well that the See of St. Peter always remains unimpaired by any error, according to the divine promise of our Lord the Savior made to the chief of His disciples: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren”‘ http://fisheaters.com/pastoraeternus.html
    –
    Pius XII said that ‘schism, heresy, apostasy’, automatically puts someone outside the Church. The question of pertinacity is agiven now that we have had fifty years of Novus Ordo pertinacity, that is dogged persistence in error.

  8. Well, strange days. I guess Louie has been put through the wringer, just glad he’s back under this new format.
    Things are getting messy. Voris, Rosica, Poor Francis – hard to keep up with it all. One good thing is that with every attack, I’m thrown back on Church Teaching and Tradition – look it up – where are they wrong – why are they wrong – what is the correct teaching, exactly? A very good exercise.

  9. The post on thesensiblebond was not impressive. What does impress me is the difficulty many in NewChurch have with “what to do with the SSPX.” Bishop Fellay and his crowd simply stand fast. They will not be moved. They are unafraid. They will not be intimidated. So they represent a real problem, a thorn in the side of NewChurch.
    Attacking them, especially since they seldom respond to criticism, (and when they do it’s always in measured, thoughtful ways) is pretty safe – but cowardly.
    Like all large organizations they have nutty members, traitors in the ranks, and not very bright members. But I believe if they can hang on they will be the leaders in the counter revolution that must come.
    The battle is heating up. The SSPX has always been a target, but there are many others now, who will be next?

  10. I think, perhaps, we can expect more of the Bergoglio endorsed ‘mess’ to ensue. At least in manageable amounts, amongst the cabbage throwers on the net.
    –
    Mr Rafe’s (in the Voris-reinforcement group) comments on Catholics ‘Idolizing the Latin Mass and expressing nothing but disrespect and ridicule towards the current pontiff and his predecessors’. It is clear that this is something that simply doesn’t apply to those following the authentic Faith. How long will it take before people read the label on the bottle? The Novus Ordo Mass is a protestant service with Seder influences, the aim of which is to remove the ‘obstacle’ of the Real Presence and the Truth of an actual ‘unbloody sacrifice’. Lutherans, Protestants in general, Rabbis and communists were thrilled – everyone in the world, apart from the suffering Faithful. That is why a lot of traditionalists (those who have read the label and have understood the warnings) refuse to attend the NO. As for Mr Bergoglio, his heresies mount up like garbage on a holiday weekend. To notice the garbage and the garbage-maker shows one is Catholic and still has faculties of reason and logic.
    –
    These are interesting times, as a Chinese cookie might say. Regarding VII ‘the Council was not to pronounce any refinement of Church dogma’; Vatican II presented itself – or at least paraded itself, as infallible dogma: “Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.(40*) This is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church, whose definitions must be adhered to with the submission of faith.(41*)” http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
    –
    It is no secret that VII not only ambiguously re-redefined dogma and doctrine but implanted out-right new doctrine. How long will we pretend that it did not intend to be the ‘New Church’ proclamaition, to be adhered to else be ‘excommunicated’ (as was Archbishop Lefebvre – except he wasn’t, because unlike Wojtyla, Abp Marcel Lefebvre was the only Catholic in that exchange). We are becoming increasingly removed from the time of the Wretched Council, from the concerns of Archbishop Lefebvre and all those Catholics who knew something was terribly wrong.
    –
    http://www.mostholytrinityseminary.org/Triple%20Column%20Ecclesiology.pdf

  11. Glad to see the site up and running again. I was beginning to worry something had happened to Louie.

    I think Louie’s suggestion to Michael Voris is spot-on: as a journalistic enterprise, ChurchMilitantTV should at least invite guests holding opinions which, while within the realm of orthodoxy, might actually diverge from those of Michael Voris. Having members of your own staff come on as guests to talk shop about others in Catholic media is poor form, even for ChurchMilitantTV. From the perspective of investigative journalism, the only part of the program which was even slightly interesting was the interview with John Allen of Crux – a publication I personally consider only slightly better than the National Catholic Reporter – for the simple fact that Allen presented views which, to some degree, challenged Voris’ own.

    In short, it seems to me that CMTV can’t decide if it wants to be an enterprise in investigative journalism or a vehicle for the propagation of a very particular flavor of Catholicism. Whereas it initially seemed to be heading towards the former, it has taken a very sharp turn towards the latter in recent months – a huge loss, in my opinion.

  12. HI Barbara:
    The problem that post-conciliar Rome has with the SSPX is that Archbishop Lefebvre created the perfect template for resisting.

    Because he understood Catholicism and Canon Law, he did not go “off the reservation” like so many splinter groups. And by not going off the reservation, he actually created mass confusion within the modernist camp.

    On the one hand, Modernist Rome could not excommunicate him since he is faithful the the highest law in the Church, the Magisterium. Remember, VII IS ONLY PASTORAL. And the Modernists can’t excommunicate him because they would have to provide a justification on what grounds he was being excommunicated.

    But on the other hand, the Modernists MUST claim that they are a continuation of pre-conciliar Catholicism, since if they drop that lie, they will be exposed for creating a new religion. And the church pews would empty out even faster than they have over the last 50 years.

    And if we look at the present lay of the land, and all the desperate moves that the Modernists are making from FrancisChurch all the way down to the Bologna School heretics, we see that what they are really trying to do is figure out a way to “spin” why they needed to break with the past, i.e. a rationalization for why they created a new religion.

    And the MV video is a perfect demonstration “in living color” of just this confusion.

    S.A.

  15. Dear Barbara,
    What impressed us about the sensibleblog article were the actual topics covered, and the step by step reasoning he described as he thought them through, which seem to us fairly representative of the opposition we’ve read so far, which the SSPX has been incurring from those who actually delve into the issues– unlike those who arbitrarily label it as “schismatic” or non-Catholic, based on the opinions of others which they hold as reliable. sometimes that’s all people feel capable of doing because of the complexities involved. So we saw it as a possibly excellent source-list of issues that might help Louie and others develop counter-arguments that can reach more people. (He does have a special talent for putting complex issues in clearly understandable words. )
    We see these ongoing discussions as an important way for lay people to distinguish between the actual problems and the perceived ones, but only if they get put into words the average person can understand. Modernists obviously have infested the Church, and the SSPX is the most visible group fighting against their errors. Prejudices against them need to be cleared up, so people like Michael Voris can join forces with them, rather than making them bigger targets. We noticed the Remnant came back with sound reasoning against his charges, in defense of their views and of the SSPX, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tze_qOw6ezY
    and we see this type of reaction as the best way out of the frustrating infighting currently going on, which if left to grow, only helps the powers of darkness create more division.

  16. I still maintain for a balanced approach to the SSPX one must listen to talks given by Bishop Fellay. By the way I don’t attend SSPX Masses but if my FSSP parish disappears, I’m heading right over. That said, I’ve listened to a ton of stuff on the SSPX site, including many talks by Bishop Fellay. He comes across as reasonable, knowledgeable, and after all he’s the counter-weight to the garbage (and contradictory) stuff coming out of ‘the Vatican.’ The fact that ‘the Vatican’ can’t quite make up its mind about the status of the SSPX shows they don’t know what to do with this very faithful, traditional – nay – Catholic group.

  17. I have read this document in the past. I am going to see if I can find the time some time soon to write a rebuttal – which will not be difficult. “Silly” is the word I have to use.

  18. Thank you for this video. Finally you say what needs to be said. Is it Mr. Voris’ vainglory that keeps him from the ‘sensus fidelium’ perhaps? I pray not and will have confidence that our Mother in heaven will present this dear man as a bruised apple, dark spots and all to her dear Son and ask, “Please have mercy on him?”.
    Perhaps you could expound upon this point in a future video. There are many couch canon lawyers out there who are too wrapped up in the ‘letter of the law’ and not the ‘spirit of the law’ when they talk of jurisdiction. What no one seems to be bothered to address is the issue of ‘PROBABLE DOUBT’ in canon 209, and new code canon 144.. I am a simple woman but even I can see that there is PROBABLE DOUBT that I will find a priest in the Novus Ordo that will teach me that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. I also have PROBABLE DOUBT that the consecration is not being done during the Mass. All I need to know is that I can use this as ‘self defense’ and call upon my sensum fidei (what all Catholics have believed from all times) when I attend the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X. I WILL find a priest there who will show me the correct way to gain the sanctification of my soul. Our Lord supplies this jurisdiction, not the Hierarchy itself. “I have mercy on this crowd for they are as sheep without a shepherd”. This is a PERSONAL jurisdiction, not a ‘territorial’ jurisdiction in the strict sense. It is my duty ‘to ask’ for a traditional priestly ministry. I am a mere lay person and cannot be expected to continually search outside and judge for myself which confessors in the Novus Ordo Catholic Church are acceptable and gives me good spiritual advice. How can the Church ask that of me? She doesn’t. She is a generous loving Mother and does not strictly tell me I must only go to the priest in my own home town, take it or leave it.
    The Divine Law of the ‘salvation of souls’ trumps Canon law. The Church, which is the mystical body of Christ Himself of course gave the power to priests to feed His sheep. The Church supplies the jurisdiction which is ‘Supreme Law’. The faithful members of the Catholic Church have the right to request from any priest with any reasonable cause at all, especially if there is no minister, the jurisdiction for obtaining the sacraments. This is the sense of the Church, the sensus fidei. We are able to call on that sense only if we put away our vainglory and humbly ask the Holy Ghost to enlighten us to the truth. We know when something is not quite right. We sense the smoke of Satan that has infiltrated the Church and let’s face it, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Dare we pretend anymore who the arsonists are? Shall we stop this dance of waiting for the real boom to be lowered? What big boom are we waiting for? A bigger jot or a bigger tittle of the faith to be altered? We must wake up and be Catholics of principle now, not later. Our very souls are at stake. Take a stand and forget about wanting to be under the ‘umbrella’ of the Church to the exclusion of the SSPX. Forget about the pharaisical shouts against the SSPX faithful priests about jurisdiction and their canonical irregularity. Are these men criminals for teaching us good sound doctrine? Are they criminals when their only existence is merely to continue the priesthood as it has been for 2000 years? Will you prefer to attend the ‘approved’ Masses where you risk tainted teachings? Will you risk invalid absolution in the confessional because the priests in the Conciliar Church do not teach the same doctrines? It is my duty to take Catholic action ‘to ask’ for a traditional priestly ministry for myself and my family. Dear holy priests of the SSPX, I ask you for the sacraments. Thank you for giving them to me. I give you the power to feed me (a sheep) because I ASK YOU to feed me! For those of you who do not or have not asked, do your part and ASK THEM too.

  22. Dear ACT,
    Dear ACT,
    It didn’t strike us as “silly”, because so many other things we’ve read have touched on the same issues, and with less respect for the individuals in the SSPX, than this guy expressed throughout, with a level of sincerity that rings true. Maybe the arguments seem easy to refute to you, but that’s why we brought it here and offered it to Louie-because they would be viewed as sensible to people like us, we think, who don’t have a lot of background information, and find a lot of confusion about it all online, where there are letters to SSPX leaders from members complaining that they are not keeping to Lefebvre’s plans, etc. It’s a difficult maze to work through.
    If you do find time to refute it all, we’d appreciate your leaving a link on Louie’s blog when it’s done, as we always get a lot out of what you post. (Don’t neglect the growing family though, or your wife ‘ll be after our heads. 🙂 🙂

  24. I did not mean to imply that I do cannot understand legitimately struggling with the ‘SSPX question’ – I most certainly can. I was in that boat for a couple years myself. (The enemy has created one hell of a rock & a hard place with this crisis, so to speak; it has the mark of preternatural intelligence and diabolical cunning, to be sure.)

    I have another writing assignment to be completed in a couple weeks. After that I will turn my meager skills to addressing this fellow’s objections. I do hope it will prove useful to someone struggling with such questions.

  25. Dear Act,
    Good to hear, and we’re sure it will be informative, and helpful in these ongoing discussions. We may even be hearing something from the SSPX shortly if there was any progress made in their recent discussions with Archbishop Schneider.

Comments are closed.