As for Bishop Schneider, I believe he's a holy man and now he's slowly realizing what it feels like to be in Archbishop Lefebvre's shoes; there are roughly a little more than 3000 bishops worlwide, 200 Cardinals and I still have enough fingers to count those willing to step up to the plate and go to bat to defend the Catholic Faith as any and every shepherd of Christ is called to do
😂 And those who actually understand that Vatican II is thoroughly flawed and not congruent with the Catholic Deposit of Faith can be counted on one hand.
That is exactly right and apparently of those handful of Cardinals, none have the courage Bishop Rene Gracida was hoping existed when he wrote his open letter regarding the non-canonically elected Bergoglio. As Antonio Socci said … NON È FRANCESCO.
That hardly states the case. SSPX accepts ALL of the Catholic Faith. Francis seems to accept none of it. Why do I say that? Because one must accept ALL of it to be Catholic. There is no such thing as "partial Catholic" or "almost Catholic".
Bergoglio has made numerous heretical statements. Very early on in his pontificate, he said Jesus had to ask for his parents’ forgiveness for his “scappatello” when they found him in the temple. It was within weeks of his election. That was not a good sign.
To Laura: Your comment made me smile and even laugh a little. We can be a serious, orthodox lot here so try not to be discouraged by the comments. You have a great sense of humour!😁 Be well. Velox Versutus Vigilans
@@lisakrische3732 It was brought about after the 1984 indult, after the 1988 consecrations, and after the 1988 creation of the FSSP, all of which were events brought about by the steadfast pressure on Rome of the very existence of the SSPX to have some sort of alternative to them, lest they grow too strong a movement within the church. Without the pressure from the society, the TLM would have been outlawed long ago, and no other Ecclesia Dei community would exist.
@@muztan3100 thank you for the explanation. So the fssp, etc, were really just useful tools against the sspx? Seems a risky move by the hierarchy. Hasn't traditionalism grown exponentially because of it, and most especially during cough cough? I understand some but seems a bit much for my poor brain! I was born into the NO world, found the TLM 17 years ago but only now learning about the sspx properly, not that they a horror and cult to be avoided at all costs but something instead very beautiful.
From 15:40 -- very well put on popes acting outside their authority. Bizarre that many Catholics think, or practically think, such a thing is impossible, when it is entirely in man's freewill to abuse his authority, including the pope. This does not mean that God will allow a pope to abuse his authority in every way, but never has the Church taught that the pope cannot abuse his authority in any way.
It's hardly bizarre, if you consider that the average IQ has plummeted over the decades, inspired with passive entertainment: television and now the Internet. Orwell was correct about many things in his book: 1984. I am never surprised by the stupidity of the population and have noticed "dumbing down" since the 1980's.
@@MargaretNolan-c1t Undermining work of TV and now the Internet, but not only. It also has to do with the chemicals, some lead compounds burned in the fuel up to 90s massively all over the world and now the chemtrails everywhere. Truly, our enemies don't sleep.
The SSPX has an irregular status precisely because even the post-Conciliar Church could not deem/label them as schismatics; Archbishop Lefebvre has met with Pope Paul VI, tried to reason with him and come to some kind of a mutual understanding. The SSPX priests pray for Pope Francis in the Canon of the Mass ( do they do so out of pure sense of obligation or because they truly mean it? That is up to each individual SSPX priest), but they never said anything that contradicted the Deposit of Faith; in fact the point behind their very existence is because Archbishop Lefebvre felt the Church was heading in a direction contrary to the Deposit of Faith. So it pained the post-conciliar Church ever since to be unable to brand them as schismatics like the Orthodox who don't recognize papal authority, but obviously, since the SSPX took a stance that opposed their personal views and ideology, they simply chose to leave the SSPX in a state of perpetual Limbo by granting them no official canonical status ( that was the best they could do)
I agree with your observation Simon. Limbo is probably a good word to use. They aren't officially thrown out but also are not allowed to be regard in good standing. Sad really unless the logic is hoping sspx decides to cut all ties them Rome can claim clean hands.
"do they do so out of pure sense of obligation or because they truly mean it?" What does that mean? Is doing something out of a sense of duty and obligation somehow invalid because the act is not driven by feeeeelllinnnggsss? Define "truly mean it"? When my ex accused me of being a good husband and father because I felt it was my duty...... how do you reply to that type of nonsensical statement? I'll take duty, loyalty and a sense of obligation over simple human love anytime. Anyone who lives by making sure thgeir duty and obligations in their station in life does LOVE with a greater love than those who allow their emotions to dictate their actions.
@@jamesyoung187 it simply means that we hope, just like any other Catholic priest, that they do not solely pray mechanically for the Pope because the missal tells them to " they pray to me with their lips", but that they actually really, wholeheartedly pray for the conversion of Pope Francis and love him even though Pope Francis has diametrically opposing views to theirs ( which applies to all of us btw, not just them). God bless
Unreal ~ but expected. It may be that Voris & Lofton are more in schism (uncharitable) than the good & humble Bishop, as they point a (paid-for by FSSP) finger towards a holy man, while with "a log in their own eye"
Here in Australia I know of one group of 13, who once a month drive 600 kms to Dubbo. NSW (one way) to attend SSPX Mass Centre. Others, friends of mine, drive 480 kms one way attending Armidale. NSW, Mass Centre and many others in Qld & northern NSW 4 hour return trip to Brisbane for holy TLM plus many others who travel long distances once a month for Holy Mass. For those closser just think what no price is to high to obtain your crown in Heaven 🦘🌴🙏🙏🙏
Your book is needed for clarity. I really understood that after that interview with that Brian guy. I saw how not easy it was to explain but saw the nexus within the very confusing matrix. I know LeFebvre was devout and not a schismatic...your book will show the light...
You do a great job Kennedy. It all seems so simple to me too. I have devout family members who still think we are not in commuion with Rome. No matter what we say, they don't see it. Keep up the good work.
Your relatives are not "devout Catholics" objectively. They are duped members of the corrupt Novus Ordo sect. I hope you pray the ROSARY for their conversion.
Just revisiting this show again. Excellent 🔥👏😎! Thanks so much ❤️. Have just had to unsubscribe from another channel due to "SSPX in schism" nonsense. God bless, Ave Maria 🙏⛪⚓👑.
Maybe I know why some people doubt that the SSPX accepts the whole Catholic Faith. They might believe that a Catholic must accept collegiality, religiously indifferent ecumenism, collegiality, and so-called religious liberty. Fr. Gregory Hesse says that since Vatican II didn't use extraordinary Magisterium to either define dogma or condemn falsehood, it wasn't a cauncil. Christopher Ferrara insists that Vatican II didn't obligate Catholics to accept those novelties. If he's right, I don't behave schismatically by resisting them.
" collegiality, religiously indifferent ecumenism, collegiality, and so-called religious liberty" all of which have been condemned by the Church and numerous Popes in modern times, until Vatican II. It cannot be said that Vatican II did not ENABLE these things, and it is clear from the "implementation" of Vatican II, right from the start, all over the world, that these modernist concepts were INTENDED by the council. That things may not be mentioned in the Vatican II documents is NO PROOF that what happened was not fully intended.
I’d like to know ,who is the unknown big donor of Church Militant ? Who gave them all that money to expand their building and add all those people and equipment. I use to watch and support them but the negativity caught up to me, and all they did was raise my blood pressure not my spirit. Them attacking the SSPX just opened my eyes to them.
FYI Mr. Hall. I received an email this morning from a gmail account using your name and likeness. The subject of the email was asking for those requesting to not be named on your acknowledgments page. It ended up in my junk folder, so I wanted to run it by you to see if it is legitimate. God bless
I'm just a simple layman, but it seems to me the pope has been given too much authority. When I see people going through mental gymnastics in order to comply with the legalism of it, I have to wonder if perhaps mistakes were made in Vatican I.
It is a cruel irony that in seeking to shore up and strengthen the papacy, the Church may have created a weapon too powerful to control when in the wrong hands. Of course we all cheer when a Pius X wields such influence, but oh my word what has happened since...
The definition of Papal infallibility as defined at Vatican I is solid. It has limits on it, but how many Catholics even know the definition. So many Catholics think of the Pope as being able to do whatever he wants. This is not so. He has to teach everything Christ taught because he is subject to Him as well
I like Bryan Holdsworth, but I think he is among those that is hung up on the authority of the pope. You can't enact a contradiction, even as pope. I hope someday he gets that
Beware of Internet hucksters; that's all Holdsworth is, get a grip. "There are many so-called apologists and theologians online using the crisis in the Church to make money." Fr. Isaac Relyea. I suggest listening to Fr. Relyea, Fr. Michael Rodriquez (not the fake prophet) and Fr. William Jenkins, all sold, faithful, Marian priests. All of the wannabe public "intellectuals" like Taylor Marshall, the obnoxious Gordon brothers, Holdsworth, Fradd have an obvious pecuniary interest in peddling their opinions which they often shamelessly present as in accord with Dogma, Doctrine, Sacred Tradition and Holy Writ whether they are or not. "Be wise as serpents and gentle as doves."
Why going to the SSPX when they have canonical issues and irregularities - and putting your soul in danger of being outside the church, when there are fully integrated and approved options like the FSSP, ICKS or your local priest or bishop who celebrates the Tridentine mass ?
Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications against the four Society bishops in 2009, he officially stated: “As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church… the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers - even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty - do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”[4]
No one, not even a Pope can lift a valid excommunication, unless the "excommunicated" recant the alleged excommunicable acts. Since no one recanted, how can the excommunication be considered valid? Excommunication (declared or not) occurs when one deviates from believing and practicing as the Catholic Church has always believed and practiced. Denying a dogma that is REQUIRED to be believed, results in excommunication. The practice and support of using birth control and/or abortion separates one from the Church, which is the very definition of being excommunicated. No wonder God allows us to be punished with corrupt leaders!?
But Kennedy, when you (& Bishop Schneider) say that we live in extraordinary times...times of crisis...I think that liberal Catholics wonder, "What do they mean? Things are getting better. We're expanding to include more diverse ideas & beliefs & peoples." They might actually be clueless to the craziness around them...and the Church.
My question, is this. If we indeed still have TLM parishes in our area that are running and not oppressed by mandates....why would we not support them? In my mind, the TLM is optimal...why, if you have one to attend, would you go to the problematic other? I am sincere.🙏
A sticking point for me is that there was nearly unanimous support among both the clergy and the laity for the new Mass. Some 98% of priests, who were formed under the TLM, went along with the changes. My mother who has rarely missed Mass, said that she thought the change in 1970 was "nice." Went pressed, she says that she can't remember anyone really objecting. She never knew it was controversial at all until I started peppering her with questions. So if correct theology was imparted by the TLM, how is it that the vast majority ditched it? Perhaps Archbishop Lefbvre himself was spared the falling away by virtue of spending so much time in Africa, far from the slide in Europe and elsewhere. Maybe. Still a conundrum though, for me at least.
I was there for the awful changes to the liturgy in the late '60s and early '70s. Faithful Catholics fell in line with what they were told. My late Mom loved the Novus Ordo and was no longer interested in the TLM. I was an altar boy in the mid "60s and left the Church in the early '70s I can tell you that I was SHOCKED at the abuses in the Mass when I returned in 2016. Catholics in the '60s never asked for and would not have dreamed of Communion in the Hand. That was due to the machinations of one Cardinal Joseph Bernadin. The priest now hardly does anything at Mass. Both these things contributed to loss of faith in the Church and the Real Presence. No wonder so many Catholics have fallen away. Orémus Y'all.
My father told me that the Mass changed in increments (kind of like slowly boiling the frog), and Catholics always obeyed their leaders, so they trusted that the changes were for the good of the Church.
Someone needs to educate Cardinal Burke. Burke has been very outspoken against the SSPX and incorrectly calls them schismatic. Even the last two Popes have not held that view and have moved close to a reconciliation. I like Burke, he's orthodox in matters of Catholic faith and doctrine and is calling out the heretical bishops. But it seems he formed his position on SSPX back in Pope JPII's day when relations between the Vatican and SSPX were much more tense. There's also a lot of laity holding onto misconceptions that were born in that time. Listening to Bishop Schneider and Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos should dispel those misconceptions.
@@tubaceous They reject everything that is contrary to the tradition. Vatican II documents are ambigious at least, so must be rejected, because that is not the language of the Church. Church states things like yes yes no no, so something that can be easily interpreted contrary to the tradition must be rejected.
Pope John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Cardenal Burke and Cardenal Muller and Besides that there is a Message from the Holy Mary to Fr Gobbi in the book "To my predilected sons" from the day 29 of June 1988 about mons. Lefvbre and his schism (the book has the imprimatur of 4 Cardinales an also some bishops). Al of them says the same, the SSPX is in schism. This just brings confusion. Few days ago I saw your video where Bishop Schneider sais that the 3 days of darkness is a demonic deception even though is mentioned in the Chapter 16 verse 10 in the Book of Revelation and has been given by Saints like padre Pio. I feel really sad, becuase this brings confusion and more confusion and does not help. Mons Lefevbre also said horrible things against pope Pio XI in his diary calling at him "a weak" and there are some weird things about the people that trained him in the seminary. God Bless us all, becuase the confusión is going to get worst
Your post can be refuted top on down. There have been plenty of Canon lawyers who clearly stated that SSPX are most certainly not in schism. Father Hesse, a Canon lawyer, and a secretary for Cardinal Stickler, during the 80s, dispels the schism charge quite clearly. Father Gerald Murray, another Canon lawyer,has also stated the same. Cardinal Hoya, who oversaw the ecclesiae dei, not only denied that they were in schism, but saw their situation as an internal matter of the Catholic Church. The Church has never issued a formal declaration of such a serious charge against the SSPX. A few years ago, a bishop not connected to the SSPX, chose to retire in a monastery run by the SSPX. Using private revelations not officially approved by the Church, are baseless, and do nothing to strengthen, nor affirm your argument. A few years ago, the Franciscan order gifted the SSPX with a relic of St.Padre Pio, (a glove), to the SSPX. Using the charge that Marcel Lefevebre labeled Pope Pius XI, a "weak Pope," is relative, since many high ranking churchmen have said the same of many Popes throughout history. Pope Paul VI, being an obvious one.You apparently are locked in deep within your bias, because not only has Mr.Hall refuted your nonsense in detail, but has a forthcoming book which addresses this controversy in detail, which you have convinced us, by your post, that you will not bother to take the time to read. I am with Bishop Anthanascius Schneider, one of the few truly holy Bishops, who not only stands by the SSPX, but fully comprehends their purpose and future mission for the Church.
@@LUIS-ox1bv Pope John Paul II in his motu proprio Eclessia Dei made a sanction and also Benedict in His letters to Mons. Lefebvre when he was cardinal Ratzinger and the Pope John Paul II asked Cardenal Ratzinger to write to Lefebvre asking him to not cause a schism by ordaining bishops with out authorization, you can read the letters.Also Lefebvre in his diary wrote something about the pope Pio XI calling him "Weak and that he is friend of the world" And a lot of nonsense because he Pio XI prohibited a magazine in France that was masonic pretending to be traditional catholicism, and because two of Lefevbre instructors where involved in it, research about that. Bishop Schneider have just said few days ago in one of the videos of this channel that the 3 days of darknes is a false prophecy and is a demonic deception... Well, my friend, let me tell you that that is a horrible mistake for one simple reason and that is that the three days of darkness are something biblical, you can go and read the Book of Revelation Chapter 16 verse 10 and you will find the fifth bowel. Besides that, God sended that plague as punishment to the Egyptians when the Jewish people was still slave. Besides that, is a prophecy also given by saints like padre Pio. I will be careful to listen to Bishop Schneider. The SSPX are going to play an important role in the schism that is coming, that is why the destruyer, the false pope Francisco, has allowed the SSPX to continue with the latin mass while he is persecuting the diocesan masses, is simple logic. But Is pointless to talk about this things with the catholics because most of the catholics still don't see what is really going on in the church, and cannot recognize the signs of the times. I will recommend you to read the Numerals 675 -677 in the Catechism of the catholic church. The SSPX is just part of the game, hopefully, when Petrus Romanus comes, he will fix this situation, because this is just to much.
@@marieny4748 you require ministers for the sacraments, someone with consecrated hands has to say the words. People think baptism of desire and baptism of blood are real and you can somehow be United to the church without water baptism. Cantante Domino Council of Florence “It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
Your claim is ridiculous as it is false. SSPX is thoroughly and entirely Catholic as Catholic has been since Our Lord established it. You sin by false accusation.
As for Bishop Schneider, I believe he's a holy man and now he's slowly realizing what it feels like to be in Archbishop Lefebvre's shoes; there are roughly a little more than 3000 bishops worlwide, 200 Cardinals and I still have enough fingers to count those willing to step up to the plate and go to bat to defend the Catholic Faith as any and every shepherd of Christ is called to do
😂 And those who actually understand that Vatican II is thoroughly flawed and not congruent with the Catholic Deposit of Faith can be counted on one hand.
That is exactly right and apparently of those handful of Cardinals, none have the courage Bishop Rene Gracida was hoping existed when he wrote his open letter regarding the non-canonically elected Bergoglio. As Antonio Socci said … NON È FRANCESCO.
It was great when Bishop Schneider came to our local SSPX chapel to say Mass a few months ago
?
Are you at Most Precious Blood?
@@miselemondele8189 st. Michaels
I pray this would be a possibility at our Chapel. That is beautiful. God bless him.
Which St Michaels? He didn’t come to the one near me.
SSPX accepts more of the Catholic faith than Francis.
That hardly states the case. SSPX accepts ALL of the Catholic Faith. Francis seems to accept none of it. Why do I say that? Because one must accept ALL of it to be Catholic. There is no such thing as "partial Catholic" or "almost Catholic".
Bergoglio has made numerous heretical statements. Very early on in his pontificate, he said Jesus had to ask for his parents’ forgiveness for his “scappatello” when they found him in the temple. It was within weeks of his election. That was not a good sign.
To Laura: Your comment made me smile and even laugh a little. We can be a serious, orthodox lot here so try not to be discouraged by the comments. You have a great sense of humour!😁 Be well.
Velox Versutus Vigilans
You know, the ones who wont go to the sspx but enjoy the mass preserved by the sspx
Did the icksp not develop independently from sspx?
"The truth has no defense against a fool who is determined to believe a lie." -Mark Twain 😏 There would be no TLM if not for the SSPX... no cap!
@@lisakrische3732 It was brought about after the 1984 indult, after the 1988 consecrations, and after the 1988 creation of the FSSP, all of which were events brought about by the steadfast pressure on Rome of the very existence of the SSPX to have some sort of alternative to them, lest they grow too strong a movement within the church. Without the pressure from the society, the TLM would have been outlawed long ago, and no other Ecclesia Dei community would exist.
@@muztan3100 thank you for the explanation. So the fssp, etc, were really just useful tools against the sspx? Seems a risky move by the hierarchy. Hasn't traditionalism grown exponentially because of it, and most especially during cough cough? I understand some but seems a bit much for my poor brain! I was born into the NO world, found the TLM 17 years ago but only now learning about the sspx properly, not that they a horror and cult to be avoided at all costs but something instead very beautiful.
@@muztan3100 Correct.
From 15:40 -- very well put on popes acting outside their authority.
Bizarre that many Catholics think, or practically think, such a thing is impossible, when it is entirely in man's freewill to abuse his authority, including the pope. This does not mean that God will allow a pope to abuse his authority in every way, but never has the Church taught that the pope cannot abuse his authority in any way.
There is the real Catholic doctrine about the pope.
God bless you dear Fr James!
This reminds me of a passage in Lord of the Rings: "Gondor needs no Kings!".
This what happens when stewards forget their purpose.
It's hardly bizarre, if you consider that the average IQ has plummeted over the decades, inspired with passive entertainment: television and now the Internet. Orwell was correct about many things in his book: 1984. I am never surprised by the stupidity of the population and have noticed "dumbing down" since the 1980's.
@@MargaretNolan-c1t Undermining work of TV and now the Internet, but not only. It also has to do with the chemicals, some lead compounds burned in the fuel up to 90s massively all over the world and now the chemtrails everywhere. Truly, our enemies don't sleep.
A lot of people when they're name calling sometimes don't even know the right phrase of what they're talking about.
I like to use big words I don't understand. It makes me sound more photosynthesizing😁
Velox Versutus Vigilans
Great video Kennedy, very well done, and very informative . My god bless Bishop Schneider.
Bishop Schneider does not need to defend the SSPX because their works speaks for itself!
Best comment so far 😊
Thanks for that.
God bless Bishop Schneider and the SSPX for defending sacred tradition as handed down from the Apostles
Looking forward to your book. Definitely will be picking that up.
The SSPX has an irregular status precisely because even the post-Conciliar Church could not deem/label them as schismatics; Archbishop Lefebvre has met with Pope Paul VI, tried to reason with him and come to some kind of a mutual understanding. The SSPX priests pray for Pope Francis in the Canon of the Mass ( do they do so out of pure sense of obligation or because they truly mean it? That is up to each individual SSPX priest), but they never said anything that contradicted the Deposit of Faith; in fact the point behind their very existence is because Archbishop Lefebvre felt the Church was heading in a direction contrary to the Deposit of Faith. So it pained the post-conciliar Church ever since to be unable to brand them as schismatics like the Orthodox who don't recognize papal authority, but obviously, since the SSPX took a stance that opposed their personal views and ideology, they simply chose to leave the SSPX in a state of perpetual Limbo by granting them no official canonical status ( that was the best they could do)
AMEN!
I agree with your observation Simon. Limbo is probably a good word to use. They aren't officially thrown out but also are not allowed to be regard in good standing. Sad really unless the logic is hoping sspx decides to cut all ties them Rome can claim clean hands.
"do they do so out of pure sense of obligation or because they truly mean it?"
What does that mean? Is doing something out of a sense of duty and obligation somehow invalid because the act is not driven by feeeeelllinnnggsss? Define "truly mean it"?
When my ex accused me of being a good husband and father because I felt it was my duty...... how do you reply to that type of nonsensical statement? I'll take duty, loyalty and a sense of obligation over simple human love anytime. Anyone who lives by making sure thgeir duty and obligations in their station in life does LOVE with a greater love than those who allow their emotions to dictate their actions.
@@jamesyoung187 it simply means that we hope, just like any other Catholic priest, that they do not solely pray mechanically for the Pope because the missal tells them to " they pray to me with their lips", but that they actually really, wholeheartedly pray for the conversion of Pope Francis and love him even though Pope Francis has diametrically opposing views to theirs ( which applies to all of us btw, not just them). God bless
The SSPX is where it's at!!!
Velox Versutus Vigilans
3000 Bishops, 200 Cardinals and only about 5 defend the faith. This tells you everything you need to know about the state of the Catholic Church.
Sadly, now it's like a corporation dictated by an abusive boss and full of obedient workers.
The real question to me is whether the current pope and magisterium is Catholic
Amen Bishop Schneider
Common sense is not that common.
And right on que unbelievably lofton and voris accuse Bishop Schneider of being a schismatic.
What!?
Yes that video was gross, for the lack of a better word.
Voris and Lofton - enough said. Puke!
Unreal ~ but expected. It may be that Voris & Lofton are more in schism (uncharitable) than the good & humble Bishop, as they point a (paid-for by FSSP) finger towards a holy man, while with "a log in their own eye"
Voris is now swinging wildly at everyone he disagrees with and has become unhinged. The hit piece against Schneider was a new low even for him.
I would love to go to an SSPX mass, it’s about and hour and a half from me.
I’ve known people traveling 2hrs to go to an SSPX mass.
we drive 1.5 hours each way every Sunday. But not everyone can afford it with gas and tolls.
I travel 1.5 hours both ways too, twice a week. Totally worth it.
It’s well worth the drive!
Here in Australia I know of one group of 13, who once a month drive 600 kms to Dubbo. NSW (one way) to attend SSPX Mass Centre. Others, friends of mine, drive 480 kms one way attending Armidale. NSW, Mass Centre and many others in Qld & northern NSW 4 hour return trip to Brisbane for holy TLM plus many others who travel long distances once a month for Holy Mass. For those closser just think what no price is to high to obtain your crown in Heaven 🦘🌴🙏🙏🙏
‘Excessive papal centrism’ - so true. This may be what Our Lord wants us to learn and avoid.🎉
Brilliant commentary thank you!
Thank you 🙏✝️👍📿
God bless you & your family Kennedy. 🙏
Mr. Hall, can you please talk about the FSSP and ICKSP? If you already have then does someone have a link?
Your book is needed for clarity. I really understood that after that interview with that Brian guy. I saw how not easy it was to explain but saw the nexus within the very confusing matrix. I know LeFebvre was devout and not a schismatic...your book will show the light...
Going to buy the book and share it with my diocesan TLM friends lol
You do a great job Kennedy. It all seems so simple to me too. I have devout family members who still think we are not in commuion with Rome. No matter what we say, they don't see it. Keep up the good work.
Your relatives are not "devout Catholics" objectively. They are duped members of the corrupt Novus Ordo sect. I hope you pray the ROSARY for their conversion.
Just revisiting this show again. Excellent 🔥👏😎!
Thanks so much ❤️.
Have just had to unsubscribe from another channel due to "SSPX in schism" nonsense.
God bless, Ave Maria 🙏⛪⚓👑.
Ooh that’s not going to sit well with Michael Voris.
Yes, he hates SSPX
Michael Voris is Jealous of the SSPX because they did more for the Restoration of Traditional Catholicism than he ever did.
He knows they are right!
Please turn on closed captioning.
I want to buy the book defending the SSPX. How I miss mass with them. We lost our chapel in Miami.
Maybe I know why some people doubt that the SSPX accepts the whole Catholic Faith. They might believe that a Catholic must accept collegiality, religiously indifferent ecumenism, collegiality, and so-called religious liberty. Fr. Gregory Hesse says that since Vatican II didn't use extraordinary Magisterium to either define dogma or condemn falsehood, it wasn't a cauncil. Christopher Ferrara insists that Vatican II didn't obligate Catholics to accept those novelties. If he's right, I don't behave schismatically by resisting them.
" collegiality, religiously indifferent ecumenism, collegiality, and so-called religious liberty" all of which have been condemned by the Church and numerous Popes in modern times, until Vatican II. It cannot be said that Vatican II did not ENABLE these things, and it is clear from the "implementation" of Vatican II, right from the start, all over the world, that these modernist concepts were INTENDED by the council. That things may not be mentioned in the Vatican II documents is NO PROOF that what happened was not fully intended.
CM was quick to pounce on the good bishop. Sad in my opinion. Invite the bishop on to CM and have a discussion instead.
I’d like to know ,who is the unknown big donor of Church Militant ? Who gave them all that money to expand their building and add all those people and equipment. I use to watch and support them but the negativity caught up to me, and all they did was raise my blood pressure not my spirit. Them attacking the SSPX just opened my eyes to them.
@@jeffkeenan5059 I don’t like what they did to Frank Pavone either. That bothered me.
CM wants to be seen as the original source of calling out the disaster happening in the Church after Vatican II. It's pure animus and jealousy.
Excellent
Only The Holy Spirit can open the novus ordo goers eyes🙄 "even the elect will be fooled"
FYI Mr. Hall.
I received an email this morning from a gmail account using your name and likeness.
The subject of the email was asking for those requesting to not be named on your acknowledgments page.
It ended up in my junk folder, so I wanted to run it by you to see if it is legitimate.
God bless
Mother Miriam needs to listen to him.
I'm just a simple layman, but it seems to me the pope has been given too much authority. When I see people going through mental gymnastics in order to comply with the legalism of it, I have to wonder if perhaps mistakes were made in Vatican I.
It is a cruel irony that in seeking to shore up and strengthen the papacy, the Church may have created a weapon too powerful to control when in the wrong hands. Of course we all cheer when a Pius X wields such influence, but oh my word what has happened since...
The definition of Papal infallibility as defined at Vatican I is solid. It has limits on it, but how many Catholics even know the definition. So many Catholics think of the Pope as being able to do whatever he wants. This is not so. He has to teach everything Christ taught because he is subject to Him as well
The SSPX is in complete schism, with modernism. 🎉❤
How can sspx be in schism? Pope francis and his cohorts are in schism by accepting gay marriage. Has the SSPX accepted gay marriage?
SSPX is the true Church. The message of Fatima will vindicate them!
I like Bryan Holdsworth, but I think he is among those that is hung up on the authority of the pope. You can't enact a contradiction, even as pope. I hope someday he gets that
Beware of Internet hucksters; that's all Holdsworth is, get a grip. "There are many so-called apologists and theologians online using the crisis in the Church to make money." Fr. Isaac Relyea. I suggest listening to Fr. Relyea, Fr. Michael Rodriquez (not the fake prophet) and Fr. William Jenkins, all sold, faithful, Marian priests. All of the wannabe public "intellectuals" like Taylor Marshall, the obnoxious Gordon brothers, Holdsworth, Fradd have an obvious pecuniary interest in peddling their opinions which they often shamelessly present as in accord with Dogma, Doctrine, Sacred Tradition and Holy Writ whether they are or not. "Be wise as serpents and gentle as doves."
What’s the link to purchase 100%Frankincense oil and Lanolin oil the link not coming up Blessings in the Divine Will .
Why going to the SSPX when they have canonical issues and irregularities - and putting your soul in danger of being outside the church, when there are fully integrated and approved options like the FSSP, ICKS or your local priest or bishop who celebrates the Tridentine mass ?
You have been lied to by NOVUS ORDO MODERNISTS I WILL ADD YOU TO MY ROSARIES AND
MANY OTHER QUASI CATHOLIC /PROTESTANTS
LIKE YOU
Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications against the four Society bishops in 2009, he officially stated: “As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church… the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers - even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty - do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”[4]
No one, not even a Pope can lift a valid excommunication, unless the "excommunicated" recant the alleged excommunicable acts. Since no one recanted, how can the excommunication be considered valid?
Excommunication (declared or not) occurs when one deviates from believing and practicing as the Catholic Church has always believed and practiced. Denying a dogma that is REQUIRED to be believed, results in excommunication. The practice and support of using birth control and/or abortion separates one from the Church, which is the very definition of being excommunicated. No wonder God allows us to be punished with corrupt leaders!?
@Catholic Truth do you think Bishop Schneider is wrong for defending the SSPX?
But Kennedy, when you (& Bishop Schneider) say that we live in extraordinary times...times of crisis...I think that liberal Catholics wonder, "What do they mean? Things are getting better. We're expanding to include more diverse ideas & beliefs & peoples." They might actually be clueless to the craziness around them...and the Church.
My question, is this. If we indeed still have TLM parishes in our area that are running and not oppressed by mandates....why would we not support them?
In my mind, the TLM is optimal...why, if you have one to attend, would you go to the problematic other?
I am sincere.🙏
It comes from the Catholic Normies.
Every day I believe more and more that Mons. Lefebvre is a SAINT.
Sspx is the secret service play time?
A sticking point for me is that there was nearly unanimous support among both the clergy and the laity for the new Mass. Some 98% of priests, who were formed under the TLM, went along with the changes. My mother who has rarely missed Mass, said that she thought the change in 1970 was "nice." Went pressed, she says that she can't remember anyone really objecting. She never knew it was controversial at all until I started peppering her with questions.
So if correct theology was imparted by the TLM, how is it that the vast majority ditched it? Perhaps Archbishop Lefbvre himself was spared the falling away by virtue of spending so much time in Africa, far from the slide in Europe and elsewhere. Maybe. Still a conundrum though, for me at least.
I was there for the awful changes to the liturgy in the late '60s and early '70s.
Faithful Catholics fell in line with what they were told. My late Mom loved the Novus Ordo and was no longer interested in the TLM.
I was an altar boy in the mid "60s and left the Church in the early '70s I can tell you that I was SHOCKED at the abuses in the Mass when I returned in 2016.
Catholics in the '60s never asked for and would not have dreamed of Communion in the Hand. That was due to the machinations of one Cardinal Joseph Bernadin.
The priest now hardly does anything at Mass. Both these things contributed to loss of faith in the Church and the Real Presence.
No wonder so many Catholics have fallen away.
Orémus Y'all.
My father told me that the Mass changed in increments (kind of like slowly boiling the frog), and Catholics always obeyed their leaders, so they trusted that the changes were for the good of the Church.
Someone needs to educate Cardinal Burke. Burke has been very outspoken against the SSPX and incorrectly calls them schismatic.
Even the last two Popes have not held that view and have moved close to a reconciliation.
I like Burke, he's orthodox in matters of Catholic faith and doctrine and is calling out the heretical bishops.
But it seems he formed his position on SSPX back in Pope JPII's day when relations between the Vatican and SSPX were much more tense.
There's also a lot of laity holding onto misconceptions that were born in that time.
Listening to Bishop Schneider and Cardinal Darío Castrillón Hoyos should dispel those misconceptions.
Traditional ,cultural. Rome, Vatican deposit of Jesus teaching? Bless
Does SSPX accept Vatican 2?
Who cares about Vatican 2. The Blessed Virgin Mary came to CRUSH that Council!!!
Vatican II has not a single one anathema, how would some pastoral thoughts bond anyone?
@@maciejnajlepszy so you think the SSPX publicly rejects Vatican 2?
@@tubaceous They reject everything that is contrary to the tradition. Vatican II documents are ambigious at least, so must be rejected, because that is not the language of the Church. Church states things like yes yes no no, so something that can be easily interpreted contrary to the tradition must be rejected.
@@maciejnajlepszy it must be rejected, sure, but - has it been officially rejected by SSPX?
Pope John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Cardenal Burke and Cardenal Muller and Besides that there is a Message from the Holy Mary to Fr Gobbi in the book "To my predilected sons" from the day 29 of June 1988 about mons. Lefvbre and his schism (the book has the imprimatur of 4 Cardinales an also some bishops). Al of them says the same, the SSPX is in schism. This just brings confusion. Few days ago I saw your video where Bishop Schneider sais that the 3 days of darkness is a demonic deception even though is mentioned in the Chapter 16 verse 10 in the Book of Revelation and has been given by Saints like padre Pio. I feel really sad, becuase this brings confusion and more confusion and does not help. Mons Lefevbre also said horrible things against pope Pio XI in his diary calling at him "a weak" and there are some weird things about the people that trained him in the seminary. God Bless us all, becuase the confusión is going to get worst
Your post can be refuted top on down. There have been plenty of Canon lawyers who clearly stated that SSPX are most certainly not in schism. Father Hesse, a Canon lawyer, and a secretary for Cardinal Stickler, during the 80s, dispels the schism charge quite clearly. Father Gerald Murray, another Canon lawyer,has also stated the same. Cardinal Hoya, who oversaw the ecclesiae dei, not only denied that they were in schism, but saw their situation as an internal matter of the Catholic Church. The Church has never issued a formal declaration of such a serious charge against the SSPX. A few years ago, a bishop not connected to the SSPX, chose to retire in a monastery run by the SSPX. Using private revelations not officially approved by the Church, are baseless, and do nothing to strengthen, nor affirm your argument. A few years ago, the Franciscan order gifted the SSPX with a relic of St.Padre Pio, (a glove), to the SSPX. Using the charge that Marcel Lefevebre labeled Pope Pius XI, a "weak Pope," is relative, since many high ranking churchmen have said the same of many Popes throughout history. Pope Paul VI, being an obvious one.You apparently are locked in deep within your bias, because not only has Mr.Hall refuted your nonsense in detail, but has a forthcoming book which addresses this controversy in detail, which you have convinced us, by your post, that you will not bother to take the time to read. I am with Bishop Anthanascius Schneider, one of the few truly holy Bishops, who not only stands by the SSPX, but fully comprehends their purpose and future mission for the Church.
@@LUIS-ox1bv Pope John Paul II in his motu proprio Eclessia Dei made a sanction and also Benedict in His letters to Mons. Lefebvre when he was cardinal Ratzinger and the Pope John Paul II asked Cardenal Ratzinger to write to Lefebvre asking him to not cause a schism by ordaining bishops with out authorization, you can read the letters.Also Lefebvre in his diary wrote something about the pope Pio XI calling him "Weak and that he is friend of the world" And a lot of nonsense because he Pio XI prohibited a magazine in France that was masonic pretending to be traditional catholicism, and because two of Lefevbre instructors where involved in it, research about that.
Bishop Schneider have just said few days ago in one of the videos of this channel that the 3 days of darknes is a false prophecy and is a demonic deception... Well, my friend, let me tell you that that is a horrible mistake for one simple reason and that is that the three days of darkness are something biblical, you can go and read the Book of Revelation Chapter 16 verse 10 and you will find the fifth bowel. Besides that, God sended that plague as punishment to the Egyptians when the Jewish people was still slave. Besides that, is a prophecy also given by saints like padre Pio. I will be careful to listen to Bishop Schneider.
The SSPX are going to play an important role in the schism that is coming, that is why the destruyer, the false pope Francisco, has allowed the SSPX to continue with the latin mass while he is persecuting the diocesan masses, is simple logic. But Is pointless to talk about this things with the catholics because most of the catholics still don't see what is really going on in the church, and cannot recognize the signs of the times.
I will recommend you to read the Numerals 675 -677 in the Catechism of the catholic church. The SSPX is just part of the game, hopefully, when Petrus Romanus comes, he will fix this situation, because this is just to much.
Fr Gobbi is not approved by the Church.
Fatima is. Traditionalists will be vindicated!
SSPX dont accept John 3:5
How do you feel about spiritual Communion? Same rule apply?
@@marieny4748 you require ministers for the sacraments, someone with consecrated hands has to say the words. People think baptism of desire and baptism of blood are real and you can somehow be United to the church without water baptism.
Cantante Domino
Council of Florence
“It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
????
@@woodlandsartgal they require their priests to say out loud that they believe in Baptism of Desire when they ordain them.
Your claim is ridiculous as it is false. SSPX is thoroughly and entirely Catholic as Catholic has been since Our Lord established it. You sin by false accusation.