Schismatics, the SSPX, and Sedes w/ John Salza
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 06. 2024
- John Salza joins Matt to discuss Schism, the "irregular state" of the SSPX, and the growing contingent of Sedevacantists in Trad movements.
Channel Recommendations:
@thelogosproject7
@ReasonandTheology
Documents:
Ecclesia Dei Afflicta: tinyurl.com/59szybxx
Traditiones Custodies: tinyurl.com/yw266jup
Trad Cust Bp's Letter: tinyurl.com/33m82sre
1989 Profession: tinyurl.com/mva7u8k8
John's Book: www.amazon.com/True-False-Pop...
Sponsor--
Pray on Hallow (FREE TRIAL): hallow.com/matt
TimeStamps:
0:00 Intro
3:18 The Beauty of TLM Parishes
5:20 SSPX discouraging Diocesan TLM
7:30 Initial research on the SSPX
9:18 Does the SSPX Mass satisfy the Sunday Obligation
17:25 What is sacrelige?
19:00 Ecclesiology
22:57 What does the SSPX Teach?
26:05 Origins of the SSPX
29:33 Evidence for Schism
44:33 JP2, Ratzinger, and the Bishops Consecrations
48:38 Rejection of the Roman Primacy
56:44 The Excommunications
1:03:54 The Old Catholics
1:05:30 Consecration vs. Mission
1:09:35 Jurisdiction
1:11:31 Declaration vs. Latea Excomm.
1:13:07 Bp. Williamson
1:18:06 Is the SSPX in Schism?
1:22:54 Sunday Obligation/ Ecclesia Dei
1:27:00 What does "irregular State mean?"
1:27:45 Canon Legal Errors of SSPX
1:37:30 Doctrinal Errors
1:45:00 Why hasn't the Vatican be more clear?
1:47:00 why is this so important?
1:50:40 Break
1:55:53 Does Faculties lift Schism?
1:58:03 Local Bishop and Francis in Liturgy
1:58:49 What is the Profession of Faith?
2:01:57 Do they have permission through Neccesity
2:02:11 Canon 1323.4
2:03:04 Lifting of Excommunication
2:04:28 Bp. Sheen 1978 Letter
2:06:06 Rejecting those who are in Communion
2:07:26 Is the Novus offensive to God?
2:09:44 Was Rome toying with Lefebrve?
2:10:45 SSPX Marriages and the SSPX Tribunal
2:20:30 Sedevacantism
2:27:54 Occult Heresy
2:28:29 Was Aquinas a Heretic
2:31:50 Responding to Benevacantism
2:38:09 Universal acceptance curing canonical irregularities
2:41:38 Can Francis be a bad Pope and still be Pope?
2:43:30 The Shift in the Trad movement
2:49:00 Does beng a heretic cause loss of office?
2:54:16 Kissing the Koran at Assisi
2:55:16 Pachamama
2:58:45 JP2 Assisi idolatry?
3:00:05 Was John23 a Mason?
3:01:48 Heretic Popes?
3:02:33 Biblical Aposstacy?
3:03:53 La Salette?
3:05:08 Can people attend what they prefer?
3:05:30 SSPX and Profession
3:06:10 Changing the Liturgy outside Popes authority
3:08:17 How to find a good TLM?
3:09:45 Wrap Up
I would love to see a debate between Dr. John Salza and Kennedy Hall.
It would never happen. One of the most important unwritten rules of being a trad like Taylor Marshall or Kennedy Hall is to never publically engage or have real debates with anyone who disagrees with you. It's a loud echo chamber.
@@lardiop It would never happen because engaging with unaccomplished internet ankle biters serves no purpose
@@DaveS859 DR Salza is a canon lawyer and a published theologian. He's hardly an internet anklebiter.
No need for a debate with Kennedy Hall. The Popes have settled matter for a long time. Until the SSPX fully receives the reforms of the Second Vatican Council and live in full communion with Holy Mother Church, no theological or canon law gymnastics and media P.R. campaign by SSPX members, sympathetic bishops and media celebrities can rescind the consistent papal judgment that the SSPX is "not in full communion with the Church" (JPII, Ecclesia Dei; BXVI, Ecclesiae Unitatem; and Francis, Traditiones Custodes). In the July 16, 2021 letter accompanying Traditiones Custodes Pope Francis mentions the status of the SSPX going back to JPII: "The faculty - granted by the indult of the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1984 and confirmed by St. John Paul II in the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei in 1988 - was above all motivated by the desire to foster the healing of the SCHISM with the movement of Mons. Lefebvre."
Debates are not the acid test of truth. A person eloquently peddling an errant falsehood could out-talk someone on the side of the truth. Truth is the truth, even if no one in the world believes it; and falsehood is worthless although everyone on the planet accepts it and actively propagates same. Alĺ that's needed is that there be good, reasonable reasons for the claims one puts on the table in the course of discussion. I think Matt's guest has done an excellent job in discussing this particular issue.
I’m a convert from being an atheist. I was baptized 3 years ago at 30 years old. The only advice I can give after struggling with this for so long comes from a priest I confessed to. Mass should not disturb your soul. You should not have to wonder whether or not the Mass your attending is licit or not. Keep the waters of your soul calm and still so that you can grow in faith, hope, charity, and love - do not let it become choppy lest a storm brews and drowns you.
I haven’t had these experiences described at SSPX Masses - and for the most part, I’ve experienced some pretty reverent NO Masses. The NO masses had their issues in my opinion, but at the end of the day, what I had issues with in the NO mass came from a place of love for Christ in my heart. Slowly, over time, it became a bit prideful.
Because I could see the pride growing, I know travel 2 hours (not boasting or anything) to attend an FSSP Mass. This is a small sacrifice to pay for the assurance of being in communion with our Bishop and celebrating what I believe to be a Mass that helps nurture your soul. The TLM
It’s all emotion. Emotions can lead you astray and that is what the novus ordo means new world order. My goodness you folks need to wake up , ask the Holy Spirit to help you
@@christophergros9884 I've been on both sides of this issue. The TLM has been the perfect expression consistent with centuries of refining. The NO mass has problems from the outset and many Bishops and Cardinals were outright lied to and misled by some of the members of the Vatican II council. The problem now is the Church is in crisis and will remain so until yet a new council can take up the issue, hopefully in a decade or so.
It’s the abomination of desolation in the holy places ……….. The NO committed deocide.
I love how you explained your thoughts on the mass. I am so happy you are in the Kingdom of God. Be blessed.
@@christophergros9884novus ordo does not mean new world order lmao where did you come up with that ?
I grew up with the Latin Mass in the 1950s and 1960s in a very small village in the Moluccas. The village was 100% Catholic, it still is now. When we were introduced to the New Mass after Vatican Council 2 where our national language started to be used and the priest began to face the people with simpler Mass attires, my aunt stopped going to Mass. She said it was a made-up religion. We had to persuade her for a very long time before she could attend Mass again.
I very often attend the Latin Mass virtually. When I do, it brings back sweet memories of holiness back then. I think the Latin Mass should still be practiced because in reality we have more then 20 rites. So why not the Latin Mass?
He mentions he encourages people to go to the Latin Mass. Just not the SSPX
Which is wrong. Salza just wants to grift to sell books and have paid speaking engagements such as this. The Vatican sent both Bishop Schneider and Bishop Huondor to investigate the SSPX. They both reported the order to be a fully faithful part of our Church. I will listen to our Church hierarchy before I listen to this dramatizing man.
@@sethv2312And when it is banned everywhere else, what then?
Your aunt was spot on. Like the Monsignor Lefebvre ❤️❤️❤️
@@sethv2312but SSPX are about the only Latin & respectful priests around!!!
I don't know about all the legalistic stuff, but I got married by the SSPX. I'm Byzantine rite Catholic and my wife was baptized and entered the church in a parish church in Hawaii in 2020 during the COVID outbreak.(causing some strange things that needed a lot of paper work) Now we live in AZ so we had to get 4 bishops to sign off on our marriage. The Byzantine Arizonan, Latin Hawaiian, Latin Arizonian, and the SSPX Bishops all said we we're good. If my weeding caused a mini ecumenical council and none of these bishops objected... I think we're all good. I just go with the modo "be chill, worship God, let the politicians do the politics."
From my studies it seems so far that Marriage and reconciliation is licit, its Masses they may not be.
@@veronicasingermaciasI think it’s bc Pope Francis gave them those 2 faculties as an act of charity for the people. I’m not sure if that permission was just for that specific year or for all time going forward.
God and The Word and The Holy Spirit acknowledge and validate you. Love.
It was Benedict who allowed for the marriages to be validated. The SSPX has been doing this for a long time.
@veronicasingermacias It's important to remember that the marriages were conditional to permission from their local bishops.
That permission is rarely sought, so those people that were married under the SSPX without the society obtaining episcopal permission are in objective mortal sin.
This particular person obviously got permission for the SSPX to do the wedding, so that marriage is valid.
The more I listened to this guest, the less I felt he was giving me charitable trust worthy analysis.
AMEN!
In his defense, he's a lawyer so he probably sees this as a black and white situation. A lot of lawyers sound like this because they live in laws that are usually not vague. He says at 1:34:30 that he sees this as a black and white issue, so I can definitely see why a lawyer sounds less charitable.
I’m not SSPX, but Jimmy Akin was on Catholic Answers explaining that Popes Francis and Benedict XVI affirmed SSPX priests do have faculties to celebrate the mass, and it does fulfill your Sunday obligation.
"As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church…In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, 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." - Pope Benedict XVI
Yes, I came across that podcast recently. May I invite John and Matt to watch it? Thanks.
Jimmy is a bit off on this. John goes into detail in the video. Furthermore the Church (through Mons Perl in his letter to F. John Loughnan) clarified that it does not fulfil the Sunday Obligation and exposes the faithful to the danger of becoming schismatic
Thanks for everyone jumping in to clarify.
@@24erstad Thank you for putting this out there. Even though it's been said, again and again- ppl still don't believe it.
I think you should have a knowledgable pro-Society (one of their best, in their opinion) influencer or actual cleric debate Salza on this. Now that would be a very interesting and highly watched event.
Yep I do too! I think there are many inaccuracies in this podcast. I'm not pro SSPX but LeFevbre wasn't given everything he wanted, not even close. Rome did NOT accomadate him and anyone who has studied this issue at all knows this. I read or heard Salza say the exact opposite of what he is saying here merely 3 years ago. It's not a good thing to NOT be in communion with Rome. The SSPX needs to figure this out but the last three popes have not said they were is schism. That is untrue. If they were in schism why did Francis give them faculties to hear confessions?? I think the most honest experts in this topic simply say it's confusing and they are not sure because it's very confusing and no one is certain, they might think they are, and then a couple years later flip flop, just like Salza has done.
The SSPX and their defenders have been completely silent towards the arguments put forth by Salza, the only responses that have been put out are weak defenses by laymen which have already been rebuked or attacks on Salza's character/motives.
Strangely, the best man to debate Salza is Salza. Check out the article on 1 Peter 5 wherein "Salza answers Salza".
@@backwaterfarmer: Old John Salza evidently lost that debate. lol
@@tonyalongi4409 in his mind, apparently. Although, I find Old Salza a bit more articulate and a bit less anecdotal and self-contradictory.
First time I’ve seen this guy, but 3 Hours and 15 min of John Salza not stuttering once. Just fantastic stuff Matt. Thank you.
@@eoinmcg88 he is a freemason, all the original documents on the subject say, he can only get confession on his death bed by the Pope himself. i wouldnt trust a word he says.
I found one 'umm' at 2:59:13 but this only proves your point of how good of a speaker he truly is.
Is mr salza still a freemasonic luciferian .....oh ...he appears to be an authority on the Catholic faith now ...I see....
Not stuttering like a good lawyer.
He is a good man who speaks truth.
You have a newer video titled, "Bishop Schneider's AMAZING Defense Against Sedes!" You should listen to B. Schneider and pull this horrible interview you did with Salza. B. Schneider investigated the SSPX and found them to not be sedes. But you took the word of Salza. You should vet your guests. Salza has a history of grifting and exaggerating to sell books. He did it with the masons and now he did it with the SSPX. I love your show Matt but you have had a couple guests that are really questionable.
100%
Bishop Huondor made the same report to the Vatican. The SSPX are not schismatic. I don't know why we would listen to Salza over two good Bishops of the Church. Not every lawyer is oily but this one does seem to be an ambulance chaser, profiting from church division. It's shameful.
This.
I’m only 30 minutes in but this is by far the most in depth discussion of SSPX I’ve seen on CZcams. Extremely helpful. Thank you so much Matt for hosting this-it will be so beneficial to so many!!
Check out our videos with John! Thanks for watching!
The former high ranking freemason John Salza who made an oath to Lucifer and renounced Jesus Christ before his "conversion" to the Vatican II church and who now eagerly tries to bring all who want to be traditional catholics into that institution in which someone who builds temples for pagan god worship and who prays on the wailing wall "in which HaShem dwells" for the coming of "their" Moshiach must be venerated as a saint is proven to be a complete spiritual fraud in an audio file named "John Salza's Lies, Errors and Dishonesty" here on CZcams. I suggest you also study the article entitled "John Salza Has No Idea What He’s Talking About" (you can google it).
A few questions: Bishop Athanasius Schneider was the Vatican delegate that was sent to assess the Catholicity and orthodoxy of the SSPX. He lived in their seminary for a month. His conclusion was that yhey were thoroughly Catholic and recommended their regularization. The bishop unequivocally denies they are in formal schism. He brought up the fa t the Pope CANNOT confer faculties to a group in formal schism without implicitly endorsing sed schism. And now that SSPX chapels can witness marriages on behalf of the Church. Our diocese doesn't even send a diocesan representative but just has them send a record of the marriage. So they have valid Mass, valid Confession, valid marriages...but they are in schism? I am not a regular attendee of the Society (90% Novus Ordo) but I find their presence in our diocese a great benefit and feel that when Satan is in full control of the hierarchy (which is soon coming to pass) the Society will be a refuge (along with other TLM communities) for the faithful when denied the fullness of the Faith.
He addresses all these points in the video
Oh so everything is hunky dory and the sspx is no longer separate from the “conciliar modernist church” as lefev called it?? Did sspx become conciliar and modernist or renounce these words from lefev or has this so called “conciliar church” come around and said lefev was right and Rome was wrong and now they are in communion with the great self anointed defenders of “tradition” the sspx??? Lol what a joke.. larp harder
@@johnjaun9231 "Concilliar church" isn't something Lefevbre coined. It's something post VII bishops coined to justify novelty. He didn't just make it up, he's quoting their own theology.
The simple fact that you believe Satan can possibly be in full control of the Church hierarchy means the poison has already seeped into you. That's not catholic belief. Just as a reminder, the creed does not say we believe in the One Holy and Apostolic SSPX.
@@tanksgtThe Latin Rite offered the language in the languages of the people. There is nothing wrong with that. The mass was originally in Aramaic and eventually offered in Coptic, Syriac, and Greek. It was offered in Latin because it was the language that the people in the Roman Empire spoke. Eventually, Catholicism came to more countries so it is great that the Church offered the mass in the language that they can understand.
I too see myself as a "glad trad", but whilst much of this discussion was informative, some of it was completely wrong. I am not an SSPX apologist (and agree they can go to far), and I attend the TLM from a number of different priestly societies, SSPX included, but I still found the tone of this discussion unhelpful. It needed another voice to provide a sense of balance. Moreover, instead of alluding to what certain documents said, the documents should have been quoted, as Salza was simply incorrect in some instances.
- the worst error is that of not fulfilling your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by an SSPX priest. This is clearly wrong. Just read the response by the Ecclesia Dei Commission on January 18, 2003 (which was requested to be published, hence is not particular to an individual's circumstances). It follows up on a letter sent to an individual, as noted in the discussion, but this is for public consumption. It points out: Points 1 and 3 in our letter of 27 September 2002 to this correspondent are accurately reported. His first question was "Can I fulfill my Sunday obligation by attending a Pius X Mass" and our response was: "1. In the strict sense you may fulfill your Sunday obligation by attending a Mass celebrated by a priest of the Society of St. Pius X."
- Abp Lefebvre never said the New Mass, he never "signed off on the New Mass". He adopted some of the earlier changes in the mid 1960s, but stopped around time time of the 1967 missal when he felt his faith being challenged.
- the declaration of 1974 was not a general response to the changes, but a response to the scandalous behaviour of the Vatican visitors 10 days before.
- the SSPX does not refuse communion with Novus Ordo Catholics. They even have a retired Bishop (Bishop Huonder) residing in one of their Switzerland houses. I have seen diocesan priests at SSPX events. The SSPX school in the UK had the diocesan Bishop visit them.
- Abp Lefebvre may have signed the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, not the liturgical changes themselves. Many have argued that the latter is not a faithful representation of the former. To conflate the two is an unfortunate confusion of the issue.
- Pope Francis' motu proprio cannot be said to be a direct result of the SSPX - it doesn't even affect them. Apparently, Cardinal Bergolio got on very well with the SSPX in Argentina. His letter talks of healing the schism in terms of the action of JPII (the actual wording is this: "The faculty - granted by the indult of the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1984 and confirmed by St. John Paul II in the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei in 1988 - was above all motivated by the desire to foster the healing of the schism with the movement of Mons. Lefebvre"), not his own opinion here and now.
- Pope John Paul II did not give him a Bishop - they went through a number of names, and they repeatedly rejected by the Vatican, and in the end, Abp Lefebvre concluded they couldn't be trusted. This is a predental decision of the Abp.
- please don't compare Old Catholics to the SSPX, they deny a dogma of the faith and reject Vatican I.
- charges of schism. Listen to what Cardinal Hoyos, who dealt with their case in the Vatican said: "They had moments when they were away, but technically they never made any complete schism or heresy. For example, they did not create a separate jurisdiction, because to create a jurisdiction outside the jurisdiction of the Church, that means you want to separate." "We are not dealing with a case of heresy. One cannot say in correct and exact terms that there is a schism. There is, in the act of ordaining bishops without papal approval, a schismatic attitude. They are within the confines of the Church. The problem is just that there is a lack of a full, a more perfect-and as it was said during the meeting with Bishop Fellay-a more full communion, because communion exists.". Schismatics are outside the Church, Cardinal Hoyos (who was the authority on the matter) said they were within the confines the of the Church. Hence no schism.
- if you want hard criticism of the Novus Ordo, apart from Abp Lefebvre, then just read the Cardinal Ottaviani & Bacci Intervention, for example: "It is evident that the Novus Ordo has no intention of presenting the Faith as taught by the Council of Trent, to which, nonetheless, the Catholic conscience is bound forever." This would seem to match up with the SSPX's claims regarding the Novus Ordo.
Finally, the SSPX should be considered a life boat, it's not meant to be permanent. It's a temporary measure to bridge the crisis inside the Church. Obviously, the danger is there that it becomes so, but that certainly wasn't Abp Lefebvre's intention.
Very strong comment, thank you!
Well said....
You are much more tempered and stable with your responses than I 🤣 thank you.... it truly is a shelter, and it's not hard to see how the holy spirit has put it as such for the time being outside of a diocese, and protecred from manipulation in the dead Latin language.
Very very good points! He very much misrepresented the SSPX’s position
Thank you. Mr. Salza is on the wrong side here.
Disobedience to evil men is not a sin.
Public veneration of pagan idols is sinful and scandalous.
Slander and schism are mortally sinful
Pagan worship, sacrilege are mortal sins. Pope Francis gave honor & thumbs up to artist who did Blasphemy against Crucifix, by putting Crucifix in urine.
Jesus Sacrifice on Cross, suffering so greatly, dying for love of us, to save us.
Francis brought pagan idols into Vatican, when faithful Catholic threw in river, Francis got angry, had idols retrieved.
Jesus didn't give the Keys Schismatic Lefebrvre, He gave it to Peter and the successors. THAT IS DOGMATIC
So glad you are having this conversation! Thank you. It's so critical for our Holy Mother Church!
Is mr salza now an authority on Catholicism....😮.....it seems not long ago he was a freemasonic luciferian...it is amazing how the devil operates
I really appreciate the "Middle Road" approach John is talking about here. I've felt this is the best answer to the problems Traditional Catholics are trying to point out. Thank you Matt Fradd for your work in this approach as well. And to Scott Hahn who also promotes this.
When I had my conversion to the Faith, it was within the Novus Ordo Mass and my heart was on fire with the Holy Spirit. Then I got caught up in this drama of Trad vs. Novus Ordo, and found myself very unhappy and angry with the Church. I lost sight of what truly matters- Jesus Christ and His Kingdom. We can help our Lord build His Kingdom at the Novus Ordo AND the TLM. We don't need to pick sides or tear down the other side. The "Middle Road" is important for both sides to learn from and can bring peace of mind/heart/soul.
The novus ordo is false it was written in preparation for the new world order ? Do you know what novus ordo means ? Now look at your 1 dollar bill
“But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth." -Apoc. 3:16
False equivalence.
Is it Catholic to accept an apostate as Vicar of Christ?
@@johnraymond-pz9bo I think we should pray for his conversion and still respect the office of the papacy. even if he's likely a freemason infiltrator. We've endured bad popes before. I don't think sedevacantism is the best response
I am a Catholic who grew up attending SSPX Masses, and attended a girl school run by SSPX Dominican sisters; I am also a big fan of this channel. I just wanted to address some things in this video that I felt were contrary to my understanding of the SSPX (this is my understanding. I am not claiming to represent exactly what the SSPX stands for because I could easily be wrong or have misunderstood).
1. We do not claim to be separate from the Church, nore that the Catholics who attend the Novosordo (I apologize if I spelled that wrong) Mass are separate from the Church, though we do discourage attending it because we feel that the purpose and mindset that it was made with, make it a danger to the faith, and that it does not give God proper worship. In the parish I am a part of, we have gotten a few sermons addressing the issue of treating Catholics who attend the Novosordo Mass as lesser or not part of the Church.
2. The story behind what led up to Arch Bishop Lefebvre making Bishops is told rather differently from the SSPX perspective, at least in the Crisis series podcast. For example in that description of the story, Archbishop Lefebvre asked for 4 bishops initially and was offered one, but they would not give him a date when he would receive the bishop. They kept moving the date, until he eventually told them that if they didn't agree to that date, he would move forward with making Bishops without Rome's approval. I don't know if this inconsistency is a matter of one side being wrong, or different sources, but as far as I know, the SSPX is trying to get Rome to approve our next set of bishops. One of the crisis in the Church videos includes Bishop Fellay, who is one of the four bishops who Archbishop Lefebvre ordained, and I am inclined to trust his explanation of the situation, as he was there for it.
3. I don't think I'm very good at explaining things, and I apologize if I misrepresented something. I highly recommend the Crisis in the church series. I think that Pints with Aquinas is really great and I would love to see an SSPX priest come on and be interviewed on this topic or even debate. I would be willing to try to reach out to one about the idea if you would be open to that.
Thank you and God bless!
Glad to see that you're open to this discussion. While it's great that you and many more followers of the SSPX don't think that Catholics who attend regular diocesan liturgies aren't in schism, the official position of the SSPX, which has never changed, is that those liturgies are an offense to God and harmful to souls.
Also just saying that you're not outside of the Church doesn't really mean anything. Protestants will swear on their life that they are part of Christ's Church. The SSPX can say whatever they want but it wouldn't change that they are in schism. Now individuals who attend their liturgy may still not be in schism for lack of culpability, but if you're informed about them, then there's a problem.
From what I've seen, the perspective of Lefebrve being pushed by the Vatican and refusing to give him a date is false. Lefebrve signed the agreement to consecrate one bishop and then rejected that proposition literally the next day on his own. Doesn't sound at all like the narrative that the SSPX pushes.
@@john-el9636 it is definitely a complicated situation, and I don't think that I am informed well enough to make a firm judgement yet. I think it would be really beneficial to see an SSPX priest come onto the show to defend that position. I'm definitely planning on doing more digging into Vatican 2. I wish that things had never gotten so complicated and divided with the Church, and I can only hope that things will get better with the will of God.
I appreciate the back and forth because it is so nuanced, but the archbishop did write two very beautiful books on his own experience: “open letter to confused catholic,” and “they have uncrowned him.” Those books are clearly not written by a “rigid” man. They are very geared toward “the people”, and it is clear, by his own words, the archbishop’s concern is for Jesus and his flock. He points out many contradictions and so far as i know, alot of his critics do not adress his books. Why? I think itvwould go a long way to see if the archbishops reasoning could be picked apart by adressing thecwords in his book. Also, what facts or points of history, does the archbishop cite in his books, that are incorrect or mistaken? So far those two books carrry alot of weight still. The reader who cares about the catholic church, will be enriched by the archbishops obvious love for the church, for Christ, for the faith… where are his own, actual words, in those two books, taking acwrong turn. I see a bust of Luther in the vatican office, but alot of contempt for lefevre-- whats up with that?
@Inarticulus I would dispute the claim that Lefebvre wasn't rigid, but in any case Dr. Salza does refer to his open letter in this very video. I know he quotes from it extensively on his website as well. Lefebvre's heresies and errors are on full display in his own writings. Whether or not he had good intentions is pretty much meaningless.
czcams.com/video/DqgcCujfQF0/video.html&ab_channel=Rev.AnthonyCekada
Great discussion with lots of clarity on the issue. Thanks for hosting the interview! Praying for peace and unity
Thomas this guy is a complete fraud. He was a member of the Free Masons. That says it all.
Matt, recently I’ve had a hard time getting through the hour and a half to two hour episodes. Usually bail out after hear a good nugget. This was a fascinating new story hadn’t heard and the 3 hours + flew by. As of now, for me, this is your Titanic episode.
Agreed. This episode is huge.
Until that shroud episode hit
I totally agree! Goes my super fast. Especially when I watch it at 1.25x. And even if it wasn't at that speed, it would still be okay.
This was an excellent interview and my first PWA live since discovering Matt's channel a few months ago. I'm glad to say that I'm in R.C.I.A currently and eagerly await my baptism and confirmation this upcoming Easter. Thank you so much Matt Fradd for aiding in the Grace of The Holy Spirit. Gloria Patri!
Welcome home
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Is that GLR in your profile pic?
Iam trying to understand...isnt it The Hierarchy who rejected the Sspx and not the other way around?
That's correct.
But it looks better if the enemy plays the victims role.
That's how modernism works.
John doesn't tell me about his gigs like this anymore... but I'm glad one of my friends alerted me to this interview. I don't watch 3 hour shows unless it is true crime, but this was absolutely worth it to watch. I have to say, even though I worked with John for about 8 years on his website, I realize I did not get to fully appreciate John's capacity to teach with such clarity, calmness, precision, and humility. He should honestly be regarded as one of the top apologists for the Catholic Church and I am so glad that Matt gave him this opportunity to share John's expertise.
I agree. What a brilliant mind .
That website is great. Scripturecatholic, right?
This is top noych video.
Scripture Catholic was the site. Then we lost the domain in 2017 I think it was.
I greatly appreciate your interviews and demeanor in these discussions. There's a lot to take away and reflect upon! Thank you!!
This was an excellent interview. I just want to thank Dr. Salza and Mr. Fradd for making it happen. May God bless you both and may God protect Holy Mother Church 🙏🏻
I'm 30 minute into this, and I am not liking the vibes so far, (as he's making all one-sided arguments and cherry picking what suits his position, like a Protestant.). Also from what I have seen in past. . Plus he needs to be scrutinized closely as he reportedly was a 32 nd Degree Freemason, now with an agenda to shape Catholics, as he has been active for years at this. So any wonder his position?? . This is a long vid , so I will have to give him his Time to lay it all out, this is still early. . (Been attending Trad Mass for past years with occasional N.O.) I'd like to see him and Brother Peter Dimond debate for extended, thorough debate. That would be very helpful for Catholics.
@@finallythere100 sedevacantism is not the answer
@@24erstad - well, firstly, I have to finish the vid. Hearing anyone's one-line advice or opinion, no disrespect no intended., doesn't say anything. , you provide nothing to back it up.,and I don't know what you know or don't know. Have you seen the vids about the heresies of the past 4 or 5 popes? (Vatican catholic channel) Have you seen "Apocalypse Now ..." vid by Bros. Dimond? Have you seen Bro. Dimond debate. other guy on Pints w Aquinas? Bro Dimond clearly prevailed, not debate points, but substance. . It's not enough to say Sed is not the answer. (I never attended SSPX, btw). It seems the main question is whether V2 Church from Vatican is the anti-church. (If so, WHY,?) I want to practice Catholicism, but I don't want to be under a false Church. It is obviously pagan and not Catholic / Christian at the top. The actual Sr. Lucy said we are in final Times. If you can see all that is documented in those vids and explain to me that what is in Vatican is true Catholicism and not th count-church, that Our Lady of La Saltte, and reportedly Put Lady of Fatima spoke of , then I'm listening.. As I said, I will see what all JS includes and what he avoids. And I will certainly give him his chance and take in what all he says. I will check back in later, and pls do sam if u watch those vids! My only agenda is truth.
@@eoinmcg88 - If so, add THAT to the abominations of what looks like the Whore of Babylon and not the true RCC. (Bro, Ptr Dimond makes a great case for the former ,, which is why I'd like to see those 2 in an extended debate. Time for the feet of opposing sides to be held to the fire. Put it out there for everyone to see. - BUT with enough Time to get it all out there so that audience is adequately informed of content . rather than judge by debate skills, and may truth prevail. ..l
@@24erstad - Curious, do you believe"Francis" is a true pope? A Catholic? Christian?
Fradd, this is hand over fist one of the best episodes to date on Pints. Great discussion.
I would have to disagree. I don't even go to SSPX but there is evidence Lefebvre had not a schismatic spirit. Promises were made but not fullfilled (One bishop was promised to the SSPX for ex).
43:01 Matt Fradd misunderstood John Salza when he said Abp Lefebvre signed off on the V2 documents. By signing those documents, Abp Lefebvre DID NOT sign off on the Novus Ordo Mass - those are two separate things. Mr. Salza knows that, and yet and he didn’t correct Mr. Fradd’s misunderstanding. Why not? Mr. Salza lost all credibility by not doing so.
thank you for doing this interview! My husband and I nearly fell for the lies of the society shortly after becoming Catholic sadly because of certain commentators we were listening to. John Salza did an amazing job, he is so clear, knowledgable & articulate!
Is mr salza still a freemasonic luciferian I wonder or does that matter , I wonder who was lying 🤔
Such an excellent and much needed conversation! Thank you for caring for the salvation of souls!
John mentioned 'the appearance of the Church' vs what she really is at about 20min.
God just taught me a similar lesson this Christmas. The whole family was sick with different viruses (including an awful influenza) all of advent and Christmas.
We had a tree and some presents, but could not really eat much or really enjoy the tree and such.
We were just too exhausted.
What remains of Christmas if we take away the food and the cookies I was not able to bake. What remains if we can't enjoy the tree that much or be excited with th children about their new toys?
Christ in the manger remains. It still felt like Christmas to me. I felt overflowing love for all of my family. And the holy family and little baby Jesus.
But all the nice Christmas things got a little bit called out for being accessories. All good things, but not the main thing.
And perhaps God is doing a similar thing in the Church atm. I like incense and all the traditional things. But what happens if it all falls away? What remains to cling to? Christ in the Eucharist. I'm not into modern barren churches with ugly modern art on the walls and awful acustic. But perhaps God wants me to look more to Christ directly? Perhaps he wants all of us to do that?
These is quite similar to my Christmas these year...,
Beautifully said. The unfortunate irony here is that belief in the presence of Christ (body, soul, divinity) in the Eucharist is fading fast amongst NO parishes. This is the opposite for TLM parishes including in the SSPX where the number of faithful is growing.
It is reasonable to be attracted to the full-on display of reverence and tradition of the mass especially in these times. I've never been to a TLM but i want to join in one, and i suspect quite a lot of catholics are the same. But stip away all the vestments, the tradition, the reverence, and what we have are the absolute basics: apostolic succession and the magesterium, scripture and the cathecism, and the sacraments. If all else fails then these are the ones to hold on to. All tradition and reverence flows from these, but are they absolutely essential? Imo, in these times, its back to basics.
Christo nihil praeponere
@@eddiedelatorre5925 it almost sounds like Church Universal would benefit from unity among her children! Wouldn't it be wonderful to reunite those who believe in the Real Presence with their NO brothers and sisters. The NO crowd can model obedience and submission to the authority of Christ's Church, while the TLM crowd can model proper Eucharistic faith. The point is we need to supplement each other's weaknesses through the strengths God has given us.
This is one of the most important conversations that we currently deal with. It forces people to identify and adhere to the one true body of the Catholic Church. The rejection of leftist errors does not mean we should jump on the bandwagon of schismatic groups. God bless to John, Matt, dude who is on the mic, Lofton, Dom, Andrew, and all others who are on the forefront of defending Catholic Orthodoxy.
@@deus_vult8111 larp harder
@@deus_vult8111 tell that to Pope Pius IX, see Singulari Quadam
@@deus_vult8111 additionally, tell that to the Church fathers
Now SSPX acts like Protestants 🤣
@@deus_vult8111
"For, it must be held by faith that outside the Apostolic Roman Church, no one can be saved; that this is the only ark of salvation; that he who shall not have entered therein will perish in the flood; but, on the other hand, it is necessary to hold for certain that they who labor in ignorance of the true religion, if this ignorance is invincible, are not stained by any guilt in this matter in the eyes of God."
So is your claim argument that Pope Pius IX was mistaken and that God allows guiltless people to go to hell? What about people who never even had a chance to join the Church through ordinary means because Catholic explorers and missionaries hadn't arrived to their continent yet?
If Pope Pius IX is wrong, why was Fr Feeney excommunicated in 1953? He taught the most literal interpretation of "no salvation outside the Church", and in 1949, the Vatican responded with a letter that included the following:
"Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God."
Good Job & God bless you guys
This conversation is SO needed. Thank you for educating us in a charitable way. God bless you both.
So you were being educated by mr salza on Catholicism ....who was a freemasonic luciferian and now an authority on Catholicism....yeah right 😂
Google article "John Salza Has No Idea What He’s Talking About"
Great interview, Matt. Great questions. And you had the good sense to get out of Mr Salza's way and let him answer in full.
Wow this is the best SSPX talk/explication on CZcams and i can say ive listen to very many .. great job
If inclined, our channel has more great videos with John. Thanks for watching!
Sad. You, like many others, have been duped. To see why, check the articles at lesfemmes-thetruth.blogspot.com/p/sspx-is-not-in-schism.html These include statement by canon lawyers, theologians, priests, and Bishop Schneider who is much more trustworthy than the "former" homosexual freemason Salza.
How is it that bishop Huondor of Switzerland was granted permission to retire in the SSPX (2019), if they are, in fact, in schism?
This would be an absurdity.
@@bbseal6174 It is indeed a very interesting question. How could Francis permit a bishop to retire with schismatics?
Should have brought this up before the debate, would have been great to hear it discussed. My take is that merely residing with them and even celebrating liturgies with them doesn't mean they're not in schism. For example, the orthodox are in schism but the Pope occasionally attends Divine Liturgies with them (and vice versa). I know of some priests who live in obscure locations who reside with Protestant clergy.
Very long winded, but the point I'm trying to get across is "living with" is not equal to "in communion with".
@@matthewmorris9532 The problem is that Bishop Huonder has explicitly stated he lives with them because of what they preach and because he does not believe them to be in schism. This is quite different than a lone priest with nowhere to go being taken in out of charity by a non-Catholic. The Pope also does not assist at Orthodox Masses. There have been joint vespers, etc. but the Pope does not assist at schismatic celebrations of the Eucharist.
Assisting at a schismatic Mass and adhering to the teachings of the schismatic minister would, in fact, make you schismatic. Since Bishop Huonder is apparently not in schism (nor are the lay faithful who assist at SSPX Masses) then we are quite clearly not dealing with the same situation as the orthodox
@@matthewmorris9532 "the orthodox are in schism but the Pope occasionally attends Divine Liturgies with them (and vice versa)." If the pope hasn't done this, bishops have. This was not done nor permitted prior to Vatican II.
""living with" is not equal to "in communion with"." That is a nuance that most everyone is not going to know or appreciate. By allowing a bishop to retire with schismatics and offer mass for them and with them and live with them day in and day out gives a sign of approval. Once could say it is scandalous.
@@toddbyrd9071 Precisely
This is so helpful and well done, thanks for explaining this all!
My entire family started attending the SSPX during Covid because it was the only church that was open. But slowly things started to get tremendously more radical and my heart is completely broken. Everything in this video answered the questions I've had for years now but whenever I wanted to ask the SSPX priest there wasn't any room to other than in confession which was for "confession" and a massive line was waiting after you.
Everything Salza said in this video is exactly true to what happened to my family. My questions started when my parents said I couldn't go to the diocesan Latin Mass because they were giving communion on the hand under the Cardinal's orders. They started saying things like "as soon as it is given in the hand, it's no longer Jesus, it's just a wafer". But then they would say "we don't want to go to Novus Ordo Masses because there's Jesus all over the ground from them giving communion on the hand" it was so contradictory and warped but questioning wasn't allowed. Slowly one by one, it's gotten worse and now they refer to anything I say as "having the Novus Ordo demon" which I think was said about me by an SSPX priest to my parents. Their attacks on me and anyone inside the Church including our pope and clergy is purely attacks on their person and never the argument.
Please pray for my parents and family and me. They really need it right now 🙏🏽💕
Who is "they"? A priest would never say Holy Communion suddenly ceases to be consecrated because it was handed to a lay person. The real horror of Communion in the hand is that it is the consecrated species, assuming the Mass was offered with the correct intentions etc
Please don't confuse some of the ignorant weirdos who attend mass at the chapel with The Society proper.
Sounds like a weird experience, but these are not the positions of the Society as I've head them. The Novus Ordo is certainly illicit per Canon 13, Session 7 of the Council of Trent. The TLM is the Catholic Mass.
@@Felatay by "they" I mean my own parents. I'm speaking from my heart and what I have seen happen. I fully agree that communion on the tongue is much more respectful but that doesn't mean attending a LATIN MASS within the diocese which is closer to my house and ONLY gives communion on tongue should be something to fear.
@@backwaterfarmer it may sound "weird" to you but the sad truth is it is a reality for me. My parents who have started attending the society are completely confused. They refuse to attend any Latin mass except for that of the society even if it's the Latin Mass within the diocese that is given by the Oratorian fathers who who provide Latin mass. I'm so tired of all this confusion, fighting and division. I wish none of this on any Catholic family.
@@backwaterfarmer don't be a Protestant and quote one line out of context. But regardless, since you have quoted just one line let me explain what that line means.
It states: "If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by every pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema."
Believe it or not, but the "New Mass" was, however unfortunate, an "APPROVED" rite of the church. How was it approved? It was approved by the council convened by the Vicar of Christ. Just as there has been a Dominican rite, or Ukrainian rite, there have been many "approved" rites post Trent.
How could Archbishop have over reacted when we have a worship of Pachamama at the Vatican? Seems Archbishop Lefebvre was ahead of his time.
That's to much for modernist, they prefer to fight with dead bishop than with an alive Pope that's teaching errors.
To Reject the Bishops and the Pope Authority is to be an Anathema to Christ. Council of Trent Session 23, 24, and 14. You cant fight scandal by committing scandal.
Best PWA in a hot minute. Devil’s advocate Matt at his best
He is really great at asking those questions.
I have the humility to say that if something isn't in good standing with the church, don't go to it. Even if it seems better and the sacraments are valid, if they don't accept the pope, they're off the ark. Just go to an fssp or move to a place that has one. We live in rough times we must offer up our sufferings and trust in the Lord for better times.
Would you stand with Arrio, knowing that he is teaching an error?
If you don't, with your logic, you would be rejecting the pope.
Fantastic episode, thank you. I'm intrigued into looking into these topics more. Yes, get a canon lawyer on.
Amazing video, so helpful!!!!
Interesting discussion to consider for someone sympathetic to the SSPX. I just find it interesting that Matt devotes three hours to hammer the SSPX but he doesn't seem to have a problem with the orthodox and seems more than eager to attempt to find common ground with Muslims. I would direct folks to the Kennedy report for a decent rebuttal of this episode. He doesn't name Fradd, but it is clear this is what he is talking about.
a link if you could, I should much like to hear it
@@christiaanmeadows9081 czcams.com/video/Zm5vQMvqBLA/video.html
Well said
Bravo.
Mons. Lefevre's enemies are good calling Catholic Church's straight foes; separated brothers, brothers in the faith, christians, etc.
"Love is love" when it comes about modernist.
Hate is hate (with all of your guts) the SSPX.
Excellent vid, Matt. Many thanks to brother Salza for such a clearly articulated explanation.
Well done, John Salza👏👏 I have been waiting for you to do an interview like this. I myself got caught in Sedevacantism, and your Book and material helped get me out of it. I then went with the SSPX way for years and departed approximately 5 years ago, now attending TLM and NO adhering to Diocesan Bishop, etc. and never felt better! Keep up the solid work... you follow through with great, clear, concise style, clearing things up for the Church. Live Jesus our love and Mary our hope!
Hi Joshua! Over on my channel I host interviews with former Trads. It's helped a lot of people looking for answers and someone they can relate to. I would love to hear your story of what got you in and out of Sedevacantism, if you ever feel inclined to share! God bless you!
Is mr salza no longer a freemasonic luciferian ....just wondering....as he now appears to be an authority on Catholicism....🤔🧐
Thank you both so much! This helps me to understand so much!
Thank God that where I live in Mexico, Novus Ordo Masses are generally well done. I've never encountered any of what's mentioned in the discussions of NO vs TLM. I'm praying for the unity of the Church in the world. It seems our brothers in the US need it desperately.
Very, true. They are very reverent. The people dress up too. When people visit the Cathedrals you can hear a pin drop.
I'm in switzerland. Very much a western land.
But our NO masses are reverent. Even in modern ugly churches.
I have the impression it's more some type of revolutionary spirit that gripped the US in the chaos after the council. The US was founded with a revolution after all. And so the liturgy was bent to their own image and... dare I say it... 'boomerized'.
I know Germany has a similar problem, and they have a history of overly 'reforming' as well.
And now there's a revolution going on against the new liturgy, and round and round it goes... I'll pray for my US and German brothers and sisters
¿¿¿¿¿¿?????? ¿ What about the comunion in hand? ¿Women in leggins, men in shorts, applauses?
@@chiyo256 I have never seen this in Mexico. Only a few parishes I have been to in thee US have that but thankfully things are getting better. A seemingly modern parish I have been going to for years got a young Filipino priest who is reverent and does not look for applauses. Our new older priest is reverent too.
@@chiyo256 That doesn't generally happen in my parish and some others I attend. I even see women with veils.
Also, communion in hand is the way Apostles did it. I don't think it's the best for our times, for sure, but let's relax a little.
Saludos desde Jalisco.
I'm from SE Europe, from Catholic area. I live in a reverent NO parish, with altar boys, only priests and deacons giving Holy Communion. I appreciate this video because I really like TLM and I want to learn more about it and also expand my knowledge about other important matters connected to our faith. Thank you and God bless you. 🙏✝️🕊️
The Novus Ordo is a Happy Meal. The "Traditional Latin Mass" is the Rite of St Peter, and a propitiatory sacrifice. It has nothing to do with "reverence". It has to do with ontology.
@@whitewolf1298 that is according to you but not according to the Church. Have you ever known that St. Peter never used Latin?
@@johnosumba1980
It would be absurd to think that St Peter went to Rome and was not familiar with Latin. St Paul of course knew Latin well, and was a great influence on the rest of the Apostles.
In the meantime, Holy Mother Church cannot contradict herself, nor suppress the Apostolic Traditions which are her warp and woof- her heritage.
What Paul VI did was an act of violence against the sacred, pure and simple.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us. You are our only hope!
@@whitewolf1298 have you ever tried to find out how many times there has been changes in the way mass was being conducted? And do you believe that the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church? And do you think Jesus was wrong in giving Peter the power to bind and loose. I have been to so many places and believe that the Catholic Church is right in all the improvements they make, the problem lies down on implementation. Many people relate Vatican 2 to the problem bedeviling the world and forgetting that there were problems even before Vatican 2. Even at the beginning of the Church.
@@johnosumba1980
The Gates of Hell will never prevail against Holy Mother Church. The Dogma of the Faith will always be preserved and it will always be available to souls seeking salvation. Our Lord Never guaranteed that when He returns there will be a pope and hierarchy.
Peter was definitely appointed Prince of the Apostles, and given the power to bind and lose in terms of discipline in the church. (For example, with one stroke of a pen the pope could cancel the whole of canon law and annul any penalties incurred.) But the pope CANNOT change the Divine Law nor the Apostolic Traditions. The Church has four marks- One, Holy, Catholic, and APOSTOLIC. The main duty of the pope and and bishops is to guard the sacred deposit of Faith.
The way Mass is conducted has developed, properly speaking, not changed. Just as a puppy develops into a dog, over the centuries prayers have been added to the body of he Mass and Sts added to the canon. But NEVER have prayers been altered or deleted. And NEVER has the theology of Holy Mass been changed.
Amazing show. Thanks Matt and team!
Wow, what a five-star guest! 25 minutes in and I’ve learned loads from this guy. Dr. Salza’s got a razor sharp legal mind. God bless you for bringing us these interviews, Matt 🙏. Greetings from Madrid 🇪🇸
John Salza is a mason. Disappointed that Matt does not vett his guests. Salza is well known to be a grifter.
@@scaryspyce1713 Really? Is that so?
@@helmanticus8624 Yes. Check into his background and you will find a lot to discredit him.
Both Bishop Schneider and Bishop Huonder were sent by Rome to investigate the SSPX and both of them found that the SSPX are not schizmatics. I would believe them over this mason who just wants to drive up his book sales.
Salza has written books, supposedly tell-alls of Freemasonry and the SSPX which are sensationalized fictional accounts, not accurate at all.
WAS a Mason. When he learned that Catholics cannot be masons, he left them.
He also wrote a book explaining why Catholics can't be freemasons.
@@d.v.stuyvesant6944 That’s a relief. Thank you.
Thankx to the missions of sspx some of my friends came back to the one true catholic faith.
Thank you for this video. Dr Salza is very clear and articulate in explaining the situation with the SSPX, Pope Francis, Sedevecantism, and other issues. I wish I heard this talk earlier. I was so confused.
Dude, same.
He has made serious errors. He stated that the priest don't have the faculties to say the mass. They do as the SSPX mass is valid and the SSPX are not considered "schismatic", according to Pope Francis. However, it is illicit. We are not supposed to receive communion at an SSPX mass. He claimed that the SSPX regards Archbishop Lefebvre over the magisterium. That's false. They cling to the concerns that Lefebvre had about the second Vatican and modernism as well as heresy in the clergy. They even point out heretical statements from not only JP2, but Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis who we all know is the most "soft on crime" Pope we've had in the last 100 years or so. He's used terms like "I think that..", "they say..", "I haven't seen any evidence in contrary to.." There are a lot of opinions in his argument. I'll give you a small example - The SSPX had a problem with priests in NO mass placing the bread in the hands of the laity instead of the tongue because the early protestants did this as they didn't believe in the real present of Christ's body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist. I'm not a SSPX apologist, but I believe in a fair fight.
The former high ranking freemason John Salza who made an oath to Lucifer and renounced Jesus Christ before his "conversion" to the Vatican II church and who now eagerly tries to bring all who want to be traditional catholics into that institution in which someone who builds temples for pagan god worship and who prays on the wailing wall "in which HaShem dwells" for the coming of "their" Moshiach must be venerated as a saint is proven to be a complete spiritual fraud in an audio file named "John Salza's Lies, Errors and Dishonesty" here on CZcams. I suggest you also study the article entitled "John Salza Has No Idea What He’s Talking About" (you can google it).
Is John salsa a Canon lawyer? Why should we listen to his personal opinion on anything. Archbishop Athanasius Schneider says they are not in schism , how about you get him on to discuss the matter since he does have the authority to discuss this
"In my opinion"...I will take Michael Davies over John Salza. Fortunately, the SSPX didn't come to an agreement with the Pachamama ecumenism! Good for them!
Thank you both John and Matt for having this discussion. I extremely appreciate the information and clarity in these hard times and found it very informative. THANK YOU🙏
Great interview. Learned a lot.
Amazing interview! John Salza very calmly and systematically breaks down the errors that have gripped so many well-meaning Catholics that have been scandalized into joining the SSPX. It's worth repeat watches.
Brilliant enlightening discussion. Thank you so much for this guys and very timely too!
That was awesome. Thank you.
Grabbing my popcorn for the comments section 🍿
Be gentle :) ...kidding...
The live chat was pretty rocky at times, thankfully Matt's got a lot of good Mods and Thursday the producer.
@@danguard8543 Seriously? I only started watching in the last hour, but the moderators were the only rockiness I saw in the chat.
@@willing_spirit6830 Doubt it
@@24erstad Trust me, they couldn't keep from name calling all while preaching to refrain from name calling. I believe their favorite one was "dingus". Maybe they were very efficient at hiding inappropriate comments, but if that's the case there was still no need for their rude responses to a bunch of invisible people.
Thank you, very clear explanations.
"I think most people who dont like their local Novus Ordo aren't involved, you can make a lot of changes very quickly by getting involved, usually there's not many people really volunteering"
I took this from the chat and it's absolutely true.
I saw that too. It shot out at me and called me out.
It's super true, especially if you can sing. Very easy to get Gregorian chant going in your mass if you just talk to your priest, from my experience.
It's absolutely true. We have Gregorian chant sung at every Mass as well as a new High Altar and Communion rails. The priest also says the Mass ad Orientem. All because parishioners were asking for it and they stepped in to help run the choir and teach altar boys
My brother was very involved in his local parish and was constantly met with resistance as priest after priest participated in liturgical abuses - and when he would point it out he was castigated and ridiculed - and even when he brought official publications from the church that would go over liturgical rubrics, the priest still wouldn’t listen. And when writing to his bishop - deaf ears.
He now attends a local TLM - has to drive an hour to get there
It really shouldn’t have to be this way.
@@mikeoconnor4590 it really should not have to be, but you're brother will be rewarded not only for his courage in asking for proper changes, but also for his bearing the abuses to adore His Lord and Savior. You're brother won't have to answer for these priests and Bishops sins. Bad clergy doesn't make the Church not the Church. Christ promised us He would never abandon us, he didn't promise us good and holy clergy.
Excellent show. Thank you.
Thank u for interview Matt! I have been long time follower of PWA from Kazakhstan and love your show! I have asked my bishop and he said yes I can go to SSPX. Thanks Dr. Salza for advice to ask my bishop! Greetings from Astana 🇰🇿
Matt Thank you again for doing this interview! I want to plead with you to please continue to interview folks explaining the schism of the society. I know its not fun to talk about but these talks truly are bringing people back from schism, heresy, or at least being on the brink. Without videos like this my husband and I may have completely fallen for the societies schism. Please don’t stop, souls need this!
God bless & so thankful for John Salza he explained everything so well God bless him
Man, I need a book with all this information in more detail & citings!!
Another vote for a book, please!!
Read Michael Davies book Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre, it’s extremely well documented and it fills in the gaps that Salza is leaving out
Look what Rome is doing now!! I converted 13 years ago to get away from the nonsense going on now. I’m thinking Leveve was right.
yes he was ❤😊 i also converted last year from 🇩🇪Lutheranism
To Reject the Bishops and the Pope Authority is to be an Anathema to Christ. Council of Trent Session 23, 24, and 14. You cant fight scandal by committing scandal.
This was fantastic!
Brilliant and insightful conversation. 👏
I really appreciated John’s approach to this. He’s so knowledgeable of the historical facts behind all of this and is able to communicate them calmly and clearly. This was so informative!
Rather I found his neglect of context appalling.
@@philcortens5214 yes. Lefebvre was lied to by Rome. Multiple times. He had not a schismatic spirit (and I don't even go to a SSPX parish)
@@philcortens5214 Bingo!
Yeah right ....is salza still a freemasonic luciferian or an authority on the Catholic church now....just wondering ....
The former high ranking freemason John Salza who made an oath to Lucifer and renounced Jesus Christ before his "conversion" to the Vatican II church and who now eagerly tries to bring all who want to be traditional catholics into that institution in which someone who builds temples for pagan god worship and who prays on the wailing wall "in which HaShem dwells" for the coming of "their" Moshiach must be venerated as a saint is proven to be a complete spiritual fraud in an audio file named "John Salza's Lies, Errors and Dishonesty" here on CZcams. I suggest you also study the article entitled "John Salza Has No Idea What He’s Talking About" (you can google it).
My wife is from Milwaukee and we go back every other year and have agreed that we will not attend another Novus Ordo there again. We either attend St. Stanislaus or the Melkite parish. I have only walked out of a handful of Masses in my life because I could not stand the sacrilege- all of them were Novus Ordo events (they could not qualify as legit Masses) in Milwaukee. I think there are people who are will8ng to allow a banal, saying ethos of Vatican IIism to run roughshod over them and their families rather than do what us necessary to save their souls. No one - NO ONE - is bound to submit themselves or their families to spiritual abuse and danger. Thank God for the Institute in Milwaukee.
This is the situation we’re in full time and it’s why we attend the Society Masses and Catechesis. The things we’ve heard (and seen) are our local parish, with our five impressionable little boys, is not to be believed.
It is theoretically possible to find ourselves in a sorry situation where our Bishop is running such a poor diocese that we cannot in good conscience assist at any masses under him. But that doesn't mean we then go outside the legitimate structure of the Church to have people mediate our relationship with Christ.
To act in the person of Christ as a minister in the Church, you need God to give you that mission, otherwise you are appointing yourself to a position beyond your stature. It's intrinsically evil to present yourself as someone's representative without their permission, and this is what any ordained man does unless he has received a mission to act as a minister in the Church.
Christ did not promise you access to daily mass and weekly confession. If your local situation is so dire, then simply stay home. Make the three-hour drive to the next diocese once a month, and do what you can to fix the situation in your local Church.
@@tomthx5804 breakaway sect that still recognizes Rome as the head of the church? That’s a stretch. The bishop in my diocese cancelled all TLM as of 1 January. Me and mine will attend the SSPX chapel and still pray for Pope Francis, Rome, and the union of the Society and Rome for mutual spiritual enhancement.
Actually, it’s not. We truly do not have any of that available to us. When I mention problems in our local diocese I’m talking about gravely serious issues, not “Oh, we just don’t like the guitars.” We have actually had the Holy Spirit referred to as a woman during Mass. The vax compared to Mary’s fiat to God. One hour of confession available once a week. Baptisms done in large groups several times a year when the priest feels like it. “Jesus is not really a man or a woman.” A pro-life group would be too political. It just goes on and on. In one of the two churches there are no kneelers and no kneeling allowed. Our bishop also happens to have been Theodore McCarrick’s personal secretary so there’s not much hope in going to him. We have no options like ICKSP or FSSP. Not everyone lives in a heavily Catholic area. I’m a convert of five years and attending Mass with the Society is the first time I’ve met priests that really, truly care and have time to listen to you. I’ve seen nothing devisive, no “attitude of schism.” You better believe we have prayed and prayed on this one and done all our research. There is nothing but confusion and conflicting opinions about the Society online but ultimately I see no evidence of any true authority that says they are schismatic. In fact, I see quite the opposite, I see Bishop Schneider saying they are in no way schismatic. I also see the fruits, I see the true joy there and love of Jesus Christ and his bride the Church. I see Pope Francis’ picture in the entryway and prayed for during the Mass. We are not schismatics, we love Holy Mother Church and we have had to make the difficult decision for our family to drive an hour both ways every Sunday to leave our local parish and go where we find true Catholic orthodoxy. Please pray for us, for the Pope and for the Church that this whole situation may become unnecessary. God bless you.
I will never argue with a person about attending the SSPX. In these demonic and terrible times in the Church we can only do what we can to defend our families and hold to the true Faith passed on for 2000 years. Under normal circumstances one should not attend the SSPX. Again, not going to ever condemn anyone for doing so. If you are a Novus Ordo only person - so be it. Enjoy. But...I do think where a bishop unjustly forbids the TLM and there are no other genuine alternative to the happy-slappy Susan-from-the- parish Novus Ordo with guitars and hand-holding, no Eastern Catholic, Anglican Ordinariate...I'm going to SSPX. But in our diocese we have a reputation for numerous Novus Ordo unicorn Masses - ad orientem, Latin, chant, incense, male only severs, Holy Communion kneeling and on tongue from priests, etc. Still I would prefer a low TLM over High NO. My preference of course.
Mr.Salza is very charitable with his time and personally called me to discuss this topic a year ago. Pittsburgh has a growing sedevacantist community.
"Pittsburgh has a growing sedevacantist community." What group is that? Has CMRI expanded their twice monthly Masses?
Didn't john salza say before in a Fatima center talk that his local diocesan Bishop / priest said he could become a freemason?
@@eoinmcg88 he left freemasonry years and years and years ago. He’s given a bunch of talks that explain what happened to him in that organization and how freemasonry is a demonic entity. He recognized his error and left.
@@reinelantz3304 I know that, the point is his local priest told him he could join the freemasons, salza is saying go to Mass with your local priest instead of the sspx lol
That's great to hear about Pittsburgh.
Don't hear much about PA Sede's.
John Salza's lay apologetics is akin to a Protestant preacher. No thanks.
GREAT CONVO! much needed info for a lot of people in these times.
Viva Cristo Rey!
@@eoinmcg88 and the cardinal who ordained marcel lefebvre was a free mason....
@@TheEdzy25 Archbishop Bugnini who created the novus ordo Mass was a freemason
@@eoinmcg88 the sspx also created by freemasons.
@@TheEdzy25 I prefer to stay away from a Mass created by a freemason with the help of 6 protestant ministers
@@eoinmcg88 and some people might say, they rather stay away from a society started by schismatic freemasons that hijacked a mass rite and holding it hostage.
I'm a former sedevecantist (SGG, so strict they would deny you sacraments for attending the SSPX lol), my now wife went to the NO and I was the one who introduced her to the TLM. Trying to figure this kind of stuff out almost stopped us from getting married. We now attend an ICKSP (we are blessed to be quite near one) and wouldn't have it any other way. part of my family still goes to the sede church, most go to the SSPX, and one of my siblings goes to the Institute with his family as well. I've completely left sedevecantism, praise to the Lord, and while the institute is my home parish, I go to and receive at both the SSPX and the NO, not sure how many others are in similar situations. It's difficult because most in my family would deny the validity of the NO, and some of my in-laws aren't so sure of the validity of the TLM even at the Institute
Really appreciate the information in this interview, God bless and keep up the good work everyone at PWA
I'm very familiar with Bishop Dolan's sermons.
Also no one considers eastern rites for a good option, you have ICK.
You would probably benefit from listening to all of Michael Loftons videos over at Reason and Theology. I was initially raised in the SSPV and then when there was a big fight there my parents went over and raised us in the SSPX. I jabe learned so much about what the Church actually teaches from @Reason and Theology and @TheLogosproject.
@@AnaMT1985
Michael Lofton is a great resource for well thought out theology.
I use to listen to Taylor Marshall until he started going down this rabbit hole. I unsubscribed from him, Kennedy, and recently, Tim Gordon.
I prefer to spend my time with theologically strong Catholics...Pints with Aquinas, Trent Horn, Michael Lofton, Keith Nestor, Brian Holdsworth, BP. Barron, Catholic Answers, etc..
Leave SSPX....they have issues to workout with the Pope!
@@rosiegirl2485 yes, agree. I also immediately recognized the peace I felt after leaving all of the anger, bitterness and constant negativity of the celebrity ytubers you mentioned behind. It was refreshing coming over to those that don't treat everyone with the judgement of suspicion. It's nice to trust that the Church is indefectible and all of the problems I was taught about all my life in the SSPX are not mine to carry.
None of us would have to worry about this if the Tridentine Mass was readily available in every diocese.
We are a religion that holds our history and traditions as sacred. Our souls are always going to be moved by beauty, grace and reverence. We will never stop seeking it out and it's time that the church hierarchy accepts it.
The restrictions on TLM are what is pushing people toward the "irregular", together with a lack of discipline of heterodox priests and bishops. This Pontificate worsened a situation that was previously on the mend.
I normally love all PWA episodes but this was a chore to sit through. I do wish Matt vetted his guest and realized that Salza has a real credibility problem. A person needs credibility, otherwise, the audience becomes even more polarized on an issue. Reading through the comments here, I'm afraid that is exactly what's happened.
Great insight! I sense there is way more to the deliberate tension on removing TLM other than schism from the attitude of TLM participants. It appears to be 1. Deliberately Increase division within the Church and 2. Derail the benefits of the individual within TLM. This service provides a heightened focus and contemplation by participants by very nature (focus on a uncommon language) and a focus on the presence of God - when this happens, great things happen. Agents within and without the Church do not desire this for a plethora of reasons.
Schism could be a result, but I sense not at the attitude or behest of the fold but from high ranking internal authority and external influence.
Thank you very much for this excellent interview. One of my favorite PWA episodes.
Didn't john salza say before in a Fatima center talk that his local diocesan priest said he could become a freemason?
@@eoinmcg88 I heard Salza say it in an interview.
@@eoinmcg88He is not a Freemason any longer.
@@d.v.stuyvesant6944....oh thats all right then is it .....salza attacking the Archbishop who saved the true faith...but he said is is no longer a practising freemason luciferian 😂
God bless you Mr. Salza. Thank you for clarification on this matter.
I put off watching this because I thought it might be a hit piece on tradition, but it was not at all. Good conversation which actually answered some questions for me.
This has been one of the most enjoyable episodes! Mr. Salza was such a joy to listen to.
Is mr salza still a freemasonic luciferian or does that matter as he mocks the Saintly Achbishop Lefebvre....
What a great program thank you so well said
Sharing this around. A fine well-reasoned interview.
There would be no FSSP without the SSPX. The original FSSP priests came out of ArchBp Lefebrvre's seminary at Econe Switzerland.
Excellent. Really cleared a lot up. Great.
This conversation was great and helped a lot. I have never nor did I ever want to attend a SSPX Mass. I still do not. However I do have to say the live chat during this show was frankly appalling.
1/ Sedes in the comments acting out. As they do.
2/ Mods and others being absolutely *callous* and uncharitable to those struggling with bad masses and difficult feelings about liturgy and other issues. MANY people do not have access to another other than a "typical" Novus Ordo. Some only have access to spiritually troubling ones. To be told to "get over it" and be repeatedly shouted down from questions was more than a little ridiculous. Those asking questions were repeatedly told to basically hush and listen, even when we clarified we were listening and simply were not understanding or needed clarification.
Also, incorrect information was given about TC by mods. TC did not just "give power back to bishops". Two diocese in my state were told directly, after asking for clarification from Rome, to remove all TLMs from any parish setting. It was not left up to the bishops. It was stated they HAD to move, including one that had been at a cathedral since before Summorum. TLMs that our bishops *support* and have no issues with. And Rome told them they could no longer be in any parish. These well established communities were pushed out of long standing parish relationships. Apparently though, my direct experience isn't in line with what several mods insist is the truth about TC.
I'm not one to use the term "gaslighting" lightly, but mods were absolutely skirting close to treating the audience that way during the live chat.
I love Pints, appreciate this conversation and interview, but felt the above needed to be said.
Agreed. My diocese was known for it's abundant TLMs but our Bishop was *told* to remove permissions to preform them anymore. Not asked or given any other options. This is true across the board I believe.
"the live chat during this show was frankly appalling. 1/ Sedes in the comments acting out." Who is this and what did they say?
In America, it is socially and psychologically very very important to be able to look at some group and say, “I’m not as religious as *THAT* I’m better than them cuz I’m less religious.” The only ones Catholics really have to crap on this way are other more conservative Catholics.
You should attend an SSPX Mass, which is valid and fulfils the Sunday obligation according to Rome, in order to solve the conflict between Rome and Econe.
You didn’t listen to the video
In light of Mr. Salza's point that the Liturgy is tied to a parish Church - what does that say about the Immemorial Mass not being permitted in parish Churches anymore but only shrines and oratories and such? I am an indefatigable proponent that the Immemorial Latin Mass cannot be denied to the faithful (as Quo Primum and B16 state). I would say that if you have access to a licit TLM (FSSP, ICSKP, etc.) you should go there. In absence of a licit TLM and your only access is SSPX you can go there. If a bishop will not provide for his faithful then he is derelict. I think common sense, good will, and a reasonable sense of fidelity is the guide here. I have friends that go to SSPX and have flourished spiritually. They don't "harbor a sense of schism". They found their home there and have flourished.. So it cannot be said the Holy Spirit does not work there. But for decorum and sake of scandal you should go to diocesan approved TLM. But again, in absence of diocesan approved one may go to SSPX for a blanket ban or denial is illegitimate (Quo Primum and B16).
As an ordinary layman with no training in Canon law anI absolutely no ability to weigh in on the SSPX, I have only one question.
What's wrong with the Vatican that they let this issue go on and on in massive confusion without a definitive resolution?
I was thinking about it, and I think it's because the pope's know that if they're too forceful and too conclusive, that will most likely cause the SSPX clergy to reactively counter whatever they say and lead all of their flock to full, irreversible schism. The route they're taking now, the magisterium doesn't want the people who attend SSPX masses to wholesale say the Catholic Church is evil. I think their strategy is to make it so the SSPX hangs themselves with their own rope by being so irrational that it's obvious to the layman. Unfortunately, most of these radtrads are very poorly catechized and most likely catechized by the SSPX, so they're drinking the Kool-Aid. I recommend watching the video "John Salza - 'Is the Society of St. Pius X in Schism?'" by pioneercatholic and watch the Q&A section to see how unhinged the SSPX are. They literally sound like Baptist fundamentalist conspiracy theorists who say that that the Jesuits are controlling the world and want to assassinate Protestants.
Very bad. Unfortunatley mostly lies. These kinds of persons should not have a platform on a true catholic channel.
Many questions for Mr Salza, not about the goodness of attending SSPX Masses but merely whether it is schismatic and sinful to do so:
1) how can a Pope give faculties to schismatics?
2) why would schismatics ask the Pope for faculties? Or anything for that matter.
3) how is a retired diocesan bishop living with the SSPX and not been declared in schism? Can Bishop Huonder hear Mass from a SSPX priest in the morning, then celebrate Mass at a local parish in the afternoon and be OK canonically?
4) has there ever been a time in Church history when schismatics have said the name of the Pope and the local bishop in Mass, dialogued with the hierarchy on an intra-Church basis, requested and received faculties from the Pope, the laity been allowed to be married and absolved by said schismatics? If not, what makes now different?
5) were the Jesuits who continued their mission after they were suppressed in schism? Why did no one at the time or afterward makes this assertion if that was the case?
You would do well to listen to his whole series on The Logos Project. It would clear up a lot of confusion.
@@24erstad well if the answer to the first two questions is anything like his claim about schismatic orthodox having carte blanche “faculties” to absolve then I will need further enticement
@@toddbyrd9071 It seems clear that any answer given will not be sufficient for you. Your questions are worded as "gotcha" questions. If you are serious though, his articles on his site are most compelling.
@@24erstad I have read his articles and, as stated elsewhere, he has changed my opinion to some degree on the SSPX. To claim that I am intractable based on one response is rash on your part IMO.
Could it be that these questions are rhetorical and meant to highlight the arguments of his that I find the weakest? Perhaps someone who agree with Mr Salza could answer them and I would change my mind even more. I am open to that.
Yes how is that?? I would like an answer?
But should we adhere to the Pope if/when he says it’s okay to bless gay marriages etc? Something clearly against the teaching of Jesus.
To Reject the Bishops and the Pope Authority is to be an Anathema to Christ. Council of Trent Session 23, 24, and 14. You cant fight scandal by committing scandal. The SSPX founders did just that and still do
I'm in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee as well. Love our Bishop and we have many very good Priests here especially in the Kenosha area
Is Kyle Rittenhouse Catholic?
This freemason infiltrated sspx is now actively trying to destroy.
Sure do! Arch of Milwaukee rocks!
A very gossipy and feminine attitude permeates this entire podcast. Salza is not genuine. He has received an award from freemasons in 2018. He claims to have attended an SSPX chapel for 15 years without looking into the status/legitimacy.
Not sure who is pulling the strings here.
Regardless, this is uncharitable and shameful.
It was not a problem while he was an sspx apologist haha
At least stop calling yourself "catholic"
@@katholischetheologiegeschi1319
Why wasn't it a problem?
Strawman argument followed by nonsense.
Very troubling.
@@turbodood637 no its not
When Salza was an sspx apologist nobody complained abiut he freemasonic past
No suddenly the cope is everyhwere just to make people rejecting to hear clear & direct arguments
"A very gossipy and feminine attitude permeates this entire podcast"
You realize how sexist that sounds right? You are implying that by default men are better at honest debate than woman are.
@@drewaskins8377
I may have been extreme in my comment, but men are 100% better at debating. Women shouldn't be in the public arena of ideas.
Thanks for this video, I'll definitely buy his book about sedevacantism.
Such an interesting interview. As a fan of the TLM, it gave me a new speen on the motus proprio. Thanks you for posting this.
I must say though, now I would love to hear someone from within the SSPX answer to this interview and to those arguments.
I think a moderated debate with @PintsWithAquinas with John Salza and former Superior General of the SSPX, Bishop Bernard Fellay, who was one of the bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre, would be very interesting and eye opening.
Man, I've always heard good things about Salza, but this is my first time listening to him and I'm blown away. Can't wait to dive into the full video. Thanks for the great discussion guys!
The former high ranking freemason John Salza who made an oath to Lucifer and renounced Jesus Christ before his "conversion" to the Vatican II church and who now eagerly tries to bring all who want to be traditional catholics into that institution in which someone who builds temples for pagan god worship and who prays on the wailing wall "in which HaShem dwells" for the coming of "their" Moshiach must be venerated as a saint is proven to be a complete spiritual fraud in an audio file named "John Salza's Lies, Errors and Dishonesty" here on CZcams. I suggest you also study the article entitled "John Salza Has No Idea What He’s Talking About" (you can google it).
Superb episode. 3 hours is just great.
Known John Salza through his works (scripturecatholic) for years. But only know appreciate his knowledge and stature. Thank you, thank you, John.
Thank you for this, it’s so helpful!
I think you should talk to a SSPX priest about this. They will lay out their position very logically
No. Talk to your parish priest and, if that is not clear, to your bishop.
Remember: if someone says something is super important, and it isnt in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, then it just is *not* that important. We are not required to be theologians or canon lawyers or historians; whatever is clearly stated in the Catechism should be enough to silence the drums of outrage thst schismatics beat.
SSPX setting up its own Marriage Tribunal cannot be justified or explained. The *reasons* and *arguments* SSPX priests will use to justify the Society are irrelevant - Rome *has not* given them authority to judge marriages, say masses, or say the things they say (like dissuading the faithful from confessing to NO priests or attending NO masses).
@@rickjelliffe1580 You assume modernist parish priests and bishops are even Catholic these days.
If you are suggesting a debate on this channel, I doubt any SSPX leaders would agree to do that.
@@LMC444111 No, you assume they are not. If they are Baptized and can say the Catholic Creed with the Church's intended meaning, then they are Catholics, full stop. To add anything more is to violate Jesus' warning not to invent and put obstacles in little childrens' way: better a millstone around our neck...
We love you.
Couple of things to add:
First: in 2016 Pope Francis himself granted direct jurisdiction in perpetuity to all SSPX priests to hear confessions and for the sacrament of marriage. In this decree it also states that the SSPX priest is to say Mass during the marriage. How can a priest from the SSPX celebrate Mass licitly on this day, but lose all faculties the next?
Secondly, Archbishop Lefebvre never celebrated the Novus Ordo, but only the new rites of 1965 and 1967, which were much closer to the 1962 TLM than to the 1970 Novus Ordo. He was never a great liturgist, but he rejected the new theology of the Novus Ordo.
Also; in 2018 pope Francis gave permission to Bp. Fellay to ordain priests from that year forward.
(I’m going to be adding more as I’m watching)
Because that was the permission that was given.
Oh so the sspx is no longer separate from what lefev called “the conciliar modernist freemason church”?? Wonderful so the sspx leadership have rejected these words from lefev or the “modernist conciliar church” is no longer modernist?? Great so we can just go to a NO or does the sspx say not to??
@@xanderjansen4539 where is your evidence to back up Fellay was given permission to ordain? Fellay has said that, but he has never produced a document to verify that. Anybody can say anything.
@@AnaMT1985 I’m sure the Vatican just never got around to correcting him.
Very helpful, thank you!
The pope himself granted the SSPX faculties. The Vatican itself has said Sunday obligations are fulfilled at SSPX mass and you can donate. Bishop Schneider was sent by the Vatican to answer this question and he loves the SSPX and encourages Catholics to attend. I’ll listen to:
The Pope
The Vatican
Vatican Representative Bishop Schneider
Not some internet rando
Pope never stated they were in full communion, never gave them canonical mission, there was a dispensation given by Pope Francis for CONFESSIONS. Not Mass. Not Matrimony. Being allowed dispensation doesn't mean you're in full communion. Pius X himself did the same with the Eastern Orthodox. Submit to Rome.