Olivia
Online
“Nothing has changed and nothing will ever change” is the whole problem.
If Rome’s authority only counts when Rome agrees with you, then Rome is not functioning as your authority.
You are.
Adding “Holy Father” to the letter does not fix that.
The Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X has published an open letter addressed to Pope Leo XIV following the declaration of schism and the new sanctions imposed by the Holy See.
In the text, the Superior General, Fr Davide Pagliarani, states that the Fraternity does not accept the measures adopted, which it describes as “objectively unjust and invalid”, but says it will not respond “in bitterness or rebellion”. The FSSPX maintains that it acted solely for the good of souls and of Catholic Tradition, reaffirms its fidelity to the Church and to the Pope, and says it is convinced that a future Pontiff will recognise the role played by the Fraternity in preserving the faith and the traditional liturgy.
The letter concludes with an appeal to Leo XIV to continue blessing the members of the Fraternity “as his children”, stating that, despite the sanctions, “for us nothing has changed and nothing will ever change”.
St. Joan proves churchmen can act unjustly. Agreed.
She does not prove that every group disciplined by Rome is automatically Joan of Arc with a chapel schedule.
A politically corrupted trial of a coerced laywoman is not the same category as bishops knowingly consecrating bishops after Rome explicitly said no.
Canon law remains undefeated.
My patron saint, St. Joan of Arc was excommunicated, burned at the stake, and later canonized a Saint. Proof that the Church can make errors in judgment. St. Joan of Arc, pray for us!
This is fair. Many SSPX laity are not rebels; they are families looking for reverent worship and sane doctrine because their local options are bleak. TC made that worse. Massive own goal.
But “Rome handled this badly” does not make an irregular canonical situation normal.
The answer is pastoral care and real access to tradition, not “parallel Church unlocked.”
While these types of posts are made with good intentions, they are tone deaf.
Most people that attend an SSPX chapel primarily for the liturgy have no access to a diocesan or former ED community TLM.
If Rome is serious about attracting those people, it needs to rescind TC.
You keep answering a jurisdiction question with “but Vatican II.”
Even if one thinks Vatican II was ambiguous, badly implemented, or pastorally disastrous, that does not make bishops free agents.
“Rome failed” is not a blank cheque for a parallel hierarchy. That is the entire point.
Who to follow
Pogi Gwapo 🇺🇸 🏝️
@TerryJMcMurray
Dems/Libs are either stupid or evil. Most Reps are Dems! MAHA MAGA.
Don't Mind Me, Mr. Oligarchy
@owwash
Globalists and central banks corrupt the USA, duping collectivist Dems and co-opting globalist RINOs and Libertarians, to $lide us all along for their ¢ontrol.
Derrick Todd
@Derricktodd
Who am I? I'm a husband a father, an entrepreneur and political advocate.
Our Lord also did not say, “Upon this rock I will build a decentralized content network of men deciding for themselves when Peter counts.”
Nobody is arguing for blind papalism. But pretending obedience is optional the moment it becomes inconvenient is Protestantism, not Catholic tradition.
I am appalled to see Catholics, especially the youth, especially recent converts, acting as though the only metric to being Catholic is to blindly follow the pope.
Our Lord did not say those who are baptized and obey will be saved, but those who are baptized and believe.
@moldywoodpile Catholics do not oppose “Scripture and logic” to jurisdiction.
Christ founded a visible Church with real authority. So yes, jurisdiction matters. Bishops are not free-floating sacramental contractors who get to operate against Rome because they believe their argument is better.
This comparison doesn't work.
Amoris Laetitia is a disputed theological and pastoral document. You may think it's wrong. Fine. But nobody was excommunicated for disagreeing with your interpretation of it.
The SSPX bishops weren't excommunicated for holding an opinion. They performed an act that canon law has long attached excommunication to: consecrating bishops without a pontifical mandate after being explicitly told not to.
One is "I think Rome interpreted this badly." The other is "I knowingly did the thing canon law says incurs excommunication."
Those are not remotely the same category.
Amoris Laetitia and the Declaration of Excommunication of SSPX Bishops prove a new doctrine:
You can disobey the Will of God, but not the Will of the Pope.
Vatican II has placed Man at the center of worship, and the Pope above God Himself.
“We obey Peter in all things rightfully asked” sounds Catholic until the SSPX gets to be the final judge of what counts as rightful.
Then Peter is not governing. He is being reviewed.
The issue was not whether they would attend a meeting or accept a hypothetical future canon. The issue was concrete: Rome said do not consecrate bishops without mandate. They did it anyway.
Great. Argue with them.
I reject blind papalism. I also reject the opposite error: “Rome has authority only when I decide Rome is right.”
Sound doctrine matters. So does ecclesial obedience. Lose either one and you are no longer defending Catholic tradition; you are just picking your favourite failure mode.
This is the contradiction.
“We love the Pope, but his judgment over us is invalid because we say so” is not obedience.
You can appeal. You can argue injustice. Fine. But if Rome only has authority when it agrees with you, that is not Catholic tradition.
At best, it is Protestantism with better vestments.
JUST IN: The SSPX respond to Vatican’s decree of sanctions saying they are “objectively unjust and invalid”
Says the excommunication decree highlights “profoundly tragic context in which the universal Church finds herself.”
States: “We had asked to be instructed and confirmed in the faith of all time; instead, we have been declared schismatic a second time.”
Renews statements of love for Pope Leo, but adds that “We had asked for bread…. unfortunately, we received a stone.”
@_bonaventurian Very accurate, I actually wonder if a lot of the trash I'm seeing on X around this is people who are knowingly trying to demoralize people.
This kind of black-pilling is spiritually poisonous.
The Church has survived Arianism, the Western Schism, corrupt popes, the Reformation, the French Revolution, communist persecution, and two world wars.
But apparently Traditionis Custodes is where Christ's promise finally expires?
Have a little more confidence in the Church than that.
Well Traditionalism is officially a dead system. SSPX officially placed in schism, all bishops and priests excommunicated. If Lay people go, excommunicated.
FSSP, ICK can't grow because of Traditionis Custodes, diocesan TLM's keep getting canceled.
The movement is officially over. Meanwhile German bishops still in church throwing gay pride masses, and Fr. James Martin and Fr. Rupnick still in good standing.
It's over....
“Only chain of command” is not my argument. It is just the part you keep skipping.
The merits of Amoris Laetitia can be debated. The failures of Rome can be criticized. Fine.
However, Catholic bishops are not free agents. Consecrating bishops after Rome explicitly forbids it is a concrete canonical act. “I think Rome is wrong about other things” does not magically make jurisdiction disappear.
What am I doing about it? Apparently not enough, since I still haven’t been made Pope, cardinal, bishop, or even assistant regional nuncio. Tragic, really.
But the point remains: a disputed document being weaponized is not the same canonical category as consecrating bishops after Rome explicitly forbade it.
“Rome has serious problems” is not a magic wand that deletes canon law.
“Put them on trial” is literally my point.
Formal heresy requires a canonical process.
SSPX consecrating bishops without a pontifical mandate is not speculative. It is a public act canon law directly names and penalizes.
Canon 1387: consecrating or receiving episcopal consecration without papal mandate incurs excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.
You can’t demand process for politicians, then handwave a public schismatic act because you like the team.
The SSPX publicly announced they would consecrate bishops without a pontifical mandate. Rome warned it would constitute a schismatic act. They did it anyway. Rome applied the penalty it said it would apply.
You can argue the law is unjust or misapplied, but calling it "invalid" requires an actual canonical argument, not just vibes.
The excommunication was invalid. Period.
Ironically, the very priests, bishops and cardinals, and at least one pope who should have been/be excommunicated, are the ones daring to pass such judgment.
Obedience is not blind subservience. We know better.
Most importantly, Jesus the Messiah knows better.
You didn’t fix it; you changed the subject.
“Amoris Laetitia is bad/heretical/cruel” is still an argument about a document and its interpretation.
“We consecrated bishops after Rome explicitly forbade it” is a concrete canonical act.
Same emotional outrage bucket, totally different ecclesial category. Canon law remains undefeated.
I am not defending Pride Masses. I think they are scandalous and doctrinally radioactive.
But a Mass involving doctrinal error is not the same canonical act as consecrating bishops against the Pope’s express mandate. One is scandal/heresy/abuse territory. The other is an illicit episcopal consecration with its own specific canonical penalties.
If they ordained a bishop at the Pride Mass without Rome’s approval, then sure, same neighbourhood. Until then, this comparison is mostly outrage wearing a canon-law hat.
Tradition: Excommunicated
Anal Sex: Affirmed
We are living through a Crisis in the Church of unprecedented proportions.
“I contend” is not a canonical process.
You personally believing millions of Catholics are formal heretics does not erase the distinction between material error and formal heresy.
Canon law requires obstinacy, knowledge, and culpability.
This is exactly why definitions matter. Otherwise we’re just doing ecclesiology by vibes.
I agree. I’m fasting from X for the rest of the day too.
I’m tired of trying to unmuddy waters that are being deliberately muddied. The SSPX situation is tragic, and watching people twist themselves into knots to justify schism is spiritually exhausting.
Today needs prayer more than discourse.
What a terrible day for the Church.
Everyone will argue it out today. We’ll see lots of rage, mockery, glee, defensiveness, rationalization, and much worse.
I’m going to just completely fast today in reparation. I implore you to do the same.
This only works if you pretend “ecumenical dialogue with separated Christians” and “disciplining Catholics who consecrate bishops against the Pope’s explicit prohibition” are the same category.
They aren’t.
Rome speaks differently to outsiders than to Catholics under her authority. That’s not a double standard. That’s how authority works.
Novus Ordo double standard:
To the Orthodox: “Beautiful liturgy, praying for union”
To the Protestants: “Our separated brethren”
To the SSPX: “SCHISMATIC EVIL DISOBEDIENT SECT”
Interesting.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk 
@elonmusk
240.7M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.2M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.7M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
110.7M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
97.7M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.2M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
90.9M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
87.7M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
81.6M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
73.1M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
70M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
69.8M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.7M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
63.9M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
62.8M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.4M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.9M followers
X
@x
60.8M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
60.8M followers