Hello everyone and welcome back to the Matthew Schreiner Podcast. I said I was not going to do another episode on the SSPX. But I have no other topics of discussion. And regardless this episode is not solely about the Society of Saint Pius the Tenth. This episode is about general attitudes of traditionalist Catholics. I mentioned this at the end of the last episode on the SSPX. The SSPX is one such group that has attitudes that I want to address and I addressed this in a previous episode on the SSPX.
I also touched on Vatican Catholic, in two episodes, one episode where I gave my case against Most Holy Family Monastery (which Deuterocomical has also given a rather nice look at his own case against Vatican Catholic, which his is a less theological case and more of a similar lawfulness that they give), and in a previous episode I did mention them and their attitudes. What in particular I mentioned was a video, an older video on their channel, which was an upload of an exorcism performed by Bishop Robert McKenna.
Bishop McKenna is one bishop who I wanted to speak about, as well as other bishops who hold similar sedevacantist positions. Or other positions that could be categorized as similar to Vatican Catholic. The issue I want to bring up is the disagreement amongst traditionalists as well as sedevacantists. Which is why I brought up the Bishop McKenna video uploaded by Vatican Catholic. They speak of Bishop McKenna being a heretic because he believes that non-Catholics can be saved.
The problem is the great amount of disagreement between traditionalists, and when they disagree they anathematize each other. That is not to say one should not point out error. The issue is that each side considers themselves an authority. Which led me to previously say: when one removes the pope or an ultimate authority: there will be chaos. And this is what we see, when we have multiple people claiming to have authority, all claiming to be right, there will be chaos.
It should be noted, the sedevacantist position was rather a limited one before the advent of the internet. It didn’t not exist, but it was a fringe belief. Really only those who read about it or watched video about it (like Most Holy Family Monastery) knew about it. Today, it still is a fringe belief, but not as much as before. The problem with most traditionalists is that they simply do not agree with each other, and when they don’t agree they just split of with each other.
And what other group does that sound like? That’s right, the Protestants. The group that most sedevacantists hate with the fire of a million suns, is the group they are most like. In fact, they are protestant with a few extra steps. They believe that their interpretation, not of the scriptures, but of church doctrine and teaching, are the pillar of the church of their personal belief. Could you imagine for a minute if the Dimond brothers had a huge dispute, like if the one host they worship were truly a true host (an odd but true belief of theirs), what would happen? We would have two new churches, with a population of one believer each. That being said, there may be others at Most Holy Family Monastery, but ultimately, they only claim to have their own pope, their own ultimate authority there, who leads all the others in belief.
Ultimately, Sedevacantists also have an odd view of church structure. They view bishops as only people who have certain sacramental duties. The duty of a bishop is to oversee a diocese, or other type of territory, or assist another bishop in the overseeing of a diocese. A bishop’s job is not to oversee a religious order, that is the job of an abbot (who while he may look like a bishop is radically different), or a superior of another type (who is a priest) (like that of the Jesuits or the Augustinians or Franciscans or the FSSP).
Church structure of the Catholic church is as follows: the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, is in charge of the church, he is ultimately just another bishop, the Pope oversees the bishops, who exist in various ranks, some may be cardinals, but they are ultimately bishops who oversee sees. A bishop ultimately has to have a see, even if it is titular, and his job may then be something like a department in the Vatican. Bishops then oversee priests and deacons. Priests are ordinarily in charge of overseeing a parish and the people in the parish. Ultimately, the Pope serves in place of Peter, who serves in the place of Christ.
Church structure in this way view each step as a head. The pope is the head of the church, the head of the bishops, who are head of the priests, who are head of a parish community. This is a very basic view of the structure of the church. Each part is important and necessary, as we read in Paul. Each part of the church is necessary for it to run. The ultimate goal of the church is heaven, and salvation of souls.
The problem with traditionalists of this type, of sedevacantists, is that they are simply not a monolith. There is no one set sedevacantist book of beliefs. What is true of the Dimond brothers is not true of the SSPX or followers of other institutions. Now the SSPX are technically and probably not a sede society. But they hold views that are harmful.
The problem is their rejection of Vatican II, and their views against the popes following the council. I believe many fail to understand the council and have not read the documents, and when they do, they fail to read them in continuity with the teachings of the church, and see any language that could be taken contrarily, to be contrary to the teachings of the church. As well, many in the para-council, as Fr. Blake Britton puts it in Reclaiming Vatican II, simply saw an inch and took a mile.
Not every action of a pope or bishop is infallible. Just as every word of a priest said in a homily, or of a Catholic teacher, is not infallible. In fact, they can be wrong. They can make mistakes or be obstinate in heresy or wrong belief. That being said, you don’t have to take everything a priest or bishop says with questioning, they generally know what they are talking about, but there is room where they may make a mistake, and can be corrected. Being a priest is not a get out of hell free card. In fact there is an old saying that the road to hell is paved with the bones of priests, and the skulls of bishops are the lanterns. These men are called to a higher call, and have much to give account for. This includes leading souls to salvation and being truthful in their preaching.
However, the church is protected by the Holy Spirit that she will not be bound to heresy, and that she will live on until the consummation of ages, that is, the end of the world. Therefore, even a bad pope (as there is a great number of those in history) does not disprove the church, or warrant leaving her for the sedevacantist position. Being sedevacantist does not make you a true Catholic, instead to be Catholic is to be in communion with the pope, the successor of Peter, and the Vicar of Christ on Earth.
The Catholic Church is God’s ark of Salvation, Christ established the church to preach and teach his message of salvation, until he returns again in glory. If you want to be sure of your salvation, then you should be Catholic. The Catholic Church is the one true way to salvation. Put another way, extra ecclasia nulla sallus, outside the church there is no salvation. God himself can work in different ways, he may decide to save someone, and the church believes that one who is invincible ignorant, who does not willfully reject the church, because they did not know better (either they were never preached the gospel or were never aware of the truth of the church), they may be saved.
For example, God may save someone who lived on a desert island and was never aware of the gospel or the church. He may also save someone who grew up in a place where they were taught lies about the church, and believed it to be an evil organization, since they were ignorant of the real truth about the church. Ultimately, salvation is God’s gift to man, and not something that man can on his own win. Being Catholic does not guarantee salvation, but it is the surest way to salvation. Salvation requires not only one to believe the truths the church has revealed, but also to apply these lessons to their lives. Ultimately, it calls us to have a personal relationship with God.
The church is not simply a legalistic thing, a place where we have to fill this guideline and that rule, rather it calls us to become beloved sons and daughters of God. Living in relationship with him. And God has left us a structure, the church, to be the barque of salvation, to be the surest way to heaven, the surest way to know how to be children of God. To be a child of God requires obedience to the way he has set for us. And he has set the church as the way to salvation, leaving the sacraments as a memorial, and to guide us along the way.
This is why the state of Most Holy Family Monastery is very sad, they remove themselves from the sacraments, believing and worshipping only one host, that they have almost this odd belief is the last true host on earth. It truly seems to me an odd belief to hold. Almost saddening.
Regardless, Christ left the pope for a reason, and promised that the church will remain always until the end of the ages. Therefore why should we hold the sedevacantist belief, since it goes against Christ promise. Why would Christ leave us a pope if he knew the church would fall into a state of apostasy? Wait, a great apostasy, is that not what the Mormons believe? And don’t many sedes believe that there will be some kind of great revealing where a new pope will drop out of the skies. Are there not places that have elected their own pope or believe a pope has been revealed?
So not only are Sedes protestant, they are also slightly Mormon in their ecclesiology and belief in a great “apostasy”. That’s the biggest issue with Sede belief, why would Christ have left us a pope just to have the seat of the pope be empty for decades.
The Pope is necessary, hence Christ left it. Without the Pope there is schism and division. You can see this well in Protestantism but also in orthodoxy. Even the Mormons are not immune from splits. The church can definitively say that someone, like the Anglicans or the Old Catholics, are not a part of the church, they split off from the church and are not in communion. One can also separate themselves by rejecting the pope. Therefore a visible sign of unity is necessary for the church, especially if we understand that is has come from Christ.
Leave a Reply