If SSPX is in schism, then so, it would seem, is China.
April 2025 China unilaterally "elected"/appointed two bishops—one auxiliary in Shanghai and one in Xinxiang (Henan). This occurred without papal involvement, a violation of Sino-Vatican agreement.
October 2025: Consecration of auxiliary Bishop Joseph Wu Jianlin in Shanghai without prior Vatican approval. Illicit under canon law and a direct violation.
December 2025: Consecration of Bishop François Li Jianlin (Francis Li Jianlin) as Bishop of Xinxiang on December 5, 2025, replacing the long-detained underground Bishop Joseph Zhang Weizhu. Another direct violation.
The Difference: Pope Leo XIV retroactively accepted China's bishops. If an accommodation is possible with atheistic Communism, then one would think something could be worked out with SSPX, with whom we have much more in common.
“It is clear that the highly publicized affair of the episcopal consecrations announced by the SSPX is one of the consequences of the wound opened in the Church by the last council and by the liturgical reform that followed. It would be reasonable for this affair to give rise to open and peaceful exchanges of views between the ‘two parties,’ the Holy See and the SSPX.”
This is the kind of arrogance I’ve come to expect, and reject, from the SSPX. It’s not the Church that must return to the SSPX, but the SSPX to the Church. I’m pleased people at the Vatican are much more patient than me, because I would’ve axed the SSPX long ago and let them wither in the vineyard.
I throw my support wholeheartedly to the FSSP, the true usus antiquor Catholic alternative. Because for them, communion with, and obedience to Peter is first.
The Holy See has departed gravely from the Church’s received Tradition. The Society of St. Pius X does not engage in Rome’s political calculus of “concessions,” because there is nothing to concede where the Faith itself is at stake. This is not a matter of negotiation or diplomacy, but of the preservation of Catholic doctrine and the salvation of souls—realities that the present ecclesiastical authority has, regrettably, lost sight of.
Really strong coverage here. The emphasize on ongoing dialogue feels like the only sensible path forward when you consider how much common ground exists between Rome and SSPX compared to, say, the China situation. The planned July consecrations seem like a pressure point thats being used strategicaly rather than recklessly. Hoping prudence wins over politics.
Yes, it works now. Thank you for your reporting. John 3:16 is a very famous verse but I like John 3:19 better. However, the work that you do is John 3:20-21 especially at the upper hierarchy of the Church. Thank you again.
If SSPX is in schism, then so, it would seem, is China.
April 2025 China unilaterally "elected"/appointed two bishops—one auxiliary in Shanghai and one in Xinxiang (Henan). This occurred without papal involvement, a violation of Sino-Vatican agreement.
October 2025: Consecration of auxiliary Bishop Joseph Wu Jianlin in Shanghai without prior Vatican approval. Illicit under canon law and a direct violation.
December 2025: Consecration of Bishop François Li Jianlin (Francis Li Jianlin) as Bishop of Xinxiang on December 5, 2025, replacing the long-detained underground Bishop Joseph Zhang Weizhu. Another direct violation.
The Difference: Pope Leo XIV retroactively accepted China's bishops. If an accommodation is possible with atheistic Communism, then one would think something could be worked out with SSPX, with whom we have much more in common.
“It is clear that the highly publicized affair of the episcopal consecrations announced by the SSPX is one of the consequences of the wound opened in the Church by the last council and by the liturgical reform that followed. It would be reasonable for this affair to give rise to open and peaceful exchanges of views between the ‘two parties,’ the Holy See and the SSPX.”
This is the kind of arrogance I’ve come to expect, and reject, from the SSPX. It’s not the Church that must return to the SSPX, but the SSPX to the Church. I’m pleased people at the Vatican are much more patient than me, because I would’ve axed the SSPX long ago and let them wither in the vineyard.
I throw my support wholeheartedly to the FSSP, the true usus antiquor Catholic alternative. Because for them, communion with, and obedience to Peter is first.
Prudence, Peace, and Calm. This is key.
"It would be reasonable for this affair to give rise to open and peaceful exchanges of views between the ‘two parties,’ the Holy See and the SSPX.”
The Holy See has departed gravely from the Church’s received Tradition. The Society of St. Pius X does not engage in Rome’s political calculus of “concessions,” because there is nothing to concede where the Faith itself is at stake. This is not a matter of negotiation or diplomacy, but of the preservation of Catholic doctrine and the salvation of souls—realities that the present ecclesiastical authority has, regrettably, lost sight of.
Really strong coverage here. The emphasize on ongoing dialogue feels like the only sensible path forward when you consider how much common ground exists between Rome and SSPX compared to, say, the China situation. The planned July consecrations seem like a pressure point thats being used strategicaly rather than recklessly. Hoping prudence wins over politics.
40 bishops on July 1st would be a nice, round number.
The link to the full article at ncregister returned an error...
It seems to be working now - please try it again.
Yes, it works now. Thank you for your reporting. John 3:16 is a very famous verse but I like John 3:19 better. However, the work that you do is John 3:20-21 especially at the upper hierarchy of the Church. Thank you again.
Thank you very much for your kind words. AMDG.