Catholic General - /cg/ - God Bless President Trump edition

Resources:
>www.sspx.org
>www.fisheaters.com
>www.churchmilitant.com
>www.onepeterfive.com

SSPX is a traditionalist Catholic fraternal society that practices Catholicism as it was known prior to Vatican II. It is still in communion with the Church but rejects all teachings not in accord with the faith as it has always been taught. Because SSPX does not reject any teachings of the infallible Extraordinary Magisterium or Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, the fraternity is not heretical or schismatic. However, it is rebellious to a certain degree.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a binding document. It is a teaching document and resource for local bishops. Catholics are not required to follow any teachings that are received from a non-infallible Magisterium. The entirety of Vatican II falls into this category, hence why it is possible to reject it and still remain in communion with the Church.

This thread is a calling to Catholics to learn more about your faith and undo some of the misconceptions you undoubtedly have. There is a great deal of misinformation in the Church because we are in a time of crisis.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=cUZ5xAVJhI0&t=10
youtu.be/xp5dOibh8GA
catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=886
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Williamson_(bishop)
churchmilitant.com/news/article/pope-extends-special-permission-for-sspx-priests-in-confession
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cbishops/documents/rc_con_cbishops_doc_20090121_remissione-scomunica_en.html
catholic.com/qa/society-of-st-pius-x-is-not-sedevacantist
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

Check out Mark Taylor. He is preaching what God is looking for in the church today. Pic related

pretty sure Trump hates Catholics. He hangs out with Robert Jeffress, just look at what that guy has to say about Catholics

>being catholic
literally the only good part of catholicism is that you're the most charitable

St. Andrew's Novena

Can be said in various forms between St. Andrew's Day (30 November) until Christmas (consult any online Catholic resource for more info)

Hail, and blessed be the hour and moment at which the Son of God was born of a most pure Virgin at a stable at midnight in Bethlehem in the piercing cold. At that hour vouchsafe, I beseech Thee, to hear my prayers and grant my desires. (Mention your intentions here) Through Jesus Christ and His most Blessed Mother.

Amen.

Trump is faggot supporter and kike puppet. Who cares what he says?

That's one Catholic mustache

>accepting heretical popes and a false council
>not being sedevecantist

Fucking checked

>A sense of moral unworthiness has never saddened a soul, but many souls are made sad and frustrated by their own self-love. The greater the consciousness of our own misery, the greater our confidence in the goodness and mercy of God."

-Fulton Sheen

Let me guess you also believe that jews are an alien race subverting the integrity of your gay catholic fuck party. Hmm yes learning obscure laws of your bullshit beauracratic subdivision of your bullshit false religion....quite a use of your time. You could swap out vatican with Planet Zargon and you would still sound like a typical /pol tard.

That's not actually a very interesting post when you realize you just made all of that up. But congrats on stumping for (((them))) so hard that you do it preemptively.

But Vatican II was an ecumenical council

And yet it was proclaimed with the authority of the non-infallible authentic magisterium and explicitly stated to be purely "pastoral," hence de facto not pertaining to matters of faith and morals. It fails to be binding on at least two levels just on its face.

But there's so much more. For instance, no judgments were passed (e.g., anathema statements). I could go on.

Please elaborate on authority on which it was proclaimed, providing sources if you could please.

I personally attend a church where they are very traditional and give the latin mass, so im not super interested in defending it, just curious as to if what you say is true.

>haha nice going kid. My big-brain-high-IQ-self ( who **chooses** to be a basement-dwelling loser trying to save the white race by posting on plebbit and Sup Forums) just destroyed you

How much longer does Pope Francis have to remain in office? I heard impeachment was actually possible.

Bumping. How's everyone doing?

CATHOLICISM IS FREEMASONRY/ILLUMINATI/MYSTERY BABYLON IN DISGUISE

REDPILL YOURSELF

youtube.com/watch?v=cUZ5xAVJhI0&t=10

STICK ONLY TO THE WORD OF JESUS.

DONT FOLLOW THE CHURCH

God Emperor should be lovingly embracing Jesus.

Council of Florence, Cantate Domino (1441):
>No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.

Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, the DOGMATIC constitution on the Church (1964):
>Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.

This is a contradiction proclaimed dogmatically. There is no way to deny it unless you resort to semantic perversions and handwaving rationalizations. This makes the Church internally inconsistent and falsifies all claims of being the one true church.

Therefore, Catholicism is a false religion QED

Did you just drop some William Milton Cooper knowledge?

Rspct

How do I become Catholic?It's been recurring thought for me recently but is totally foreign. Church militant and people like go Chesterton helped lead me to this conclusions after being guided by the holy spirit.

reminder trump is the first atheist president who lies about going to church and cant cite one bible verse properly

Still better than the Pope

There you are! Lets skip the first part, and go to where you quote at me from "The Gifts and the Calling of God are Irrevocable." I lost track of you last thread, it was at 300+ replies. From that document, which you believe (falsely) that the Church now says Jews can go to heaven without believing in the lord, I quote from sections 25, 35, 37 and 40.
From 25:Therefore there are not two paths to salvation according to the expression "Jews hold to the Torah, Christians hold to Christ". Christian faith proclaims that Christ’s work of salvation is universal and involves all mankind. God’s word is one single and undivided reality which takes concrete form in each respective historical context.
From 35: he theory that there may be two different paths to salvation, the Jewish path without Christ and the path with the Christ, whom Christians believe is Jesus of Nazareth, would in fact endanger the foundations of Christian faith. Confessing the universal and therefore also exclusive mediation of salvation through Jesus Christ belongs to the core of Christian faith.

From 37: There cannot be two ways of salvation, therefore, since Christ is also the Redeemer of the Jews in addition to the Gentiles. Here we confront the mystery of God’s work, which is not a matter of missionary efforts to convert Jews, but rather the expectation that the Lord will bring about the hour when we will all be united, "when all peoples will call on God with one voice and ‘serve him shoulder to shoulder

and from 40: From 40: It is easy to understand that the so–called ‘mission to the Jews’ is a very delicate and sensitive matter for Jews because, in their eyes, it involves the very existence of the Jewish people. This question also proves to be awkward for Christians, because for them the universal salvific significance of Jesus Christ and consequently the universal mission of the Church are of fundamental importance. The Church is therefore obliged to view evangelisation to Jews, who believe in the one God, in a different manner from that to people of other religions and world views. In concrete terms this means that the Catholic Church neither conducts nor supports any specific institutional mission work directed towards Jews.
So no

>St. Andrew's Novena
Thanks

You shouldn't make such fictional artwork, it is very sinful and false.
America will be punished and so will you if you keep up this bullshit.
The Pope is dead.

As for anyone who doesn't know what the answer to this is, it's that the Church holds that there needs to be three things going on for sin to be grave: the issue has to be important, you have to know what youre doing is sinful, and you have to do it anyway. If you've never come into contact with the church, you dont have this second one vis-a-vis not believing in the Lord and his Church. This is the virtuous heathen.

Are you retarded? The Catholic Church has been the enemy of freemasonry since day 1.

From Catholic Answers, a mainstream site, no friend to traditionalists, with imprimatur

If not schism, what about heresy? Again, SSPX people have not committed that offense, because the conciliar teachings from which they dissent are not proposed infallibly as divinely revealed truth, i.e., as de fide dogma. These new doctrinal developments are indeed authoritative and require our “religious assent of mind and will” (c. 752); but unlike formal heresy, dissent from such lower-level doctrines is not a grave enough offense to put the dissenter outside the Church. The main object of SSPX dissent is the teaching of Dignitatis Humanae that, within the “due limits” laid down in articles 4 and 7, all human persons (non-Catholics as well as Catholics) have a natural right to be left free by government to publicly express their conscientious religious beliefs.

From SSPX, citing Vatican II documents:

Pope Paul VI himself indicated what theological "note" it carried: "Ordinary Magisterium; that is, it is clearly authentic" (General Audience of Dec. 1, 1966: Encycliques et discours de Paul VI, Ed. Paoline, 1966, pp.51, 52).

The present crisis is at the level of what is presented as the simply "authentic" Magisterium, which, as Cardinal Siri reminds us, "does not of itself imply infallibility" (Renovatio, op.cit.). But are we really dealing with the "authentic" Magisterium?

Nowadays it is no longer the case that every word of the pope constitutes Magisterium. Now, very frequently, it is no more than the expression of views, ideas and considerations that are to be found disseminated throughout the Church,... and of doctrines that have spread and become dominant in much theology. (Eglise et Contre-Eglise au Concile Vatican II, Second Theological Congress of Si Si No No, Jan. 1996)

youtu.be/xp5dOibh8GA

...

Thank you for the answers, I'll have to look into this further.

The first testimony should, in itself, suffice to do this, as it is the testimony of a Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Paul VI. In his General Audience of 12 January 1966, he explained:

In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided any extraordinary statements of dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility, but it still provided its teaching with the authority of the Ordinary Magisterium which must be accepted with docility according to the mind of the Council concerning the nature and aims of each document.

What could be more clear? Pope Paul states unequivocally that the documents of Vatican II do not pertain to the Extraordinary Magisterium, and that they are not endowed with the note of infallibility.

The next testimony could, short of being a statement of the Sovereign Pontiff, hardly be more authoritative. It is an explanation given by the Council’s own Theological Commission, cited by the Secretary of the Council, Cardinal Pericle Felici, in a theological note appended to the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church:

In view of conciliar practice and the pastoral purpose of the present Council, this sacred Synod defines matters of faith and morals as binding on the Church only when the Synod itself openly declares so.

Needless to say, as was made clear in the subsequent statement by Pope Paul VI, which has already been quoted, the Council did not invest any of its teaching with the note of infallibility.

Just doing some general looking around about this, and it seems like this fellow has a pretty good answer for these claims. Perhaps you would like to read it?
catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=886
Person

>In concrete terms this means that the Catholic Church neither conducts nor supports any specific institutional mission work directed towards Jews.
Even though Jesus said that he was sent for the lost sheep of Israel and even though Cantate Domino from the Council of Florence teaches:
>The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her
the Church now teaches that it does not conduct nor support any specific mission to evangelize the Jews. By reneging on this mission, the Roman Catholic Church is not only failing at working towards Jesus Christ’s primary mission on earth, it is also condemning all of these Jesus to eternal damnation.

>If you've never come into contact with the church, you dont have this second one vis-a-vis not believing in the Lord and his Church. This is the virtuous heathen.
This is retarded because this means that by evangelizing you are condemning many people to hell. If you hadn’t told them about sin, then they could just live their lives and not be punished with eternal damnation.

It condemns everyone who will not convert to eternal damnation, it merely says it will not particularly attempt to convert the Jews. And why should it, when the Jews have been the enemy of the church since day one. In any case, your claim that the church is internally inconsistent is false.
As for the other thing, evangelizing gives people the oppurtunity to live as God wants, directing their will towards his, which is nearly impossible if you've never heard about God. There are certain sins written in all men's hearts, take stealing for example. Who amongst us hasn't stolen something, maybe something small. This is a grave sin whether or not you've heard of the Church. But if you don't hear of the Church before you die, and convert, and give confession, you die with this stain on your soul and are damned. So it makes much more sense it terms of "people saved" count to evangelize.

Not sure what the problem with Pope Francis is. Maybe it's just you regressive cucks.

RCIA is the usual route. Assuming you know of a church nearby, you can go check to see about if they have it.
If you have any other questions I'll be glad to help.

If it's not too much, may I ask what exactly has led you to want to join the Church? Either way,welcome Home brother, I'll pray that God may bless you guide you and keep you now and forever.

>not sure what the problem with saying the divorced can get communion is

>/cg/
More like /pdcg/ (pedophile death cult general).

To put it another way
>Don't evangelize
>Heathens commit sins throughout their life like stealing, murder, adultery, dishonering their parents etc that all men know are wrong
>Heathens can't go to confession
>Heathens die in a state of mortal sin and are damned, almost every last one of them
vs
>Evangelize
>The 1 in a trillion heathen who wouldn't do any of those things and doesnt want to convert is damned
>All of the others could be saved because they can have the stain on their soul removed through confession
>More of the once heathens go to heaven

my dad came to town this weekend and wanted to go to church with me. he’s evangelical Protestant- we went to Tridentine high mass. I thought he would hate it and complain all day but he was extremely impressed. he likes the connection to ancient tradition and was wowed by the solemn dedication of all the worshippers.

bg- im not baptized, was atheist for 10 years, been going to mass for a year

>It condemns everyone who will not convert to eternal damnation, it merely says it will not particularly attempt to convert the Jews. And why should it, when the Jews have been the enemy of the church since day one.
In other words, the official policy of the Church is to make no effort to prevent Jews from being condemned to eternal damnation? This is the logical consequence of the infallible teachings and statement regarding evangelizing the Jews as cited above. I just need to hear the Pope publicly proclaim that this is indeed the course of action the Church is currently pursuing.

>As for the other thing, evangelizing gives people the oppurtunity to live as God wants, directing their will towards his, which is nearly impossible if you've never heard about God.
This contradicts your previous post:

Trump isn't a Catholic and he shit talks the Pope you morons.

It does contradict my previous posts in general, but it does contradict that one, because, since we've had this conversation three times now, I've already made it known that there are certain sins which we believe are known to be sinful to all men from birth.

It does not in general contradict, but it does contradict that one***
my apologies

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

>I've already made it known that there are certain sins which we believe are known to be sinful to all men from birth.
Is the stain of original sin one of them?

anyone got the "you had a chance, had" meme?

I do not know if original sin is venial or mortal. It is my understanding - and this is not a topic that I am well read on, so others will forgive me if this is not the orthodox understanding of the matter - that original sin is a venial sin, but that if you have not been cleansed through baptism you will not see the kingdom of heaven until the second coming of the Lord.

SSPX seems like a Jew conspiracy to me desu. All this divide and conquer shit.

Yes, the New Mass sucks, but you could just go to an FSSP parish if you really hated it that much. Do you really want to risk hellfire over that schismatic shit?

Nothing in that article is declaring VII is infallible. Further, it ends by saying the purpose of the article was to highlight the pope's "thoughts" on the matter.

Finally, it's someone's opinion. It does not have an imprimatur. It's essentially weasel language designed to make you think something has been authoritatively decided when it has not.

You should keep reading on this topic. VII cannot be "infallible" because that would imply the previous Mass were somehow fallible, which makes no sense. There are lots of neocons who try to bully you into submission, but it's just not true.

Again, the last post I quoted to you was the Pope at the opening of VII explicitly stating that it was pastoral and not binding infallibly. What more is there to debate on this subject?

>Robert Jeffress
I had never heard of him before but noticed he is Southern Baptist. While we differ greatly on church organization, we can all agree that fags shouldn't marry and we believe in traditional family values. It's a shame we can't be at least temporary allies considering what's at stake right now... I'm even willing to break bread with the Mormons at this point...

It's not schismatic. The Pope himself literally just gave SSPX unlimited dispensation to administer all the sacraments including those requiring jurisdiction. I honestly think you should fuck off with that talk. You don't know what you're talking about, and frankly you're the one who is D&Cing here. FSSP only exists because it was a compromise organization that split off from SSPX.

There is not one authority in the Church who has ever said SSPX is heretical or schismatic. There are some people who give their hot opinions to that effect, but the reality is that SSPX priests just said Mass in St. Peter's a couple years back.

Well he does claim in the article that the Pope said this: There are those who, under the pretext of a greater fidelity to the Church and the Magisterium, systematically refuse the teaching of the Council itself, its application and the reforms that stem from it, its gradual application by the Apostolic See and the Episcopal Conferences, under Our authority, willed by Christ.
He even exclaimed in utter frustration:

It is even affirmed that the Second Vatican Council is not binding; that the faith would be in danger also because of the post-conciliar reforms and guidelines, which there is a duty to disobey to preserve certain traditions. What traditions? Does it belong to this group, and not the Pope, not the Episcopal College, not an Ecumenical Council, to establish which of the countless traditions must be regarded as the norm of faith!
Though I don't speak Italian, so I can't confirm, that does seem to contradict your quotation of the Pope, which the article also included. Again, I'm no fan of Vatican II, so I really would love to be convinced that it's a fallible document, but I'm just unsure. Like I said, I'll continue reading into it. God Bless.

gotta keep em seperated

You quote is saying that the Pope wanted everyone to follow the Council. That doesn't mean it was infallible. That means he wanted them to follow it when they wouldn't.

I'm not denying that the authentic magisterium was used. What I'm saying is that it's not heresy to refute such teaching authority. Catholics have a duty to do so, unless it is taught with infallible authority.

Also if you wanna bounce anything else off me, I'll be around. In Christ.

Well thanks for your answers, but they are missing the point. The precise wording of Cantate Domino is “no one [...] can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church”, whereas the DOGMATIC constitution on the Church of Vatican II teaches that under some conditions some people who are not within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church are saved (such as atheists who strive to live a good life). This is the contradiction.

Prove me wrong. A quick google search brings countless results calling SSPX into question. Playing with heresy is dangerous.

I've attended an FSSP Mass and it's perfectly fine if you're into the Ecclesiastical Latin and the due reverence shown to the sacraments. The only thing I disliked about the FSSP parish was how the parishioners seemed like genuine whack jobs going on about that retarded Brazilian who runs Tradition In Action. The priests seemed levelheaded, but the parishioners honestly a bit scary.

>calling SSPX into question
Not an argument. Not only is "calling into question" Jew wording, but you moved the goalposts. Unless you can show me the Pope calling them schismatics, it doesn't matter. You are really making a mistake by acting like this.

Tell me why the Pope granted that dispensation. Tell me why the previous Pope lifted the excommunications. None of this would happen - ever - if SSPX were schismatics.

Technically all of you Roman Catholics are schismatics.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Williamson_(bishop)
How do we make him the pope?

>How do we make him the pope?

Start a cult for him in south america.

It has to be arranged by glow in the dark CIA niggers?

>Tell me why the Pope granted that dispensation. Tell me why the previous Pope lifted the excommunications.
[citation needed]

That's exactly what I'm looking for is proof. Rather than being hostile, you should provide proof of this because I've never seen a reliable source say that the SSPX are in communion with Rome. PROVE IT.

I'm also laughing at your "Jew-wording." Well, I congratulate you corncobbers for finding your way into an authentic form of Christianity. Please remember that it was Jewish Christians who converted us Gentiles to Christianity. We are supposed to be converting Jews, and frankly, we could use their intelligence considering we're stuck with retards like you who should be praying the rosary instead of spreading heresy.

churchmilitant.com/news/article/pope-extends-special-permission-for-sspx-priests-in-confession

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cbishops/documents/rc_con_cbishops_doc_20090121_remissione-scomunica_en.html

There, now get the fuck out of my thread. You disgust me. You are completely ignorant of apparently anything going on in the Church and yet somehow believe you're qualified to judge authentic Christianity. You seem like a genuinely disgusting human, and probably not a great Christian.

"Who am I to judge" though :)

deus vult

You're fucking retarded and sound like reddit. Go back there.

Same poster different device. As a teen I would spend time in a trappist monastery near my home. I wasn't a believer but was always overcome with immense calm in the cathedral. This all prefaces an inexplicable calling recently. I have been without a denomination and was raised in a household of non-believers. Once this nagging began I was able to discern that in the way many Sup Forumslacks feel history has lied about Hitler I feel that is how the RC has been portrayed. I started watching Church Militant videos and was introduced to a different view of Catholicism aside from the biased views that had been presented to me before. In short it was like a veil was lifted and I could see through the lies I had been led to believe in regards to the church, its purpose, and traditions.

Fucking kill yourself holy shit. How are you communicating in a remotely Christian fashion. You literally just said you prefer Jews to Christians. Please, honestly, please fucking die.

Apologize to the people in this thread right now. You are a shame.

>churchmilitant.com/news/article/pope-extends-special-permission-for-sspx-priests-in-confession

A quote from this article:

>Both Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis have noted that the SSPX is not in "full communion" with the Catholic Church.

The Pope merely granted them the power to absolve people of their sins, however...

>Although Pope Francis has extended faculties to absolve sins, he has not granted similar faculties for SSPX clergy to validly witness marriages.

The second article just demonstrates that the bishops had their excommunications lifted. However, that does not mean that the SSPX is valid.

Stay butthurt, you divide and conquer shill. Learn how to read.

For all Catholics who want to avoid hell yet desire to attend a traditional service, see the FSSP, but beware that you might meet whack jobs like OP.

>long haired Jesus
Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
Do you really think Jesus would have long hair you sodomite enabling false christian pagan pedo scumfuck?

Wow I've never seen a Catholic ruin a thread like this by shitposting like a fucking atheist or prod. You've really shown me a new low in derailing Christian threads. Asshole.

>Fucking kill yourself holy shit.
>Please, honestly, please fucking die.
>How are you communicating in a remotely Christian fashion.

>communicating in a remotely Christian fashion.

Lel.

Plenty of great Jews have converted to the Church, retard. St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Paul, the Apostles, etc. Don't be a retard.

Everything good about Catholicism comes from Pre-Christian Germanic and Greco-Roman religiosity. The ONLY tsngible improvement is a supreme god as arbiter of reality and divine law/hierarchy of creation. This does not have to require submitting to the jewish tyrant volcani demon YHWH. Cut the flower from its poison soil and replant it where it may grow to its full potential.

Get the fuck out, scumbag. No one wants you here. Go away

For merely asking for credible proof that SSPX aren't heretical? Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if you weren't a Jew, Protestant, or some other enemy of the Catholic Church to be shilling those fakers.

Would you fucking stop

Are you borrowing mom's cell phone to make it seem like you're more than one poster? Pretty funny desu.

Not until you do, heretic.

Catholic Answers, which has imprimatur, says they aren't. You are a real fucking mess of a human. What would possess you to pretend to know what you're talking about when you clearly don't?

You really need to pray or something because you have the behavior and attitude of someone truly sick.

>inb4 google it for me
No, just leave. I'm not the first poster to want you gone.

Here's how cardinal sanders can still win

I feel like the problem you have is that of omission, like the filioque. We say now that the holy spirit "proceeds from the father and the son," which on the surface contradicts the initial creed, which says it "proceeds from the father." To read both as true, which is what you must do because they are both infallible teachings (assuming you believe vatican II to be infallible, which for example argues it isn't), you have to read it "no one can be saved [except those who have no knowledge of the church]" with what is in brackets is omitted, and specified explicitly by Vatican II. That sounds like a cop out, and I'm sure there is a more rigorous theological answer, but I think that should suffice for your purposes. Thank you for being a reasonable user, God bless you. I hope you find your way to the Church one day.

ORDODOXY XDDDD
One day we'll be united again brother. The issues that divide us can be settled.

>everyone who doesnt like my shitposting is the same person!
The meltdown is complete

>The SSPX has not yet been fully reconciled to the Catholic Church, including because of some doctrinal issues.

This answer is from June 12th, 2017.

Source: catholic.com/qa/society-of-st-pius-x-is-not-sedevacantist

Interesting how you have a new ID to appear as if you're someone else each time. Do you have a dynamic IP address to do this with or are you using multiple browsers?

>Church militant

No

Get out

Are there a lot of Catholics in Macao as a result of the Portuguese era? If so, I never knew that. God bless. I appreciate your effort in curbing this recent influx of SSPX shills.

Do you know what the definition of schism is? Do you realize none of their sacraments would be valid if that were the case? The pope could not grant them a dispensation to give sacraments at all if they were in schism. Not fully reconciled doesnt mean schism. And btw heresy doesn't even enter into it. You're spewing words you dont understand. Pathetic.

...

:)

Church Militant is anti-SSPX. Once again you just have no clue what you're talking about.

AFAIK Trump is a presbyterian protestant.