TRADCAST EXPRESS
This past Sunday, June 25th, the false pope in Rome, Jorge Bergoglio, also known as Francis,
had a difficult task for his Angelus Address.
He had to give a catechetical reflection on the Gospel reading of the day,
and this time the passage was from the 10th chapter of St. Matthew,
where Christ speaks about not being afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul.
Instead, our Lord says,
The term our Lord used was Gehenna, a common biblical metaphor for hell.
Now, if you know anything about Pope Francis,
you know that that is a message that doesn't fly with him at all.
That's because it focuses on the supernatural life of the soul
and reminds us that our earthly life will have been in vain
if, in the end, we lose our soul,
and we don't have a soul to live in.
and spend eternity in hell.
Now, if there's one thing the papal pretender from Buenos Aires does not want to talk about,
it's the possibility of damnation.
Unless he needs some powerful words against the mafia,
then he suddenly remembers that people can go to hell.
Besides, it's rather difficult for him to fit his ideological talking points into that Gospel passage.
I mean, how do you twist what our Lord said into the Bergoglian agenda of...
Everyone's included, mercy, mercy, mercy, God never condemns,
and caresses migrants in soup kitchens.
Yeah?
Not an easy task.
But Francis did manage.
He did it by pretending that when our Lord contrasted the temporal life of the body
with the eternal life of the soul,
he meant to juxtapose a trivial temporal life with a meaningful temporal life.
Here is what the papal pretender said verbatim.
Quote,
Jesus speaks about Gehenna in order to say that the true fear we should have
is that of throwing away one's own life.
Jesus says, yes, be afraid of that.
It was like saying, you do not need so much to be afraid of suffering,
misunderstanding, and criticism of losing prestige and economic advantages
to remain faithful to the Gospel.
No, but of wasting your existence in the pursuit of trivial things
that do not fill life with meaning.
This is important for us today.
Even today, in fact, some are ridiculed or discriminated against
for not following certain fads,
which, however, place second-rate realities at the center.
For example, to follow after things instead of people,
achievement instead of relationship,
unquote.
Didn't you know that?
When Christ said not to be afraid of him who can kill the body,
but of him who can kill body and soul,
he really meant that we should follow after people instead of things
and worry about relationships rather than achievements.
Notice that there is nothing supernatural in that message at all.
Francis has completely neutralized the salutary,
voluntary warning of our Lord
and turned it into some generic, naturalist self-help lather
that might just as well have been offered by the Dalai Lama
and that has all the spiritual value of a Hallmark greeting card.
It is utterly amazing how this Jesuit theological shyster
can get away with that.
But then he also says that religious differences between people
are necessary and no one bats an eye.
By the way, ask yourself this.
Who would have an interest in keeping the truth
about the danger of hell away from souls?
Would it be our blessed Lord,
who suffered and died for souls precisely
so that they would not end up there?
And who himself warned of the reality of the danger of hell
throughout his earthly ministry?
Or would it be the devil,
who wants to see as many souls eternally damned,
as possible?
It's not all that difficult
to figure out whose vicar Francis really is.
All right, now on to Kennedy Hall.
We're continuing our critique of his video
Why I Am Not a Sedevacantist,
published May 26th, 2023.
We're at the four minute and seven second mark.
There are other ways to be a schismatic.
One of the ways to be a schismatic,
at least by definition,
and I'm not throwing this around loosely,
I'm just putting that out there.
But the other ways you could be a schismatic
are to reject having communion with your fellow Catholics.
And there are many sedes who will reject
the Catholicity or the Catholic status
of other baptized Catholics out of principle.
And that to me seems like a dangerous proposition.
And that's another conversation for another day.
All right, let me address this briefly.
Yes, schism can be committed in two ways.
By refusing to submit to the Roman pontiff,
but also by refusing to maintain communion
with other members of the church.
But here's the part Kennedy Hall didn't say.
And I don't think it was intentional.
I think it's just a nuance that escapes a lot of people.
We're talking about refusal of communion
with other members of the church
who are subject to the Roman pontiff.
And you can find that spelled out like that
in Canon 1325,
paragraph 13,
of the 1917 Code of Canon Law.
Because in fact,
that's part of the definition of church membership.
You cannot be a member of the Catholic Church
if you are not subject to the Roman pontiff.
But then we, Sedebacantus,
believe there currently is no Roman pontiff
to be subject to.
So you can see that this gets a little difficult.
And the accusation that Sedebacantus,
are guilty of refusing communion with other Catholics
is actually a case of begging the question.
Because it assumes that the institution headed by Francis
is the Catholic Church.
And it assumes that Francis is the Pope.
And it even assumes, in a way,
that the Recognize and Resist Trads,
like Kennedy Hall,
are actually subject to him.
Which they're really not.
But you can see that this gets really messy really quickly.
And I don't want to elaborate on this any further now.
But I think it's clear that this is not an argument
that's going to help Kennedy Hall.
Let's continue at the 6 minute 29 second mark.
So there are some Sedebacantus who are real strong intellectuals.
And my reasons for not submitting to the Sedebacantus thesis
or one of the Sedebacantus thesis
doesn't really actually have that much to do
with the issue of the Roman pontiff.
It has to do with the intellectual side.
As we'll talk about, it has more to do with the behavior
of many prominent figures in the Sedebacantus movement.
But not with the intellectual side.
Because if I'm being honest,
there are very strong arguments for Sedebacantism.
Okay, he kind of lost me there.
So he publishes a video entitled
Why I'm Not a Sedebacantist.
And after a few minutes of talking,
he reveals that he agrees that Sedebacantus
is a Christian.
And that Sedebacantism is pretty reasonable.
But his chief reason for not wanting to embrace it
is how some Sedebacantists act.
Supposedly.
Now look, Kennedy Hall is not a dummy.
He's smart enough to know
that that is a fallacious argument.
And he would never accept that excuse,
for example, from a Baptist who says,
you know, I think the case for Catholicism
is really strong,
but all the Catholics I've encountered,
man, I don't like.
How they acted.
So for me, Catholicism is just not an option.
Nonsense.
Anyway, let's fast forward to
seven minutes and 54 seconds.
My main reason, I should say,
for rejecting Sedebacantism,
as I said, is not intellectual.
It's behavioral and almost a gut reaction.
And maybe people won't think that's very sophisticated.
Well, I am not that sophisticated.
Look at my beard.
It looks like it needs a weed whacker.
Yeah, no.
No, no, no, no, no.
Sorry, Kennedy.
I cannot let you get away with that.
You just wrote and published a 217-page book
about the Society of St. Pius X,
addressing every SSPX-related issue,
such as schism, excommunication,
supply jurisdiction,
irregular canonical status, etc., etc.,
even presuming to disagree
with the decrees and decisions
made by the Vatican.
about this.
Do not now, when it's convenient,
play the,
oh, well, I'm just some bumpkin
with a webcam argument.
No.
If you're just some simpleton
who's entitled to go by his gut
rather than by his intellect,
then you have no business
writing a book defending the SSPX.
You can't have it both ways.
All right.
We'll skip the beard oil commercial
and also some of the fluff
that, you know,
Hall offers until we finally hear something
somewhat resembling an argument.
And so we're now at the 13-minute
and 41-second mark.
I've started to notice
extremely similar critiques
from a lot of the Sedevacantist
talking heads.
And I've started to ask myself
why that is.
Because it's sort of a litmus test for me.
When someone is vehemently
against Archbishop Lefebvre
and against the Society of St. Pius X
and spends a lot of time
going after it,
traditional Catholics
that support the SSPX,
I find that very telling that,
in my opinion,
someone is just really off
about Catholicism.
Now, don't confuse my meaning.
I'm not saying that
if you are not someone
who knows a lot about the SSPX,
you're not a good Catholic.
I'm not saying anything of the sort.
I'm just saying for me,
in this time that we're in,
in 2023,
living through this crisis in the church,
it just seems like
one of the dumbest things to do
for people to spend time
going after the SSPX.
All right.
Notice how this is
a completely subjective argument.
Several times he says,
for me, for me.
Well, excuse me,
but you're not the standard
of Catholicism,
nor am I.
So he, for him,
likes Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
Okay, but that's just he, right?
Do others get to choose
their own standards too?
I mean, maybe some like
Blaise Cupich or Kevin Farrell,
or how about,
hey, how about Pope Francis?
The latter would actually make sense
if you claim he's the Pope.
But no, Kennedy Hall
has his own standard.
Archbishop Lefebvre,
Society of St. Pius X.
Okay, so then Hall goes on
to talk at some length
about how even if you think
the SSPX is problematic,
well, there are many other problems
in the church that are much worse
and more acute than the SSPX.
And yeah, that's true.
If you believe Francis is the Pope
and the modernist sect
is the Catholic Church.
Because obviously,
if the vicar of Christ
tells Buddhists to keep following
their master Buddha,
if he teaches that
God wills false religions
as an enrichment for humanity
and continually says
that Protestants and Orthodox
are part of the mystical body of Christ
and have a mission from God,
if the Vatican,
if the Vatican congratulates Hindus
on their Feast of Diwali every year
and celebrates Hanukkah with Jews,
if the church is being overrun
by the sodomite lobby
and the only thing the Pope
really fights against
is the traditional Latin Mass,
then yeah, who cares
if the SSPX has an irregular
canonical status.
That's true.
But then nothing else
really matters either.
If Francis is a true Pope,
and the Novus Ordo Church
is the Catholic Church,
then what does any of it matter?
In fact,
then you might as well be
a Sede Vacantist,
because then that
won't matter either.
Let's go to the 16 minute,
42 second mark.
So when I see people
spending their energy
going after the Society of St. Pius X,
to be honest,
I just have to give my head a shake.
And I realize
of all the things,
if somebody is going to spend
their energy going after the SSPX
and Archbishop Lefebvre
in 2023,
with everything that has transpired
and all that is going on,
it's very hard for me to believe
that those involved
really do care about souls.
Oh, so he's saying this
about Sede Vacantists.
He's upset and cannot understand
why with all the garbage
that's going on in the new church,
Sede Vacantists would go after the SSPX.
Okay, well, let me answer that.
The short answer is
because the SSPX
is false traditionalism.
The Society of St. Pius X
presents itself
as the orthodox solution
when in fact it is
just another movement
that, wittingly or not,
undermines traditional Catholicism.
Even if Hall disagrees,
this is not difficult to understand.
If we're going to
If we care about truth
and want to save souls,
then obviously we have to oppose
any and all error,
not just modernism.
In fact, a false opposition,
a false alternative
that presents itself
as the orthodox solution
is in some sense even more dangerous
than the open apostasy
of the Novus Ordo.
Don't misunderstand.
This has nothing to do
with judging people
or being mean
or anything like that.
It's not.
We totally understand
that there are many good souls
in the SSPX
who are just trying to do their best
to escape the madness
and do God's will
and raise good families.
That's perfectly understood.
But that doesn't make the SSPX right.
And it doesn't mean
that those souls are not in danger,
at least objectively speaking.
We'll leave the subjective to God.
The SSPX, regardless of intentions,
tends to be a little bit more
divisive than the SSPX.
It teaches people
a seriously distorted ecclesiology.
It misleads people
regarding the church and the papacy.
And it sets itself up
as the final arbiter
of doctrine and liturgy
and effectively presumes
to overrule the judgments
of the supposed Holy See.
To mention just a few things.
Read the 1873 encyclical
Quartus Supra
of Pope Pius IX
and see how many errors
Pius IX has made.
Pius IX condemns in that text
that are almost verbatim
the same errors held
and promoted today
by the Lefebvrists,
by the SSPX.
Kennedy Hall's argument
only works
if the SSPX position
is a perfectly legitimate
and orthodox alternative
alongside Sedevacantism.
But that's not the case.
And so Hall is upset
that Sedevacantists
would spend so much time
and effort
arguing that the SSPX position
arguing against
the Society of St. Pius X
because he has not understood
how serious the differences
between Lefebvrism
and Sedevacantism are.
They're not two flavors
of the same thing.
They're two very different things
even if externally
they resemble one another
to an extent.
Alright, next let's go to
17 minutes and 48 seconds.
At a certain point
whether we're looking
at canon law
or church history
or whatever
we do need to put down
our textbooks
put down our Wikipedia
put down our whatever
for a moment
and realize that we are Catholics
and if we are attending
valid sacraments
and we are living
in a state of grace
then we can ask
for the Holy Ghost
to guide us
in our lives.
And if that's the case
we should see some fruits
of that sort of thing.
And the fact that
so many Sedes
spend their time
really going after
a lot of other
traditional Catholics
to me
I just don't see good fruits.
Maybe that's not a very
sophisticated argument
but I just don't see it.
Alright, so like I said
this only works
if you already agree
with Kennedy Hall
that the SSPX
is a legitimate
and perfectly orthodox
option for a Catholic.
But that's not an effective
argument against
Sedevacantism
since from the very outset
it already assumes
as true
the very thing
that Sedevacantists dispute.
So Hall is really
not making sense.
He's saying
oh look at these
bad fruits.
But he's labeling
as bad fruits
things that are
only bad fruits
if Sedevacantists
are wrong
and the SSPX
is right.
In other words
if Sedevacantists
are right
and the SSPX
position is in fact
a false alternative
a collection of
dangerous errors
about the church
and the papacy
then what he's denouncing
as bad fruits
are really not
bad fruits at all
but good fruits.
And as far as
valid sacraments go
you know the SSPX
has some priests
in its ranks
that were ordained
in the Novel Sordo
and were not
conditionally reordained.
Now that's
invalid masses
and
and invalid
absolutions.
Furthermore
thanks to the
Novel Sordo
Bishop Vitas Wander
the SSPX
now also has
invalid holy oils
somewhere in Europe
certainly in Germany
and possibly elsewhere
and that means
invalid last rites
and invalid confirmations
where those oils
are used.
Folks the matter
is serious.
Okay
last soundbite now
19 minutes
and 39 seconds.
As I've released
this book
my book on Marcel Lefebvre
oops
which you can find
in the description
to this video
and seeing the energy
spent by both
sort of the leftists
in the conservative
Catholic movement
and the say days
in the sort of
fringe traditional
Catholic movement
I realized
they're basically
in so many ways
two sides of the same coin
and I just don't really
want any part of it.
You know
this is really
not terribly sophisticated.
Oh look
the conservative
Novoselic
Ordos are attacking
the SSPX
and the Sedevacantists
are attacking
the SSPX.
See
they're the same.
I mean this is
kindergarten argumentation
guilt by association.
The reason
why there is
this overlap
is actually
quite simple.
Both conservative
Novoselic
Ordos
and Sedevacantists
share
the pre-Vatican
II understanding
of the required
submission
to the Pope.
And so
both sides
here recognize
that the SSPX
has not retained
that understanding
but distorts it
because otherwise
it would either
have to follow
Francis in his errors
and embrace
his heretical
magisterium
or else say
that Francis
is not the Pope.
That's all
that's going on here.
All right
with that
we have completed
our critique
of Kennedy Hall's
video
Why I Am Not
a Sedevacantist
and I would say
in summary
that
I'm sorry
but it's a pretty
useless clip
in my opinion.
20 minutes
of wasted time.
The argumentation
is very subjective
it's not convincing
and it reveals
a number of
significant flaws
in reasoning.
But then
that is bound
to happen
when you approach
theological topics
with your gut
more than
with your mind.
Tradcast Express
is a production
of Novus Ordo Watch.
Check us out
at Tradcast.org
and if you like
what we're doing
please consider
making a tax-deductible
contribution
at
NovusOrdoWatch.org
slash
donate.