I am glad you opened with that information about Taylor Marshall.
I get why people believe as if he is compromised. We see corruption and the failing of just about everyone in a position of leadership/authority/influence etc in the secular world and sadly in the church hierarchy which ironically enough is why we are dealing with the SSPX v Modernist Church.
I’m not alleging that he is compromised at all, I’m just pointing out that given the state of world to it is understandable to suspect this as a possibility.
Personally I’m baffled and upset by his recent statements regarding this controversy.
His podcast was an integral part of my reversion back into the church.
I have several of his books in print and audio formats including ones, that you Kennedy narrated.
I learned so much from him. For a stretch of several years through every crisis and humiliation ritual coming out of the Vatican his podcasts kept me grounded.
I was searching for Catholic teaching I thought I would find when I came back to the church and he was a great source of information as well providing what to look for as I researched myself.
I’m grateful for how he shared his thought process. His words often inspired me to go deeper into the faith.
“Infiltration” set me down the course I been on for almost a decade now. In that time I found many answers that his book alluded to but couldn’t nail down. Why is that? Because that book was so influential that many of us starting reading more on our own. The greater the interest the more information was found and put out into the Catholic social media sphere.
So I write all of this because I still have immense respect and appreciation for him. Being Catholic means that you don’t hate someone just because they don’t agree with your world view 100%. Actually that’s a Jewish trait.
E Michael Jones is perhaps the greatest Catholic intellect of the last 50 years. He certainly is the greatest in the English speaking world yet I disagree with him on several big topics. I certainly don’t hate him nor question his motives when he pronounces something baffling.
So back to Taylor Marshall, the appreciation I have for him, particularly the acknowledgment that there is definitely not right since “the council,” is tremendous.
For a good 6 year stretch no other Catholic content creator was in that lane. He was not telling me about the new springtime in the Catholic Church or the wonders of the elusive “SpIrIt of VaTiCaN 2,” which really is an insult to my intelligence to listen to Catholic’s in the public sphere just totally ignorance the contradictions of the state of the church and the reality.
This insulting regurgitation of slop coming from Rome is in my opinion what is driving so many Catholics to finally take notice of the hypocrisy coming out of Rome once the bogus schism/excommunications trash was issued by Tucho.
So this is why it really was a kick in the gut when Taylor come out against the SSPX.
Nit going to lie this will take a while but I do trust him to be sincere and genuine nonetheless
Hey Kennedy can 'necessity' also encompass the State of the World?
The evil goals of secret societies: The Illuminati, the Bilderbergs, the Freemasons, the Skull and Bones, the Trilateral Commission along with WEF,UN,WHO,NATO, IPCC, etc.
With world government leaders whom are against their own citizenry in numerous ways, undermining their own country's society and these leaders deep connections to the above organizations.
And must note the plandemic and a one-world-order's dominion over seven key spheres of society: Religion, Family, Education, Government, Media, Arts & Entertainment, and Business.
And then couple the above info and from I can deduce many of these globalist goals seam to ring the bell for Vatican and Conferences of Catholic Bishops from around the world.
The world is in the biggest mess and feel we need an act of God and many are praying for, since many conservative Christians whom I talk with - feel the battle of good vs evil is ramping up.
SSPX has Situational Awareness as-in an aviation emergency: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate with the goal of keeping souls on-board alive.
Well, the state of the world certainly reflects the state of the Church, but, hypothetically if the world was run by some evil group, but the Church was still going strong, then there wouldn't be a necessity in the Church
Kennedy - Could this have to do with Catholics, especially converts who really struggled to subject themselves to the papacy? After having made that momentous decision they are now faced with questions about it, causing them to reflect deeply about their literal conversion or conversion of heart.
Kennedy, this is one of the more thoughtful SSPX defenses I’ve read. You’re careful, charitable toward Taylor Marshall, and you rightly distinguish jurisdiction from orders. My only question is this: the entire argument still seems to rest on necessity. Where does the Church teach that necessity itself supplies or publicly establishes apostolic mission? That’s the one constitutional step I still can’t find.
The simple answer is that, one, many things pertaining to necessity are not defined, because of the nature of necessity. Secondly, a mission (I imagine you are alluding to something similar to canonical mission) is when someone is officially sent to do some sort of task on behalf of the church wherein there will be teaching (magisterial action, not just regular teaching, which technically all of us are called to do, down to basic apologetics to our neighbour) and governing (the normal work that requires jurisdiction over a body of members of the faithful, etc). Neither of these things are claimed by the SSPX, but their critics would like an answer to something they don't claim to do.
Doubtless the situation is irregular. But, alas, the situation is, in fact, irregular all around.
Thank you, Kennedy. I think we’ve found the crux. If the SSPX claims no apostolic mission, on what basis does it publicly govern chapels, assign priests, hear confessions, judge marriages, confirm, and ordain? Those aren’t merely private acts. I’m still looking for the Church’s teaching that necessity publicly establishes the mission those acts presuppose.
Surely the SSPX does claim the mission that Christ gave "Go forth and teach all the nations etc" , being as they are part of the One Holy Roman and Catholic Church.
Only due to the obvious state of neccessity , they must do so without full obedience. Irregular as Kennedy says, but not schismatic. For some reason, Dr Marshall has become hung up on the legal aspects, forgetting charity.
The Great Commission established the apostolic office; it did not dispense with the Church’s own rule for transmitting apostolic mission. The constitutional question remains: by what publicly demonstrable juridical act has that mission been received? Necessity may explain why one acts, but it does not establish the authority by which one publicly governs in the Church’s name.
The SSPX were legally canonically established in a diocese in Switzerland, in response to seminarians coming to the then retired Archbishop Lefebrve. No question that the honoured son of the Church (head of the Holy Ghost Fathers and Apostolic Delegate during the time of a rapid expansion of the Church in Africa) formally carried on the mission of the Church.
Archbishop Lefebvre unquestionably possessed a lawful apostolic mission during his episcopal ministry. My question concerns something different: by what juridical principle does a mission personally received continue indefinitely apart from the Church’s ordinary rule of transmission? A society may be canonically erected, but that does not by itself establish the continuing public mission of every act of governance it later undertakes. That is the constitutional question.
As an outsider I am troubled by the accusations of both sides and barbs like "heresy", "prideful", "schism", and "disobedience" -- being flicked hither, thither, and yonder like buggers in a fourth grade class of little boys.
Rome is burning and the spiritual barbarian hoards are at your gates.
Thank you, Kennedy; this was helpful in understanding the position taken by TM in it's larger context, and I look forward to the next installment!
I was surprised that in response to "Taylor argues that since Don Davide Pagliarani is a mere priest, he cannot have authority over bishops", you skiped the elephant in the room, which is Leo's appointment of women in positions of authority over Bishops. However, it reminds me of the old saying that "it is a sign of valor not to rise to the easy one."
Both the 1988 and 2026 episcopal consecrations made in disobedience without the Apostolic mandate were disgraces that set a dangerous precedent. There's no getting around that. Two wrongs don't make a right. Resistance within the Church is the only Way to correct the loss of Catholic integrity caused by the Francis papacy or whatever it was. I'm still shocked by the mild & political response (SSPX included) & pusillanimous toleration of what has transpired since the Francis papacy. As far as I'm concerned, the SSPX ordeal is a big distraction that has shifted the focus away from addressing, confronting & correcting the real elephant in the room - the unprecedented corruption of papal doctrine (Desiderio Desideravi, Feducia Supplicans, Amoris Laetitia, Abhu Dhabi, Mater Populi Fidelis), unabashed & scandalous promotion of pagan idol worship, homosexuality, adultery & consequent Eucharistic sacrilege.
It's not a distraction to me. I can be a Catholic at my little chapel. History is made up of little people following God and His holy Church unadulterated by the world. I can't make the pope stop being a homosexualist globalist, but I can learn and practice the Faith with the guidance of the most humble and joyful priests I've ever known.
I'm the opposite of a schismatic because I firmly believe all the truths which the Holy Catholic and apostolic Church teaches because God has revealed them who can neither deceive nor be deceived.
It's not all about you, Kay. There are souls who are being & have been dangerously misled & so it behooves all Catholics in charity to insist upon correction. 1 Corinthians 12:26
It is all in canon law. The Society acts within canon law as a faithful servant of the Church, including its mission to teach, govern and sanctify. It is only disobedient on some matters out of an obvious objective neccessity. I daresay you wish to prove on some legality that the Society are outwith the Church in some sense - which is splitting hairs in this time of crisis. A crisis caused by Modernists and liberalism not the Society!
Sean, I don’t think that’s actually Kennedy’s position. As I read him, he’s not arguing that he’s leaving the Barque of Peter or denying the current claimant. He’s arguing that extraordinary circumstances can justify the SSPX’s position while still recognizing Rome. Whether he’s right is another question, but I don’t think it’s fair to criticize him for a position he isn’t taking.
I am glad you opened with that information about Taylor Marshall.
I get why people believe as if he is compromised. We see corruption and the failing of just about everyone in a position of leadership/authority/influence etc in the secular world and sadly in the church hierarchy which ironically enough is why we are dealing with the SSPX v Modernist Church.
I’m not alleging that he is compromised at all, I’m just pointing out that given the state of world to it is understandable to suspect this as a possibility.
Personally I’m baffled and upset by his recent statements regarding this controversy.
His podcast was an integral part of my reversion back into the church.
I have several of his books in print and audio formats including ones, that you Kennedy narrated.
I learned so much from him. For a stretch of several years through every crisis and humiliation ritual coming out of the Vatican his podcasts kept me grounded.
I was searching for Catholic teaching I thought I would find when I came back to the church and he was a great source of information as well providing what to look for as I researched myself.
I’m grateful for how he shared his thought process. His words often inspired me to go deeper into the faith.
“Infiltration” set me down the course I been on for almost a decade now. In that time I found many answers that his book alluded to but couldn’t nail down. Why is that? Because that book was so influential that many of us starting reading more on our own. The greater the interest the more information was found and put out into the Catholic social media sphere.
So I write all of this because I still have immense respect and appreciation for him. Being Catholic means that you don’t hate someone just because they don’t agree with your world view 100%. Actually that’s a Jewish trait.
E Michael Jones is perhaps the greatest Catholic intellect of the last 50 years. He certainly is the greatest in the English speaking world yet I disagree with him on several big topics. I certainly don’t hate him nor question his motives when he pronounces something baffling.
So back to Taylor Marshall, the appreciation I have for him, particularly the acknowledgment that there is definitely not right since “the council,” is tremendous.
For a good 6 year stretch no other Catholic content creator was in that lane. He was not telling me about the new springtime in the Catholic Church or the wonders of the elusive “SpIrIt of VaTiCaN 2,” which really is an insult to my intelligence to listen to Catholic’s in the public sphere just totally ignorance the contradictions of the state of the church and the reality.
This insulting regurgitation of slop coming from Rome is in my opinion what is driving so many Catholics to finally take notice of the hypocrisy coming out of Rome once the bogus schism/excommunications trash was issued by Tucho.
So this is why it really was a kick in the gut when Taylor come out against the SSPX.
Nit going to lie this will take a while but I do trust him to be sincere and genuine nonetheless
Marshall is a great man, and he does what he does because he loves the Church
I believe that. Also I apologize for the length typos and grammar.
It’s been a long day
TM is being a Pharisee, legalistic argument while his FSSP is the next lifeboat to be sunk by modernist bishops and pope.
Thanks for this clear analysis. I'm looking forward to the rest.
My pleasure
Hey Kennedy can 'necessity' also encompass the State of the World?
The evil goals of secret societies: The Illuminati, the Bilderbergs, the Freemasons, the Skull and Bones, the Trilateral Commission along with WEF,UN,WHO,NATO, IPCC, etc.
With world government leaders whom are against their own citizenry in numerous ways, undermining their own country's society and these leaders deep connections to the above organizations.
And must note the plandemic and a one-world-order's dominion over seven key spheres of society: Religion, Family, Education, Government, Media, Arts & Entertainment, and Business.
And then couple the above info and from I can deduce many of these globalist goals seam to ring the bell for Vatican and Conferences of Catholic Bishops from around the world.
The world is in the biggest mess and feel we need an act of God and many are praying for, since many conservative Christians whom I talk with - feel the battle of good vs evil is ramping up.
SSPX has Situational Awareness as-in an aviation emergency: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate with the goal of keeping souls on-board alive.
Well, the state of the world certainly reflects the state of the Church, but, hypothetically if the world was run by some evil group, but the Church was still going strong, then there wouldn't be a necessity in the Church
Kennedy - Could this have to do with Catholics, especially converts who really struggled to subject themselves to the papacy? After having made that momentous decision they are now faced with questions about it, causing them to reflect deeply about their literal conversion or conversion of heart.
Kennedy, this is one of the more thoughtful SSPX defenses I’ve read. You’re careful, charitable toward Taylor Marshall, and you rightly distinguish jurisdiction from orders. My only question is this: the entire argument still seems to rest on necessity. Where does the Church teach that necessity itself supplies or publicly establishes apostolic mission? That’s the one constitutional step I still can’t find.
The simple answer is that, one, many things pertaining to necessity are not defined, because of the nature of necessity. Secondly, a mission (I imagine you are alluding to something similar to canonical mission) is when someone is officially sent to do some sort of task on behalf of the church wherein there will be teaching (magisterial action, not just regular teaching, which technically all of us are called to do, down to basic apologetics to our neighbour) and governing (the normal work that requires jurisdiction over a body of members of the faithful, etc). Neither of these things are claimed by the SSPX, but their critics would like an answer to something they don't claim to do.
Doubtless the situation is irregular. But, alas, the situation is, in fact, irregular all around.
Thank you, Kennedy. I think we’ve found the crux. If the SSPX claims no apostolic mission, on what basis does it publicly govern chapels, assign priests, hear confessions, judge marriages, confirm, and ordain? Those aren’t merely private acts. I’m still looking for the Church’s teaching that necessity publicly establishes the mission those acts presuppose.
Surely the SSPX does claim the mission that Christ gave "Go forth and teach all the nations etc" , being as they are part of the One Holy Roman and Catholic Church.
Only due to the obvious state of neccessity , they must do so without full obedience. Irregular as Kennedy says, but not schismatic. For some reason, Dr Marshall has become hung up on the legal aspects, forgetting charity.
The Great Commission established the apostolic office; it did not dispense with the Church’s own rule for transmitting apostolic mission. The constitutional question remains: by what publicly demonstrable juridical act has that mission been received? Necessity may explain why one acts, but it does not establish the authority by which one publicly governs in the Church’s name.
The SSPX were legally canonically established in a diocese in Switzerland, in response to seminarians coming to the then retired Archbishop Lefebrve. No question that the honoured son of the Church (head of the Holy Ghost Fathers and Apostolic Delegate during the time of a rapid expansion of the Church in Africa) formally carried on the mission of the Church.
Archbishop Lefebvre unquestionably possessed a lawful apostolic mission during his episcopal ministry. My question concerns something different: by what juridical principle does a mission personally received continue indefinitely apart from the Church’s ordinary rule of transmission? A society may be canonically erected, but that does not by itself establish the continuing public mission of every act of governance it later undertakes. That is the constitutional question.
Can great and noble men be wrong?
As an outsider I am troubled by the accusations of both sides and barbs like "heresy", "prideful", "schism", and "disobedience" -- being flicked hither, thither, and yonder like buggers in a fourth grade class of little boys.
Rome is burning and the spiritual barbarian hoards are at your gates.
Heed the warning of Fatima. SOULS ARE AT STAKE.
Yes, we can all be wrong, especially when things are a matter of dispute
Thank you Kennedy, we keep your family and your intentions in our prayers, God bless.
Thank you, Kennedy; this was helpful in understanding the position taken by TM in it's larger context, and I look forward to the next installment!
I was surprised that in response to "Taylor argues that since Don Davide Pagliarani is a mere priest, he cannot have authority over bishops", you skiped the elephant in the room, which is Leo's appointment of women in positions of authority over Bishops. However, it reminds me of the old saying that "it is a sign of valor not to rise to the easy one."
Both the 1988 and 2026 episcopal consecrations made in disobedience without the Apostolic mandate were disgraces that set a dangerous precedent. There's no getting around that. Two wrongs don't make a right. Resistance within the Church is the only Way to correct the loss of Catholic integrity caused by the Francis papacy or whatever it was. I'm still shocked by the mild & political response (SSPX included) & pusillanimous toleration of what has transpired since the Francis papacy. As far as I'm concerned, the SSPX ordeal is a big distraction that has shifted the focus away from addressing, confronting & correcting the real elephant in the room - the unprecedented corruption of papal doctrine (Desiderio Desideravi, Feducia Supplicans, Amoris Laetitia, Abhu Dhabi, Mater Populi Fidelis), unabashed & scandalous promotion of pagan idol worship, homosexuality, adultery & consequent Eucharistic sacrilege.
It's not a distraction to me. I can be a Catholic at my little chapel. History is made up of little people following God and His holy Church unadulterated by the world. I can't make the pope stop being a homosexualist globalist, but I can learn and practice the Faith with the guidance of the most humble and joyful priests I've ever known.
You've actually made an example of yourself of what a schismatic looks like.
I'm the opposite of a schismatic because I firmly believe all the truths which the Holy Catholic and apostolic Church teaches because God has revealed them who can neither deceive nor be deceived.
Your vain self-proclamations about you & your little chapel with ill-regard to everyone else suggest your quite deceived.
Why so harsh? Mercy, maybe?
Mercy...
GLORY TO JESUS CHRIST! No, correction is not "harsh" - correction IS mercy!
It's not all about you, Kay. There are souls who are being & have been dangerously misled & so it behooves all Catholics in charity to insist upon correction. 1 Corinthians 12:26
I learned much. Your students were blessed with a talented teacher.
It is all in canon law. The Society acts within canon law as a faithful servant of the Church, including its mission to teach, govern and sanctify. It is only disobedient on some matters out of an obvious objective neccessity. I daresay you wish to prove on some legality that the Society are outwith the Church in some sense - which is splitting hairs in this time of crisis. A crisis caused by Modernists and liberalism not the Society!
Your obedience is disordered
Katie - What religion/faith are you?
Sean, I don’t think that’s actually Kennedy’s position. As I read him, he’s not arguing that he’s leaving the Barque of Peter or denying the current claimant. He’s arguing that extraordinary circumstances can justify the SSPX’s position while still recognizing Rome. Whether he’s right is another question, but I don’t think it’s fair to criticize him for a position he isn’t taking.
this is a non sequitur, Sean. No one is leaving the Church here. The SSPX is a part of the Church.
Disordered obedience
Your obedience is disordered
🥴😂🤣 ignorance
Please learn the difference between your and you are ( you're). Your grammer is poor and so is your understanding of obedience
Grammar... with an 'ar'.
"Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."