Breaking down the Pints with Aquinas interview with Mr. John Salza- part 5/9

Welcome back to another packed episode. The conversation resumes with an exploration of the indicators by which one could fall under the excommunication of the Motu Proprio “Ecclesia Dei” as an ‘adherent’ to the schism of Archbishop Lefebvre. Mr. Salza treats this very tactfully, continually pointing out that the church only hesitatingly makes judgements about a person’s internal form and he will not go further than what the Magisterium has ruled on.

The main idea of this episode is a rebuttal of the main error of the SSPX in asserting supplied jurisdiction. He expresses mild exasperation at its misapplication by the SSPX, and wonders at how the SSPX has gotten away with it for so long. He also addresses one or two objections from Mr. Fradd in the course of this analysis.

Other topics in this episode include the letter of Msgr. Perle apparently granting permission to attend the SSPX for Sunday obligation, whether any pope has made a single statement approving SSPX attendance, what is meant by “canonical irregularity” and others. The arguments against the use of supplied jurisdiction by the SSPX would be of particular interest for the SSPX to rebut.