Are We Witnessing the Autodestruction of Church Militant?
#1
A blog post I wrote this evening:

I've had little to say about the recent Church Militant vs SSPX kerfuffle because it was being covered in depth by other excellent sources. However, I recently began to wonder 'Why?' Why would CM engage in an obvious attempt to destroy one of the strongest bastions of Tradition in the Church?

I have a theory as to the answer. It looks to me like CM realised that they were a failing enterprise and thought that by stirring up an unneeded controversy they could recover from the slump they were in. Here are some statistics on CM's reach over the past year and a half.


In October 2018, CM was averaging just over 70,000 page views a day, their unique daily visitor count was around 1,400 per day, and their Alexa ranking was around 45,000. Not bad for a 'niche' site with a limited appeal to the general public.


The slump was beginning tho'. The slide continued until July 2019, when CM ran the shocking headline,  'Is the the SSPX Sheltering a Sexual Predator?' The answer, of course, was 'No', as is explained in both the official press release of the USA District of the SSPX and this article in Catholic Family News, by Matt Gaspers.


This calumnious attack on a Priest who was not even a member of the SSPX in an attempt to damage the Society resulted in a small 'bounce' in their numbers, bringing their page views back up to about 50,000 per day. Unique visitors and their Alexa ranking got a similar 'bounce' to around 1,000 per day and 63,000 respectively (The smaller the Alexa ranking, the more reach the site has).


However, moving on, their numbers continued to get worse and worse. Then, late last month they decided to go all in with an attack on the SSPX. Every technique of yellow journalism was used complete with lurid, sensational headlines, shoddy 'journalism', outright lies and false accusations, implications of corruption in the civil authorities involved, you name it, they've used it!


Has it helped? It doesn't seem to have done so. The last day logged shows they had 31,489 page views (about 45% of the number when logging began), 630 unique visitors (again, about 45% of the starting figure), and their Alexa rank had risen to 101,305 from 45,000.


Having stooped to lows to which even the Fishwrap wouldn't stoop, it looks like their latest attempt at saving their bacon has been a miserable failure.


I can't say that I'm sorry. There was a time that I followed CM closely. In the early days of this blog I often shared videos from their YouTube channel and articles from their website, and had them listed in the sidebar. Thanks to their descent into the filth of gutter 'journalism', I no longer follow them, have unsubscribed from their YouTube channel, and have removed links to them from the sidebar.


All the statistics cited above come from Trackalytics:


Trackalytics: Church Militant
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#2
This day and age nothing would surprise me, I don't know how true the accusations are against the SSPX, like them all there are good and bad apples. Only issue I have with the SSPX though is the break away from Rome, which puts them in a similar (albeit much closer to the Church because much more recent) position to the Orthodox. Unless they are in communion with Rome I don't fully trust it, and even those in communion I don't trust when it comes to sound teaching given Francis at the moment and all the wolves there too, but at least I know for sure the sacraments are valid, because Our Lord promised the gates of Hell would not prevail, and I believe I'll witness the truth of this teaching in my lifetime.

God Bless You
Reply
#3
(05-06-2020, 09:28 PM)josh987654321 Wrote: This day and age nothing would surprise me, I don't know how true the accusations are against the SSPX, like them all there are good and bad apples. Only issue I have with the SSPX though is the break away from Rome, which puts them in a similar (albeit much closer to the Church because much more recent) position to the Orthodox. Unless they are in communion with Rome I don't fully trust it, and even those in communion I don't trust when it comes to sound teaching given Francis at the moment and all the wolves there too, but at least I know for sure the sacraments are valid, because Our Lord promised the gates of Hell would not prevail, and I believe I'll witness the truth of this teaching in my lifetime.

God Bless You

Let's not trot out those 40-year-old talking points.

One is either in Communion or is not. There is no such thing as partial communion, no matter what people might claim. It's repugnant to theology. Either the triple bond exists or it doesn't.

Pope Francis has given faculties to the SSPX priests. Those not in communion are incapable of receiving faculties.

In the midst of the salacious CM reports it is seen that the CDF (which is the first instance tribunal for priests accused of crimes with those under 16), delegated to Bishop Fellay and the SSPX the power to try one of their priests who was so accused. He was convicted, Rome confirmed this sentence and was ordered to live out his days in a cloistered house for priests. He refused and joined the "Resistance" and is given full access to children. Note, however, that the CDF gave jurisdiction to Msgr Fellay to try a case, and they accepted this as a normal Canonical tribunal. Schismatics cannot be given jurisdiction.

You don't have to like the SSPX, but let's address reality and not just canned and false old talking points.
[-] The following 6 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • , CopiosaApudEumRedemptio, JacafamalaRedux, jovan66102, Justin Tertius, MiserereMeiDeus
Reply
#4
I am equally amused and angered by the whole 'partial communion', 'schismatic tendencies' argument. Anyone with any understanding of the terms 'communion' and 'schism' should realise that if the SSPX were ever not fully in the Church (not that they ever left, nor were the Priests and Faithful excommunicated, and the questionable 'excommunications' of the Bishops were lifted), it is no longer true. The Pope cannot grant faculties to those outside the Church as Francis has with the SSPX.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 2 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • , MagisterMusicae
Reply
#5
(05-06-2020, 10:00 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: I am equally amused and angered by the whole 'partial communion', 'schismatic tendencies' argument. Anyone with any understanding of the terms 'communion' and 'schism' should realise that if the SSPX were ever not fully in the Church (not that they ever left, nor were the Priests and Faithful excommunicated, and the questionable 'excommunications' of the Bishops were lifted), it is no longer true. The Pope cannot grant faculties to those outside the Church as Francis has with the SSPX.

If the SSPX were in schism, there is no question on the validity of their Sacraments. They would be certainly and undoubtedly valid, like the Orthodox.

The only question comes if they are actually in Communion but without proper jurisdiction. Then confession and marriage (without appealing to some extraordinary provisions in Canon Law, which the SSPX did) are doubtful, or invalid ... which is what Pope Francis wanted to clarify ... giving this jurisdiction, and ensuring there was no question.

So either the talking points about Schism were wrong and the Sacraments were doubtful and needed a possible fix, or the talking points about schism were right and there was no need to fix or give reassurance on their Sacraments. Can't be both.

Logical conclusion, since the jurisdiction was given : they were not and are not in schism, meaning, they are in Communion, though the Holy See does not recognize them as properly and canonically established (a matter of a legally-recognized structure).
[-] The following 5 users Like MagisterMusicae's post:
  • , Ioannes_L, JacafamalaRedux, jovan66102, The Tax Collector
Reply
#6
(05-06-2020, 09:40 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: Let's not trot out those 40-year-old talking points.

Didn't intend to.

(05-06-2020, 09:40 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: One is either in Communion or is not. There is no such thing as partial communion, no matter what people might claim.

I agree. Never even mentioned 'partial communion'. Also what does it make the Orthodox if they have a valid Eucharist?

(05-06-2020, 09:40 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: You don't have to like the SSPX, but let's address reality and not just canned and false old talking points.

On the contrary, I think it's good that they don't go along with Vat II, I'm just a little concerned and would want to make sure they are still in communion and thus the sacraments are valid. I don't know enough about them to make that call yet so I just tread carefully. Not even any SSPX anywhere near where I live so not that it matters much to me anyway.

Do the SSPX recognize Pope John Paul II & Pope Benedict XVI for instance?

God Bless You
Reply
#7
(05-06-2020, 10:48 PM)rose0325 Wrote:
(05-06-2020, 10:14 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote: The only question comes if they are actually in Communion but without proper jurisdiction. Then confession and marriage (without appealing to some extraordinary provisions in Canon Law, which the SSPX did) are doubtful, or invalid ... which is what Pope Francis wanted to clarify ... giving this jurisdiction, and ensuring there was no question.

We should also recognize, however, that the schismatic Orthodox absolve validly as a result of a tacit grant of jurisdiction by the Supreme Pontiff.

That's not how it works.

By dint of ordination, a priest has the radical power to absolve. If a man is a priest he can validly absolve.

Canon Law restricts the use of that faculty for validity to those who have received jurisdiction.

Canon Law does not apply to the Orthodox, but only to Catholics.

So the orthodox or schismatics absolve validly by dint of ordination.

In fact, Canonically, those who are not Catholic and most theologians would argue also laity, are not proper subjects of Jurisdiction, so the Pope could not in fact grant jurisdiction to the Orthodox or even to Sr Imelda.
[-] The following 1 user Likes MagisterMusicae's post:
  • jovan66102
Reply
#8
(05-06-2020, 10:57 PM)josh98765432 Wrote: Do the SSPX recognize Pope John Paul II & Pope Benedict XVI for instance?

Yes. They've always recognised the Reigning Pope as the Vicar of Christ, praying for him in every Mass and displaying his portrait, just like any other Catholic Institute.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
Reply
#9
(05-06-2020, 11:07 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: Yes. They've always recognised the Reigning Pope as the Vicar of Christ, praying for him in every Mass and displaying his portrait, just like any other Catholic Institute.

Okay, I didn't know that, then I take it back and they are legit then.

God Bless You
[-] The following 3 users Like josh987654321's post:
  • , jovan66102, Teresa Agrorum
Reply
#10
(05-06-2020, 11:12 PM)josh987654321 Wrote: Okay, I didn't know that, then I take it back and they are legit then.

And therein lies the problem. You at least admitted your error. Many of those attacking the Society do not know the basic facts and refuse to accept them when they're pointed out, like Jeeter's friend in this thread. However, the 'ignorance excuse' doesn't work for people like Voris, Niles, Coffin, Gordon, et. al. They know better but lie out of spite and hatred.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 2 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • , Quickbeam
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)