My position on the SSPX

A Note on Dietrich von Hildebrand

Dietrich von Hildebrand, called by Pope Pius XII “the 20th Century Doctor of the Church,” was one of the world's most eminent Christian philosophers. He was awarded a Papal Knighthood due to his defense of Humanae Vitae and has recently received much papal applause from Pope Benedict and Pope John Paul II. He was cited amongst the great theologians of St. Thomas, Bonaventure, Chrysostom, and others as being a source for the Catholic Church's theology on the sacrament of marriage in Uno Cairo. No other Catholic writer has so thoroughly echoed the message of Our Lady of the Roses than Dietrich von Hildebrand.

The Essential Distinction: Theoretical and Practical Authority

Dietrich von Hildebrand offers the clearest framework for navigating the crises of our time. In The Charitable Anathema, he poses the vital question: “What should be one’s inner attitude toward practical decisions of the Pope, decisions that seem ill-advised or dangerous in their consequences or even decisions that seem to compromise with the spirit of secularism?”

He answers by drawing a precise distinction. Theoretical authority “is a guarantee of the truth of a statement.” In the natural order, such authorities are relative. But in the Church, “there is but one absolute theoretical authority: the Church in matters of faith and morals… infallible in matters of faith and morals.” This authority demands unconditional belief and religious faith. New dogmas may develop or clarify, but “no dogma, once authoritatively taught, can ever be authoritatively denied,” or the Church’s infallibility would collapse.

Practical authority, by contrast, “appeals not to belief… but to obedience.” It is sacred because it represents God. “The Church is a practical authority of a higher order… her commandments and administrative measures have a solemn and morally binding character.” Yet infallibility does not extend here. Practical decisions—changes in canon law, administrative acts, permissions, or disciplinary measures—“cannot be true or false but only valid or invalid, good or evil, useful or useless.” We are obliged to obey with deep respect, but “we need not consider them felicitous or prudent.” We may pray for revocation, petition respectfully, and even write about the matter, yet we cannot reject the authority itself.

Hildebrand reminds us: in theoretical matters, “Roma locuta: causa finita.” In practical matters, fidelity requires obedience even when we judge a decision unfortunate. This distinction is not academic; it is the key to understanding why the current state of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) constitutes a profound tragedy.

The SSPX’s Variance with Church Authority and Tradition

The very nature of the SSPX has always been at variance with the Church and Tradition. Their bishops and priests move from province to province without regard for local bishops—an abuse condemned by the Council of Serdica, by Mirari Vos of Pope Gregory XVI, and by Apostolic Canon 38.

Worse, the Society scheduled and publicly announced episcopal consecrations before seeking a papal mandate, then fabricated the appearance of one during the rite by reading from a scroll that was not the authentic document. This is not mere irregularity; it is deception within the sacred liturgy itself. As Hildebrand teaches, practical authority binds us even when we find decisions imprudent. The SSPX, however, chose disobedience. Pope Leo pleaded with them in his letter to the Society, begging them not to proceed. They ignored him.

Mr. Kennedy Hall and others repeat the same formalistic arguments, speaking of a “pseudo-excommunication” and “fraudulent claims” about the Society’s schism. Yet any faithful Catholic must recognize that when the Curia issues a decree in the Pope’s name, it carries his authority. Canon 360 states that the Supreme Pontiff conducts the affairs of the universal Church through the Roman Curia, acting in his name and by his authority. Canon 361 confirms that references to the Apostolic See include the Curia. To dismiss this is to echo the Jansenist error condemned in Quartus Supra by Pope Pius IX: claiming an excommunication may be ignored on grounds of injustice.

Pope Pius IX is clear: “Every man who has been declared schismatic by the Roman Pontiff must cease at once to claim the name of Catholic so long as he does not expressly recognize and revere the authority of the Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff.” The SSPX have willfully placed themselves outside the Church’s jurisdiction. They reject local bishops in whose dioceses they operate, contrary to the responsibility placed on bishops by Pope Gregory XVI. They claim to hold to Rome while refusing the very authority Rome exercises through her appointed shepherds.

Even if their sacraments are valid, reception of Communion while out of union with the local bishop and the visible hierarchy means receiving unworthily—eating and drinking damnation to oneself. One cannot claim to stand in union with the whole Body of Christ while rejecting the structure Christ established through Peter. As St. Jerome wrote: “Whoever eats the Lamb outside this house is profane. Anyone who is not in the ark of Noah will perish when the flood prevails.”

The Tragedy and the Only Path Forward

This is a great and terrible tragedy of our time. The SSPX knew what they were doing. They were warned. They have derelicted the universal principle of authority—the Pope—and the manifest unitive principle by which souls are bound to God. As Hilaire Belloc said, “Without authority there is no life.” Religion itself (religare) means to be bound to God. Christ gave Peter the power to bind and loose: “Upon this rock I will build my Church… Whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” The SSPX, like the Eastern Orthodox, have effectively declared that Rome has defected and justified separation. Yet Rome is indefectible—Pastor Aeternus, paragraphs 5–8.

It would never be the will of God for a society to step outside its proper jurisdiction in order to “save” Tradition. Such action severs the very life of the Church.

We must respond with prayer, especially the Rosary, turning to Our Blessed Lady. As Our Lady of the Roses warned: “Pastors, you shall be called and shall you stand before, in judgment, the Eternal Father and say that your teaching has been pure in His sight? Better that you fear your God than man! Obedience? Obedience is commanded by the Eternal Father for good, not for evil!”

Mr. Kennedy Hall may have good intentions, yet he does damage to the faithful by encouraging resistance rather than submission. The Church has spoken. It is foolish and rebellious to argue against her clear statements. Voices must rise in defense of Mother Church. The SSPX must submit to Rome, recognize the rock of Peter, and return to full canonical regularity. Only then can they participate worthily in the life of the Mystical Body.

Hildebrand’s wisdom remains the sure guide: obey the practical authority with reverence, believe the theoretical authority with absolute faith, and never confuse the two. In this distinction lies both fidelity and charity. May the SSPX—and all who follow them—return to the ark before the flood prevails.

More to come. I will release the entire section On Belief and Obedience: The critical difference by Dietrich von Hildebrand soon.