The National Catholic Register portal reports on the latest episcopal ordinations in China under the secret 2018 agreement with the communist regime, contrasting them with the recent excommunication latae sententiae incurred by the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) for unauthorized consecrations. The article attempts to justify the disparate treatment by appealing to “dialogue,” “procedure,” and the “pope’s authority,” presenting the Chinese bishops as irregular but reconciled, while the SSPX is portrayed as willfully schismatic. This analysis exposes the theological bankruptcy of a conciliar church that negotiates with atheist tyrants while persecuting those who cling to the Mass of Ages, revealing that both the “Vatican-China deal” and the SSPX are rotten fruits of the same post-conciliar revolution.
The Usurper’s “Authority” and the Nullity of Conciliar Jurisdiction
The entire premise of the Register’s analysis rests on the recognition of Robert Prevost (“Leo XIV”) as the legitimate Roman Pontiff. From the perspective of integral Catholic faith, this is the primary and fatal error. Since the death of Pius XII in 1958, the See of Peter has been occupied by a line of manifest heretics who, by their public adhesion to the modernist errors condemned by St. Pius X in Lamentabili Sane Exitu and Pascendi Dominici Gregis, and by their promulgation of the heretical documents of Vatican II (religious liberty, ecumenism, collegiality), have automatically lost all jurisdiction ipso facto, without need of any declaration. As St. Robert Bellarmine teaches, “a Pope who is a manifest heretic, by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head, just as he ceases to be a Christian and member of the body of the Church” (De Romano Pontifice). Wernz and Vidal confirm that such a one is deprived of jurisdiction ipso facto “even before any declaratory sentence by the Church”.
Therefore, the “papal mandate” which the article treats as the touchstone of liceity is a chimera. An antipope cannot grant a mandate; he can only simulate one. The “Holy See” referenced by Gagliarducci is not the Apostolic See of the Catholic Church, but the administrative center of the conciliar sect, the paramasonic structure occupying the Vatican. Consequently, the excommunication latae sententiae declared against the SSPX bishops is canonically null and void—issued by a non-pope lacking all jurisdiction. Conversely, the “lifting of excommunications” of the Chinese bishops by Francis in 2018 was an act of nullity performed by a non-pope, regularizing schismatics appointed by an atheist communist party.
The Vatican-China Agreement: A Pact with the “Synagogue of Satan”
The article describes the 2018 provisional agreement as a mechanism to “reestablish communion in the Church.” This is a diabolical inversion of terminology. The “Church” in China with which the conciliar sect seeks communion is the Patriotic Association, a creature of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), explicitly designed to sever Chinese Catholics from the Roman Pontiff. Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors, condemned the proposition that “The Church is not a true and perfect society, entirely free… but it appertains to the civil power to define what are the rights of the Church” (Error 19). He condemned the idea that “The ecclesiastical power ought not to exercise its authority without the permission and assent of the civil government” (Error 20), and that “The civil government… has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs” (Error 41).
The secret agreement—whose text remains hidden, a hallmark of masonic secrecy—effectively concedes to the CCP the right of nomination or veto over episcopal appointments, a direct violation of Canon 147 (1917 Code) and the divine constitution of the Church. Pius XI, in Quas Primas, taught that “the Church, established by Christ as a perfect society, demands for itself by a right belonging to it, which it cannot renounce, full freedom and independence from secular authority”. By entering this accord, the conciliar “pope” has betrayed the Kingship of Christ over the Chinese nation, handing the flock to wolves. The article admits the Chinese government “overreach” (e.g., the unilateral appointment of Joseph Shen Bin), yet frames the “pope’s” subsequent ratification as a “rectification.” This is not rectification; it is capitulation. It is the Siniciation of the Church, the very “tight grip of the Chinese government” the article claims to oppose, now blessed by the usurper.
The SSPX: Schismatics Within the Schism
The article portrays the SSPX as “Lefebvrists” who “reject the conclusions of the Second Vatican Council en masse” and ordain bishops “to maintain a link with tradition.” While the SSPX retains the usus antiquior, their theological position is inherently contradictory and schismatic. Archbishop Lefebvre, ordained by the freemason Cardinal Liénart (whose ordinations are of doubtful validity), consistently acknowledged the validity of the conciliar “popes” (John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francis, and now Leo XIV). As the provided context states: “Abp Lefebvre – continuously acknowledged the validity of the usurpers in the Vatican; his words: ‘give us the old Mass, that is enough for us'”.
The SSPX seeks a “canonical regularization” from the very antipope they claim to resist in doctrine. They recognize the “pope” as the supreme authority while rejecting his magisterium. This is the definition of a schism within a schism. They are not outside the conciliar church; they are its “traditionalist” wing, performing a controlled opposition function. Their episcopal consecrations in 1988 and 2026 were acts of disobedience to the antipope, but since the antipope has no authority, the “excommunication” is a theatrical prop. The real issue is that the SSPX validates the conciliar hierarchy by seeking its recognition. They are “those pretending to be traditional Catholics” who refuse the logical conclusion of sedevacantism: that the Chair is vacant and the conciliar structure is the abomination of desolation.
The Theological Equivocation on “Communion” and “Schism”
Gagliarducci writes: “It is no coincidence that the head of the SSPX, Father Davide Pagliarani, asked Leo for the mercy of which Pope Francis spoke so often and so eloquently.” This reveals the modernist ontology: “mercy” divorced from truth, “communion” severed from unity of faith. St. Pius X condemned the modernist error that “The Church listening cooperates in such a way with the Church teaching in defining truths of faith, that the Church teaching should only approve the common opinions of the Church listening” (Lamentabili, Prop. 6). The conciliar church has replaced the unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam Ecclesiam with a sociological “communion” based on bureaucratic recognition.
The article claims the Chinese bishops “are not” excommunicated because “there is a procedure, established by an agreement.” Since when does an agreement with a communist regime override divine law? The Chinese “bishops” are functionaries of the state, appointed to implement Siniciation—the transformation of Catholicism into a tool of the Party. Their “communion” with the antipope is a communion in betrayal. The SSPX bishops, for all their errors, at least attempted to preserve the sacrament of Holy Orders in its traditional rite (though the new rite of episcopal consecration introduced by Paul VI is of doubtful validity, and the SSPX uses the traditional rite). But the Register’s logic implies that obedience to the usurper is the sole criterion of Catholicity. This is the heresy of papolatry, elevating the person of the “pope” above the Faith he is bound to guard.
The Kingship of Christ vs. the “Dialogue” of Antichrist
Pius XI, in Quas Primas, instituted the Feast of Christ the King precisely to combat the “secularism of our times, so-called laicism” which “began with the denial of Christ the Lord’s reign over all nations”. He warned: “When God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed”. The Vatican-China agreement is the apex of this denial. It submits the Church in China to the “laws of men” (the CCP), deriving the “right” to appoint bishops from the state, not from Christ.
The article’s hope that “the secret agreement will be changed and ‘adjusted,’ or made public” is the hope of a whore for a better contract. There can be no “adjustment” of a pact with the enemies of God. The only Catholic response is the one Pius IX gave to the Prussian Kulturkampf: “These laws are null and void because they are absolutely contrary to the divine constitution of the Church”. The Chinese “bishops” ordained under this accord are intruders in the sheepfold, regardless of the antipope’s “rectification.”
Conclusion: Two Wings of the Same Bird of Prey
The Register’s analysis is a masterpiece of conciliar casuistry, designed to soothe the consciences of those who still believe the Vatican structures are the Church. It contrasts the “disobedience” of the SSPX with the “irregular but regularized” Chinese bishops, obscuring the reality: both are integrated into the counter-church of the New Advent. The SSPX provides the “traditional” liturgical veneer; the Chinese “Patriotic Church” provides the geopolitical accommodation. Both recognize the antipope. Both accept the Second Vatican Council (the SSPX “with reservations,” the Chinese fully). Both reject the Social Kingship of Christ.
True Catholics, adhering to the integral Catholic faith prior to 1958, recognize neither the “pope” Leo XIV, nor his “bishops” in China, nor the SSPX hierarchy as legitimate pastors. They know that “a manifest heretic cannot be Pope” (Bellarmine), that the Church cannot defect, “reconcile herself with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Syllabus, Error 80), and that the only “agreement” possible with the enemies of Christ is the one dictated by the King of Kings: “You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve” (Mt 4:10). The excommunications and appointments of the conciliar sect are irritus, cassus et nullus—void, null, and of no effect. The Chair is vacant; the faithful must cleave to the Tradition, the true Mass, and the bishops and priests who maintain them without compromise with the occupiers of Rome.
Source:
Why China’s New Bishops Aren’t Excommunicated While the SSPX Is (ncregister.com)
Date: 29.07.2026