Novus Ordo Watch says the SSPX distorts the papacy. Rome has said much the same, but its answer is the opposite
Promoting a former SSPX priest’s talk, Novus Ordo Watch says the Society “communicates a distorted notion of the Papacy”, and presents sedevacantism as the cure. The Holy See has also faulted the Society’s stance, but Church teaching gives no support to the conclusion that the see is vacant.
By TradWatch™ staff
3 min read
Share this piece
Verdicts at a glance
- Needs context
The SSPX’s stance distorts the papacy, and the consistent conclusion is that there is no true pope. · Novus Ordo Watch
In this brief · 7 sections
On 10 October 2026 Novus Ordo Watch published a post promoting a talk given on 4 October by Fr Reid Hennick, a former priest of the Society of St Pius X who now belongs to the Roman Catholic Institute of Bishop Donald Sanborn (Novus Ordo Watch). The post summarises why he left the Society for sedevacantism, the view that there has been no true pope since around the time of the Second Vatican Council.
What was said
Statement 1: Novus Ordo Watch
Novus Ordo Watch · October 10, 2026
he came to realize that the SSPX “communicates a distorted notion of the Papacy” because it ultimately reduces the figure of the Pope to what the late Fr. Anthony Cekada called a “cardboard Pope”.
In brief: The SSPX’s stance distorts the papacy, and the consistent conclusion is that there is no true pope.
Our verdict: Needs contextThe words are accurate, but missing context changes how they read.
See the recordThis content is embedded for purposes of commentary, criticism, and news reporting. TradWatch is not affiliated with Novus Ordo Watch. Views quoted are those of the speaker.
Context
The Society of St Pius X holds a “recognise and resist” position: it accepts the post-conciliar popes as popes while refusing parts of their teaching and governance. Sedevacantists, including Bishop Sanborn’s institute, hold that those popes are not true popes at all. Novus Ordo Watch is a sedevacantist outlet.
On statement 1 · Novus Ordo Watch
The post says this is “the false notion of the Papacy that convinced Fr. Hennick he had to leave the Society”, and that he arrived “unexpectedly, to Sedevacantism”.
The record
What the sources show, statement by statement.
Verifiable factcan be checked against the sources cited.TradWatch analysisis our interpretation, clearly labelled.Statement 1 · Novus Ordo Watch
The SSPX’s stance distorts the papacy, and the consistent conclusion is that there is no true pope.
Verifiable fact The Holy See has also faulted the Society’s stance
When the Society’s founder consecrated bishops without papal mandate in 1988, John Paul II wrote that “the root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition” (Ecclesia Dei, n. 4). Canon law defines schism as “the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him” (CIC can. 751). So the Church, too, holds that recognising a pope while refusing submission to him is not a coherent position.
Verifiable fact The Church teaches that Peter has perpetual successors
The First Vatican Council taught that it is “by divine law” that “blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church”, and anathematised anyone who denies it (Pastor aeternus, ch. 2). The Holy See lists Leo XIV as the 267th Pope, elected in 2025 (vatican.va).
TradWatch analysis A shared diagnosis, opposite conclusions
Novus Ordo Watch and the Holy See agree on one point: a pope cannot coherently be recognised and resisted at the same time. They draw opposite conclusions. The Holy See asks for submission to the pope; sedevacantists conclude there has been no pope since the Council. Church teaching on the perpetual succession of Peter gives no support to the second conclusion, which no bishop in communion with Rome holds. The post’s criticism of the Society has a real basis; the remedy it presents does not.
Bottom line
The post’s criticism of the SSPX’s position is not unusual: the Holy See has made a similar criticism since 1988. But Church teaching on the perpetual succession of Peter gives no support to sedevacantism, the conclusion the post presents as the answer.
The original
Sources
- 1.Primary sourceCited in statement 1
‘Undistorted, in Deed and Truth’: The Conversion Story of Former SSPX-Lefebvrist Fr. Reid Hennick
Novus Ordo Watch · October 10, 2026
novusordowatch.org/2026/10/fr-reid-hennick-fsspx-conversion-story/
- 2.Official Church sourceCited in statement 1
n. 4 — Ecclesia Dei (2 July 1988)
Holy See (vatican.va)
vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio…
- 3.Official Church sourceCited in statement 1
can. 751 — Code of Canon Law, Book III
Holy See (vatican.va)
vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/documents/cic_lib3-cann747-755_en.html
- 4.Official Church sourceCited in statement 1
ch. 2 — First Vatican Council, Pastor aeternus (1870)
Papal Encyclicals Online
- 5.Official Church sourceCited in statement 1
Holy See (vatican.va)
Corrections & updates
No corrections have been made to this brief. Spotted an error? Request a correction.
We invite the people and outlets discussed here to respond. Submit a response and we’ll publish it alongside this brief.
Help us keep the record straight
If we’ve made a mistake, tell us — we correct errors openly and log every change. People and outlets we write about can respond, and we publish their replies here.
Share this analysis
More analysis
- The SSPX episcopal consecrations of 2026Who did the 2 July decree excommunicate? Checking a OnePeterFive report against the textOnePeterFive said SSPX bishops and priests were excommunicated but not necessarily the faithful who attend SSPX Masses. On lay people the Vatican’s own texts bear that out; on priests, and on the sacraments, it needs qualifying. · 12 min read
- The SSPX episcopal consecrations of 2026‘Not a schismatic act’? Weighing the jurisdiction argument for the SSPX consecrationsA canon lawyer quoted by LifeSiteNews argued that consecrating bishops without a papal mandate falls short of a ‘perfect schism’ unless there is schismatic intent and a rival jurisdiction. The Holy See applied a different test. · 15 min read
- Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX)‘I have not moved’: Bishop Strickland’s test for Vatican II, set beside the Church’s own textsIn a September pastoral letter Bishop Joseph Strickland said Vatican II’s continuity with earlier teaching must be demonstrated, not merely asserted, and that he will examine the Council in the light of Tradition. The Church’s own texts address who makes that judgment. · 10 min read