Skip to main content

The Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, 1991 and 2015 - Some Perspectives

Image
By
+
JMJ


In defense of the recent consecration of Fr. Faure by Bishop Williamson, some have argued that the 1991 consecration of Bishop Rangel (RIP) by the Bishops of the SSPX present an equivalent standard of action and principles.  From this they conclude that the SSPX's condemnation of Bishop Williamson's action is flawed as the principles of the 1991 consecration and that of 2015 are equivalent.


The first hole in the argument is that Bishop Williamson, to my knowledge, has not invoked the rationale that this consecration was comparable to that of 1991.

Since Bishop Williamson did not invoke this as his motivation, then anyone ascribing this as his justification is simply putting words into Bishop Williamson's mouth and making an excuse.

The second aspect is the motivation for Archbishop Lefebvre to consecrate a bishop in 1991.

"In the same spirit of broadly applying the supplied jurisdiction that the Church grants in case of necessity to those with the supreme power of orders - the bishop - he suggested to his friend Bishop de Castro Mayer, whose health was failing, "a possible episcopal consecration of someone to succeed him - in Campos - to transmit the Catholic Faith and confer the sacraments reserved to the bishops." The priests of Campos could choose a successor who would be consecrated by the auxiliary bishops of the Society in their capacity as Catholic bishops. " (Marcel Lefebvre - Bishop Tissier de Mallerais)

This clearly demonstrates that the motivation is quite different: Bishop Rangel was consecrated to succeed Bishop de Castro Mayer at the wish of Archbishop Lefebvre. For an order founded by Bishop de Castro Mayer. 

Simply put, Archbishop Lefebvre did not reach beyond the grave and request that Bishop Williamson consecrate Fr. Faure for some loose association of priests.

So, on these grounds, comparisons to the 1991 consecration are baseless from the get-go.

The third aspect to consider is whether or not there is an equivalent principle in the lack of a request of permission from Rome to perform the consecration in 1991 and 2015.

The answer, to my knowledge, objectively is yes. Neither the 1991, nor the 2015 act of consecrations sought Pontifical mandate for the consecrations.  On this grounds, and only this grounds, the events are equal.

For reference, I have drawn up the following table that compares and contrasts the three events on a number of aspects.




 Pontifical Mandate Requested? Pontifical Mandate Provided? Publicly Announced?

 Condition of Consecrator(s) from the perspective of Rome Aim of Consecration
SSPX 1988 Yes Declined Yes Archbishop Lefebvre (suspended a divinis)
Bishop Castro de Mayer (retired?)		 Bishops provided as auxiliary bishops for the SSPX
SSPX 1991 Assumed not. N/A Yes

 Ex-communicated Bishop provided as successor to Bishop de Castro Mayer – head of SSJV
'Resistance' 2015 Assumed not. N/A Only after the event was leaked to Rorate-Caeli.

 Suspended a divinis ?


Conclusion:
The comparison of the 2015 consecration to the 1988 and even the 1991 episcopal consecrations is inconsistent on a number of levels.  However, none is more evident than the aim of the consecration:

In 1988 and 1991 each consecration was associated with an order of the Church.  This consecration has no such correlating motivation. It is a the creation of a vagus Bishop for vagus Priests.

PS.
I've added a png file of the chart above for linking purposes.


Labels:

Comments

  1. AnonymousJanuary 9, 2016 at 7:35 AM

    I boycott the novus ordo,attend a Catholic church which holds the pre-1950 traditions.This consecration is needed as many valid catholic bishops are dying off.The "consecration craze" of the 80's & 90's died down.The valid priest's are dying off faster than the valid bishop's.With the SSPX fixing to become the new FSSP,the World needs all the valid catholic bishop's it can receive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TradicalFebruary 13, 2016 at 2:39 PM

      There are a number of issues with your assertion that "valid priests" are dying off along with "valid bishops".

      Briefly: The rite of consecration of priests and bishops is valid. To assert otherwise is to call into question the doctrine of indefectibility (do you really want to open up that can of worms?) as well as the validity of the eastern rites which are the origin of some of the elements that most question in this day an age.

      P^3

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

By
+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

By
Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...
8 comments
Read more

If Pope Francis is bad - what about Pope St. John Paul II et al?

By
+ JMJ So here we are on the apparent cusp of yet another post conciliar Papal canonization. This time we have Pope's John-Paul I and Paul VI canonizations to 'look forward' to. This follows, obviously, on the heels of Pope St. John Paul II's canonization? So the first question that I usually encounter is: How is it possible, keeping in mind the doctrine on infallibility of canonizations (note doctrine not dogma), that Pope St. John Paul II is a Saint? First, what does it mean???  According to the doctrine of dogmatic facts - it is the universal opinion of Theologians that canonizations are infallible.  It means that they enjoy the beatific vision.  ... that's it.  That is the doctrine and it is at the level of universal opinion of theologians.  It is called a 'dogmatic fact'. That they made mistakes is obvious.  That the miracles seem to not be very miraculous is also a bit of an issue. Here's something to consider: The rush that surrou...
16 comments
Read more

Spiritual Journey Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre - Extracts

By
+ JMJ I have posted these two chapters to provide context for the quote of: It is, therefore, a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith. P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.ca Chapter II The Perfections of God We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, Who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastic authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outsi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (de fide) - Expanded Listing: Answer for Reader

By
 + JMJ  A reader asked the following question in the 2015 version of the article on the Dogmas of the Catholic Faith (link) : 117: "In the state of fallen nature it is morally impossible for man without Supernatural Revelation, to know easily, with absolute certainty and without admixture of error, all religious and moral truths of the natural order." Where can you find this in the documents of the Church? ( Link to comment )  Here's the reference from Ott: The citation that Ott provided was Denzinger 1786 and the source document is Dogmatic Consitution Concerning the Faith from the First Vatican Council (Papal Encyclicals - link) : Chapter 2 On Revelation, Article 3: It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation , that those matters concerning God, which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone, without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error. Here's ...
Post a Comment
Read more