Principle of Obedience - Applied to the SSPX

JMJ

I have synthesized St. Thomas' principle of obedience as follows:
The Catholic principle is laid out as follows:

The person issuing the command is in a position of authority over the inferior
The command is within the scope of the superior's authority
The command does not require the inferior to sin, either in the immediate or proximate case.
If the above conditions are met then the person has an obligation to obey. Disobedience in this case is sinful.

Now the question is how have the leaders of the SSPX applied this principle in key conditions?

Archbishop Lefebvre withdrawing his signature from the protocol of 1988
Archbishop Lefebvre disobeying the order from the Pope to not consecrate bishops
Bishop Fellay refusing to sign the pre-amble provided in 2012.

In this review, I will make the following assumptions:

Superiors: Pope St. John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI and their delegates, respectively Cardinals Ratzinger and Levada
Command:

Accept a canonical regularization in which the Second Vatican Council and the Liturgical Reforms (ie primarily the New Mass) are accepted complete and entire.
To not perform episcopal consecrations without Pontifical Mandate

Perception of immediate sin is objective and that of proximate sin can be either objective or subjective in nature.
Acceptance of the following without reservation or exclusion constitutes a compromise that is at least proximately if not immediately sinful.

Second Vatican Council
Liturgical Reform issuing thereof

The Society of St. Pius X, in order to sustain its mission and for its protection required bishops selected from its members.

Case #1: Withdrawal of signature from protocol

While no compromise was required in the protocol (Archbishop Lefebvre stated that there was nothing wrong with it, otherwise he would not have signed it) shortly after the signing Cardinal Ratzinger mentioned having the New Mass said in St. Nicholas de Chardonnet ( Marcel Lefebvre- The Biography: page 554).

There were other issues, but here we have a proximate case of compromise listed above.

Case #2: Performance of episcopal consecrations without Pontifical Mandate counter to express command of Pope St. John Paul II

Given the circumstances within the Church, Archbishop Lefebvre was convinced that no Bishop would ordain the seminarians of the SSPX and that the SSPX needed to continue for the good of the Church.

Therefore, to not consecrate, in the face of the delays and requested compromises, would constitute a dereliction of duty on his part. Even contrary to the will of the Pope.

Therefore, we have a proximate occasion of sin.

Courtesy of SSPX Asia: Letter to Bishops

Case #3: Refusal to sign the preamble and accept a canonical regularization.

In the end, Cardinal Levada presented to Bishop Fellay a document that contain compromises on both the Second Vatican Council and the Liturgical Reform.

Conclusion

My conclusion is that in all three cases either an immediate or proximate occasion of compromise (sin) was present - at least in the minds of those making the decisions. Therefore, obedience to the command was not required as in all three cases some sort of compromise was required.

In the case of the consecrations, it was for the good of the Church to provide for the life of the SSPX.
In the case of the agreements, it is centred on the issues with the documents of the Second Vatican Council (Four Points) and the Liturgical Reform the pose a danger to the Faith due to their ambiguities and departures from Church Doctrine.

Given that the crisis is moving along at a steady march towards the October Synod - perhaps more clarity will be provided. I know that some "modern" Catholics are getting concerned, we must explain to them the doctrine of the Church concerning error, papal infallibility in order to bolster their faith.

P^3

Reference: Obedience Maligned and Misunderstood

Auctorem Fidei

Can the SSPX be right about the Novus Ordo? Revision: Feb 11, 2013 On another web forum, I was engaged in a rather heated discussion about the documents of Vatican II.

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Catholic Culture - The Edgar Schein Model Analysis of the Pre and Post Conciliar Culture

+ JMJ So ... I was thinking ... I've used Edgar Schein's (RIP) organizational cultural model (link ) in my research ... why not apply it in a comparison between the Catholic Organizational Culture - PRE and POST Second Vatican Culture? Of course, this will be from my own perspective, I'm certain that others will think differently. 😁 Also, apologies for a rather long article. Graphic: https://mutomorro.com/edgar-scheins-culture-model/ Below is a quick mapping of the cultural factors that I could think of. Since the Church is vast and composed of millions of Souls, it is necessarily a limited cultural map. Yet, I think it will still be useful to assess what has changed since the Second Vatican Council. Additional Reading: 5 enduring management ideas from MIT Sloan’s Edgar Schein | MIT Sloan Artifacts Artifacts are tangible and observable aspects of the culture being examined. All organizations have them. Walmart has their Walmart chant, Charismatics have their spe

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment. Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid. No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein. Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse? The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin. Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service. It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX. This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu

Tradicat

Search This Blog