Skip to main content

Principle of Obedience - Applied to the SSPX

Image
By
+
JMJ


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

  1. The person issuing the command is in a position of authority over the inferior
  2. The command is within the scope of the superior's authority
  3. The command does not require the inferior to sin, either in the immediate or proximate case.
  4. 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?

  1. Archbishop Lefebvre withdrawing his signature from the protocol of 1988
  2. Archbishop Lefebvre disobeying the order from the Pope to not consecrate bishops
  3. 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.

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

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

By
+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3
30 comments
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

Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations - Courtesy of SSPX.org

By
+ JMJ In the blogosphere there are number of responses to this crisis in the Catholic Church that lead to conclusions that run counter to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas - if taken to their logical conclusion. The validity of the New Rite of Episcopal consecrations is one such hotspot within more extreme sections of the 'traditionalist' culture. Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations Courtesy of SSPX.org Why the new rite of episcopal consecration is valid Introduction This comprehensive study was compiled to settle a debate that has been circulating in traditional Catholic circles. Some writers have examined the new rite of episcopal consecration and concluded that it must be invalid. Since this would cause manifest problems if it were true and due to the heightened awareness of such a theory, we present a study of this question concluding that it is valid. Following the Council, in 1968 a new rite for the ordination of bishops was promulg...
1 comment
Read more

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