Skip to main content

A Look Back - Should I consecrate Bishops?

+
JMJ

More on the motivations for the consecrations.

P^3

Courtesy of SSPX.org


"Should I consecrate Bishops?"
“Obviously the question poses itself. In order to continue, should I consecrate bishops, or should I let the seminarians fend for themselves, so that after my death they might find bishops to ordain them?
“I do not know one bishop in the whole world who would agree to do it. Several cardinals and a few bishops have some sympathy with the Society. But I do not believe that one or another of them would agree to ordain our seminarians, for fear of thunderbolts from Rome. I was illegally and unjustly disciplined with a suspens a divinis for having ordained priests. All the more reason if I consecrated bishops!

“In the new Canon Law, excommunication is prescribed, and no doubt that is no accident. It was made with us in mind. And so those bishops will not dare to risk being excommunicated.

“That doesn’t frighten me, though, because Rome already treats us in practice as though we were excommunicated. What more can they do against us?

“Suppose that I were excommunicated, that we were all excommunicated: what additional evil would be added to what we are already enduring now? We can no longer go about the parishes. We cannot celebrate Mass in a church. If we ask for permission from a bishop for an exceptional circumstance, it is not granted us. If we want to perform the slightest ceremony in a diocese, communiques are sent to the press forbidding the faithful to attend: ‘They are suspended! They have broken with Rome and are against Rome. They are no longer in communion with the pope.’

“An excommunication would do nothing more to us, especially if you are willing to consider where it would come from. To be excommunicated by liberals, by modernists, would be instead a badge of orthodoxy. That would prove that we have stayed on the right line. We would be excommunicated because we do not think as they do. Well, yes, we do not think as they do. That is true!

We find ourselves therefore in a situation that has some urgency. To be sure, the Good Lord has allowed me to have rather good health. But the years are going by, and I am nearing my end. Our seminaries are filled with seminarians who are ready to receive priestly orders. Well, then, given their [i.e., Rome’s] repeated refusal to lift that suspension, in which they believe, but which was illegal, as I have already proved, we are prevented from continuing in a normal fashion the work of the Society, which however was officially recognized, and in the absence of a bishop who can replace me, what should we do?

“Should I do nothing and consign myself totally to the grace of God, to Providence, come what may; or should I consider that it is my duty to consecrate several bishops so as to allow the Catholic priesthood to continue in order to save souls?

“This is why, together with Bishop de Castro Mayer, during our last meeting in Argentina, we did not rule out that possibility.

“Of course, one may object that in order to consecrate bishops who have apostolic succession, authorization from Rome is required. That is true. And why would we not have that authorization? Not because what we wanted to do was bad, but because it would be contrary to the current modernist, liberal orientation of Rome. ‘You are going to make traditional bishops in order to ordain traditional priests. We don’t want that any more. We want priests who are in the spirit of Vatican II.’

“From this radical opposition, we can conclude that it is impossible to accede morally to the pope’s wishes—physically, or course, it is still possible—but morally [impossible] because it is oriented toward the application of the Council and its consequences. That is his work. That is his purpose. It is useless to try to put tradition into his mind."


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rome and SSPX - Version 2026 Part 2

 + JMJ Part 2 Detailed Synopsis and Timeline (ChatGPT) At this point, I took the shortcut of uploading all of my previous links and the latest SSPX and Rome links to ChatGPT. This way we’ll see how ChatGPT interprets the world as presented on the internet. P^3 Briefing Memo Subject: Rome–SSPX Relations and Planned Episcopal Consecrations (July 1, 2026) Prepared for: Ecclesial / Academic / Media Briefing Date: February 2026 Issue Overview The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) has announced its intention to consecrate new bishops on July 1, 2026 , potentially without a papal mandate . The Holy See has acknowledged ongoing talks with the SSPX and stated its desire to avoid rupture, but has not granted approval nor outlined canonical consequences. The situation revives unresolved tensions dating to 1988 and raises questions about schism, authority, and doctrinal continuity. Background Founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX seeks to preserve pre-Vat...

Schism

There is some question as to whether the Pope can be in actual schism as per the Cardinal Torquemada: Citing the doctrine of Pope Innocent III, Torquemada further teaches:  "Thus it is that Pope Innocent III states [De Consuetudine] that, it is necessary to obey the Pope in all things as long as he, himself, does not go against the universal customs of the Church, but should he go against the universal customs of the Church, 'he need not be followed' . . . " [Cited from A Theological Vindication of Roman Catholic Traditionalism, Father Paul Kramer, B.Ph., S.T.D., M. Div. (2nd edition, St. Francis Press, India) p. 29. The full quotation from Cardinal Torquemada reads, "By disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ despite the fact that he is head of the Church, for above all, the unity of the Church is dependent on its relationship with Christ. The Pope can separate himself from Christ either by disobeying the law of Christ, or by commanding som...

SSPX / DICI: Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure.

+ JMJ The following is the communiqué of the SSPX regarding the Bishop Williamson's consecration of Fr. Faure. As a follow-up to this article ,  I would like to highlight the rationale for denouncing the consecration. Communiqué of the General House of the Society of St. Pius X concerning the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure. On March 19, 2015, Bishop Richard Williamson performed the episcopal consecration of Fr. Jean-Michel Faure at the Benedictine Monastery of the Holy Cross in Nova Friburgo, Brazil. Bishop Williamson and Fr. Faure have not been members of the Society of St. Pius X since 2012 and 2014, respectively, because of their violent criticisms of any relations with the Roman authorities. According to them, such contacts were incompatible with the apostolic work of Archbishop Lefebvre.(1) The Society of St. Pius X regrets sincerely that this spirit of opposition has led to an episcopal consecration. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre had c...

Bishop Huonder, SSPX in Schism? - Nope, Consecration of Holy Oils - Update 1

 + JMJ  So Bishop Huonder is in the news for two reasons.  First, his 'Testimony' concerning Pope Francis etc. This was received as a nice reinforcement by Trads (SSPX and others).  Of course, there are those that now are demanding an apostolic investigation.  Yawn, been here before.  This was predictable as other bishops who have followed the same path came to the same conclusions.  It is the way. Second, he celebrated the Chrism Mass and blessed the Holy Oils for use in the SSPX's European chapels and ceremonies.  This caused a stir amongst some Trads who are locked in one or the other statements made by either Archbishop Lefebvre or others. I received two versions of a question regarding this event: Hi Tradical Do you have any comments about doubtful oils in SSPX europe by +Huonder (NO Bishop not conditionally consecrated)? God Bless Hi Tradical Any thoughts on Huonder oil, not conditionally ordained and consecrated by SSPX bishops? God Bless M...