Skip to main content

A look back: Wasn't Archbishop Lefebvre Excommunicated?

Image
By
+
JMJ

Further to 'Eyeballs' thoughts (see this link) here's the SSPX perspective on the excommunications.

P^3


Courtesy of SSPX.org: FAQ: Wasn't Archbishop Lefebvre Excommunicated?


Wasn't Archbishop Lefebvre excommunicated?

FAQ #11

Confusion often arises about Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's 1988 consecration of four bishops without papal permission, which action Pope John Paul II pointed out carried with it the latae sententiae (automatic) penalty of excommunication.
However, according to canon law, a person who believes, like Archbishop Lefebvre did, that there is a moral necessity to break a law (i.e., for the salvation of souls) would not incur any automatic penalties, even if that person were to be incorrect in that assessment.

June 29, 1987

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, experiencing failing health, aware of his episcopal duty to pass on the Catholic Faith and seeing no other way of assuring the continued ordination of truly Catholic priests, decided to consecrate bishops and announced that, if necessary, he will do so even without the pope’s permission.

June 30, 1988, "Operation Survival".

Cardinal Gantin, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, officially warned the archbishop that, in virtue of canon 1382 (1983 Code of Canon Law), he and the bishops consecrated by him would be excommunicated for proceeding without pontifical mandate and thereby infringing the laws of sacred discipline.

June 30, 1988

Archbishop Lefebvre, together with Bishop de Castro Mayer, consecrated four bishops.

July 1, 1988

Cardinal Gantin declared the threatened excommunication (according to canon 1382) to have been incurred. He also called the consecrations a schismatic act and declared the corresponding excommunication (canon 1364 §1), as well as threatening anyone supporting the consecrations with excommunication because of “schism".

In Ecclesia Dei Afflicta, the pope repeated Cardinal Gantin’s accusation of schismatic mentality and threatened generalized excommunications (cf. question 12).
However, the excommunication warned of on June 17 for abuse of episcopal powers (canon 1382) was not incurred because:
  1. person who violates a law out of necessity* is not subject to a penalty (1983 Code of Canon Law, canon 1323, §4), even if there is no state of necessity:[1]
  2. if one inculpably thought there was a necessity, he would not incur the penalty (canon 1323, 70),
  3. and if one culpably thought there was a necessity, he would still incur no automatic penalties[2] (canon 1324, §3; §1, 80).
*The state of necessity, as it is explained by jurists, is a state in which the necessary goods for natural or supernatural life are so threatened that one is morally compelled to break the law in order to save them. (Is Tradition Excommunicated?, p. 26)

No penalty is ever incurred without committing a subjective mortal sin (canons 1321 §1, 1323 70). Archbishop Lefebvre made it clear that he felt bound in conscience to do what he could do to continue the Catholic priesthood and that he was obeying God in going ahead with the consecrations (Cf. the Sermon of June 30, 1988, and Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican, p. 136). Hence, even if he had been wrong, there would be no subjective sin.

Most importantly, positive law is at the service of the natural and eternal law and ecclesiastical law is at that of the divine law (principle 8)  No “authority,” [principle 9]  can force a bishop to compromise in his teaching of Catholic faith or administering of Catholic sacraments. No “law,” can force him to cooperate in the destruction of the Church. With Rome giving no guarantee of preserving Catholic Tradition, Archbishop Lefebvre had to do what he could with his God-given episcopal powers to guarantee its preservation. This was his duty as a bishop.

Finally, the Church’s approval of the SSPX (question 2)  allows it what it needs for its own preservation. This includes the service of bishops who will guarantee to maintain Catholic Tradition.
Pope Benedict withdraws1988 excommunications>

Get the book: Most Asked Questions about the SSPX>
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

By
 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...
25 comments
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - the latest

By
+ JMJ Bishop Fellay gave a conference late last month and provided some more insight into the situation with Rome. There are comments on Deus Ex Machina Blog  and Hilary White has now entered the fray. What is one Catholic to think about all these opinions? What a Catholic is to think: With the Church! What does the Church think about obedience?  Virtue as it is? If there is no proximate occasion of sin and the other conditions are met, then one cannot resist the command.
17 comments
Read more

Unhinged Catholics ... are they on the right path? How would you know? (Updated 2x with Response to Comments)

By
+ JMJ (Originally Published Sept 7, 2019, Updated July 30, 2022, Updated August 13, 2022)  Based on Pope Francis' latest selections for Cardinals, the Church appears to be in deep winter. Just to be clear, I don't mean a Florida winter, I mean a Canadian winter.  In the last 35+ years as a Trad, I've seen my fair share of Catholics suffering from, and dying of, mental and spiritual hypothermia. When a Catholic pours themselves into the 'fight', neglects their spiritual life, doesn't deepen their understanding of the Catholic Faith, then there is a good chance that they will become embittered, frustrated, and angry. With their narrowed perspectives they risk being blindsided and smacked in the head with a metaphorical 2x4. Just look at the headlines on canon212 for some examples. Here's some others: "Diabolically Disoriented" Michael Matt Reveals His True Colors as a Pied Piper Leading "Traditionalists" (i.e., real Cat...
5 comments
Read more

THE NOVA VULGATA: Has the Vatican Officially Ditched St. Jerome’s Vulgate? - The Remnant

By
+ JMJ The hits keep on coming. My touchstone for assessing whether or not a bible translation is suspect is Luke 1:28.  I usually compare it to three handy references: The Vulgate, Douay and Knox translations. ( http://catholicbible.online/side_by_side/NT/Lk ) Here's the vulgate: Et ingressus angelus ad eam dixit: Ave gratia plena: Dominus tecum: benedicta tu in mulieribus. Here's the Douay: And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. Here's the Knox: Into her presence the angel came, and said, Hail, thou who art full of grace; the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women. Now, here we have the Nova Vulgata  (including the preceding and following verse): 27 ad virginem desponsatam viro, cui nomen erat Ioseph de domo David, et nomen virginis Maria. 28 Et ingressus ad eam dixit: “ Ave, gratia plena, Dominus tecum ”. 29 Ipsa autem turbata est in sermone eius et cog...
Post a Comment
Read more