+ 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...
Hi Tradical
ReplyDeleteB16 states in the LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE BENEDICT XVI
TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
CONCERNING THE REMISSION OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION
OF THE FOUR BISHOPS CONSECRATED BY ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE
that the consecrations were not legitimate, any descent Trad would have to be ignorant to believe that, he also says there was a danger of schism, not a schism. There was no danger at all. it is clear from the quote below that the excommunications were regarded by Rome as legitimate and therefore the lifting is explained below as not removing the guilt of the act. Anyone decent Trad who thinks this lifting is a nullification is also ignorant and cannot comprehend the explanation below. Notice in the title Archbishop Lefebvre's name was not included amongst the 4 bishops, did not state 6 bishops. Again any decent Trad would be ignorant to assume that ABL and BDCM had theirs lifted. If they were lifted and a Trad thanked B16 for it those trads would do the heroic Bishops (ABL and BDCM) a great dishonor by thanking B16 for stating they were guilty. The truth demands a nullification not a weakling's thank you for an evil gesture.
Quote from letter below
An episcopal ordination lacking a pontifical mandate raises the danger of a schism, since it jeopardizes the unity of the College of Bishops with the Pope. Consequently the Church must react by employing her most severe punishment – excommunication – with the aim of calling those thus punished to repent and to return to unity. Twenty years after the ordinations, this goal has sadly not yet been attained. The remission of the excommunication has the same aim as that of the punishment: namely, to invite the four Bishops once more to return. This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council. Here I return to the distinction between individuals and institutions. The remission of the excommunication was a measure taken in the field of ecclesiastical discipline: the individuals were freed from the burden of conscience constituted by the most serious of ecclesiastical penalties. This disciplinary level needs to be distinguished from the doctrinal level. The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church. There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved. In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Hi Anon,
ReplyDeleteI'm not certain if you are criticizing me or just generally upset.
These points have been discussed elsewhere on the blog, but a few points by way of explanation:
a. The information that I posted here are to demonstrate from a legal position, the best that they can accuse the SSPX is 'not in full communion.
b. The validity of the excommunication is a point that I've discussed here and from Rome's point of view the excommunications were imposed automatically by the performance of episcopal consecrations without papal mandate. From the SSPX and my point of view, there are a number of issues with the 'excommunication' as well as the decree.
c. Lastly,++Lefebvre and +de Mayer were not listed because they had died and excommunications cease at death.
P^3