Skip to main content

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

Image
By

 +

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

My comments are as follows:

  • Following the doctrine of the Church it is not possible for the Catholic Church to promulgate a heretical or invalid rite.  
    • This forms the basis for sedevacantists who believe that the See of Peter has been vacant for decades or for some hundreds of years. This is an example of what happens when one arrogates to themselves the power to dictate who is and is not the Vicar of Christ.   This however creates other issues with doctrine, but we shan't sport with your intelligence by going through that again (Jane Austen quote).
    • Further the SSPX did examine the validity of the Rite of Episcopal consecration (see reference #9)
    • Suffice to say that I am confident that the rite itself is valid with the usual conditions.
  • It is important to understand that the conditional conferring of any sacrament is not to be done willy-nilly. Some seem to think it necessary due to their personal distrust of all things emanating from Rome and the Church.  It is true that much is bad, but not all.  Reason and facts need to guide decision making not the prejudice of someone like standing as judge, jury and executioner while sitting and writing at a keyboard.
  • The doubt of someone wholly unrelated to the person does not constitute a 'doubt'.  It is a personal doubt founded on fear, but not a real doubt stemming from knowledge.  What is needed for the validity of a sacrament is the correct form, matter and intention. The best person to understand if there was a defect in any of these is a witness of the event and in this case the best witness is the Bishop in question. 
  • One could go down the rabbits holes of the other actions of the consecrating bishops, but that would simply lead them to Wonderland where they will be lost wondering and being unable to make a real conclusion as to the validity - they can opine but it won't change the reality.
That's my thoughts for now.

Update #1

The following two comments were received and have been anonymized:

Hi Tradical
From Archbishop Lefebvre's sermon
Consecrations of June 30, 1988: 

You know my very dear brethren, you know that there cannot be priests without bishops. All these seminarians who are present here, if tomorrow the good Lord calls me back, and it will no doubt be without delay, well, these seminarians, from whom will they receive the sacrament of Holy Orders? From Conciliar bishops, whose sacraments are all dubious because we do not know exactly what their intentions are? It is not possible. Now which are the bishops who kept Tradition, who kept the sacraments as the Church gave them for twenty centuries until the Second Vatican Council? Well, it's Bishop De Castro Mayer and myself. I can't help it but that's the way it is.
God Bless

 Hi Tradical
This looks interesting
https://laportelatine.org/spiritualite/sermons/sermon-de-mgr-tissier-de-mallerais-le-29-juin-2016-a-econe

I think the commentator was referring to this passage:

Nous ne pouvons pas, évidemment, accepter ce nouveau rite d’ordination truqué qui fait peser des doutes sur la validité de nombreuses ordinations selon le nouveau rite.

Or, cette belle prière a été truquée, encore une fois, par l’Eglise conciliaire, le nouveau rite d’ordination où l’évêque présente le calice et la patène, avec le vin et l’hostie oui, en disant simplement : « Recevez les dons des fidèles pour les offrir à Dieu ». Alors qu’est-ce que c’est ? Vous recevez les dons des fidèles pour les offrir à Dieu ? C’est tout ? Nous ne recevons pas le don des fidèles, nous recevons le don de Dieu qui est Notre-Seigneur Jésus-Christ immolé sur la croix, pour l’offrir à nouveau à Dieu son Père. Voilà la vérité ! Nous ne pouvons pas, évidemment, accepter ce nouveau rite d’ordination truqué qui fait peser des doutes sur la validité de nombreuses ordinations selon le nouveau rite.

Deepl Translation:

 Now, this beautiful prayer has been rigged, again, by the conciliar Church, the new ordination rite where the bishop presents the chalice and paten, with the wine and host yes, simply saying, "Receive the gifts of the faithful to offer to God." So what is this? You receive the gifts of the faithful to offer them to God? Is that all? We do not receive the gift of the faithful, we receive the gift of God which is Our Lord Jesus Christ immolated on the cross, to offer it again to God his Father. This is the truth! We cannot, of course, accept this new contrived rite of ordination which casts doubt on the validity of many ordinations according to the new rite.

*** Tradical Thoughts ***

What I think the commentator is trying to suggest is that all ordinations and episcopal consecrations are dubious due to a defect in intention either in the priestly or episcopal consecration.  That is good because it avoids the problem that would pose for the sedevacantists.

I am a little surprised that the commentator didn't bring up the quotes of Innocentes, Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988 and others of Bishop TdM. 

Moving on ...

So the first thing is that these are generalizations and even Bishop TdM qualifies his statement with 'many'. It is a fallacy to take a generalized statement and apply it to specific cases.  This would be the whole to parts fallacy.

 Even Bishop Williamson, of infamous memory, didn't conditionally ordain all Novus Ordo priests who joined the SSPX. 

Even Archbishop Lefebvre didn't conditionally ordain every Novus Ordo priest and this was one of the issues that the 'Nine' took when they tried to take over the US district:

And so you have in fact conditionally ordained at least two priests in America: Father Sullivan and Father [. . .]. Indeed, you even asked Rev. Philip Stark to accept conditional ordination and he, as you yourself told us, adamantly refused And yet, after his refusal, you nevertheless allowed and continue to allow him to work with the Society; and he is not the only doubtfully ordained priest that you permit to do so — he is one of many.(Letter of the 'Nine' to Archibishop Lefebvre 1983)

The exception proves the rule ... or something like that.  There is more about this in the Archbishop's letter:

So, basically I'm in line with what the Archbishop said about specific cases.

Of course I suspect that the commentator will say that he changed his mind as this letter was written in 1983 and the later one in 1988. Well, sorry not sorry, there's nothing to suggest that the Archbishop would support the assertion that I think they are making.

Moving on ... 

P^3

 

  1.  Is the SSPX About to Consecrate New Bishops? - OnePeterFive 
  2. Bishop Huonder’s Testimony (1) - FSSPX.Actualités / FSSPX.News  
  3. If a NUKE can be gentle, this is it. VIDEO: A Bishop addresses the present crisis. ¡Hagan lío! | Fr. Z's Blog 
  4. Former Novus Ordo Diocesan Bishop Celebrates Chrism Mass in PiusX Seminary – gloria.tv  
  5. LES FEMMES - THE TRUTH: Play it again, Sam: The SSPX is NOT in Schism!  
  6. Pope Francis said SSPX priests 'are not schismatics': retired Swiss bishop - LifeSite  
  7. RORATE CÆLI: SSPX Communiqué: CDF Prefect Cardinal Ladaria meets Superior-General Fr. Pagliarani
  8. https://cathcon.blogspot.com/2023/05/apostolic-investigation-into-bishop.html 
  9. https://sspx.org/en/validity-new-rite-episcopal-consecrations 
  10. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Rite_of_the_Consecration_of_a_Bishop_in_the_Catholic_Church
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Count Capponi - RIP

By
+ JMJ I had heard of Count Capponi over the years and was happy to hear a voice crying in the wilderness. I suspect that his conscience was clearer than many. This part of the article caught my attention: Capponi defended the right of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to continue his work without the label “schismatic,” which term Capponi rejected, saying: “You cannot apply the standards of the new code of canon law and the mentality of the old code. According to the new code, Lefebvre could do what he did with a Catholic intention, and he did what he did in ‘sincerity’ and invoked the ‘state of emergency’ argument, which the new code permits. You might not like the new code, but it’s what governs the Church.” I know a few people who tried to stir up a fuss when the SSPX cited the New Code in one of the documents with Rome.  Yet, the truth is what it is --- the New Code was promulgated by a reigning Pope and flawed as it is ... there are some benefits to its liberality. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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

By
+ 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 ma...
Post a Comment
Read more

Those who return to the past are not outside the Church - Rorate Caeli

By
+ JMJ I had been thinking about putting together a post explaining some of the history of how the SSPX has arrived at its current position. Now I see that Rorate has posted a translated editorial that shows the roots of the SSPX principles. In reading these words, I see patterns and themes that were put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre decades ago. Perhaps his sight was clearer than most. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Fr. Burfitt on Fr. Pfeiffer's Attempted Consecration

By
 + JMJ   Amidst the shadows cast by the publication of Traditionis Custodes, I am working on a map of the 'resistance' splinters to put their reaction in contrast with that of the SSPX.  In the midst of this, I just came across Fr. Burfitt letter on the attempted consecration. Breaking it down (see below)  items 2 and 3 are key.  Just as the consecrating bishop is 'doubtful', even if he hadn't muffed the first attempt, Fr. Pfeiffer remain doubtful and therefore this impacts those men is attempts to 'ordain'. There were rumours that Fr. Pfeiffer was seeking episcopal consecration for years as he cast about for various bishops (also doubtful) to help him achieve this goal. I wonder how he convinced the 'doubtful' bishop to provide (twice) the doubtful consecration. What a mess!  This creates a danger to the souls of his followers and wonder where it will end. Will he go full sede and have himself 'elected' pontiff as others have done before him...
Post a Comment
Read more

SSPX Transfers

By
+ JMJ Eponymous flow posted the following list of transfers etc. Source: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2020/04/castling-of-leadership-at-sspx.html The departures Bishop Bernard Fellay, the third Superior General until 2018, leaves the General House in Menzingen and moves to the Seminary of St. Thomas Aquinas in the USA. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, suffering from ill health, is being referred to the Seminary of St. Pius X in Ecene as a retreat. Fr. Christian Thouvenot, until now Secretary General of the General House, becomes a professor at the seminary in Ecene. Fr. Franz Schmidberger, until now Rector at the Seminary of the Heart of Jesus in Zaitzkofen, moves to the district of Germany. Fr. Jürgen Wegner, until now district superior of the DISTRICT USA, moves to the district of Austria. Fr. Philippe Brunet, until now Superior of the Autonomous House of Spain-Portugal, becomes professor at the Seminary U.L.F. and co-saviour of La Reja in...
2 comments
Read more