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

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

By
+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu
Post a Comment
Read more

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

By
 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too thin
Post a Comment
Read more

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

By
I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent wrot
Post a Comment
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Gary Campbell - Former SSPX Priest

By
 + JMJ I've come across Gary Campbell's articles on Where Peter Is and noticed that he seems to have very strong biases, assumptions and reactions to anything that runs against these. Driven by curiosity I have found a copy of his letter to Bishop Fellay explaining his reasons for leaving the SSPX only five years after his ordination in Winona. I was surprised to learn that I was present for his ordination. Given this, I was interested in reviewing his letter to Bishop Fellay. There will be two versions in this post. The unblocked and blocked letter. The unblocked is, obviously the full letter. The block, meaning unnecessary text will be blocked out, is a technique I use to remove ancillary text while focusing on key phrases. After completing my read, I believe that the root of much of what caused the issues with Fr. Campbell could be the seeds of the 'resistance' that, when the same perceptions were challenged by continued negotiations with Rome resulted in the necessa
Post a Comment
Read more