1988 excommunications lifted or declared null?

[Dan_Daly]

You know, that is one of those wonderful points of law that Church historians have a field day with. The Easterners were valid and legitimate bishops, therefore, successors of the Apostles. Canon Law was starting to take shape. It almost happened simultaneously. This does not mean that there were no laws. Both sides had lots of laws.

In those old laws, bishops did excommunicate, which is rare today. One of the reasons for a valid excommunication is schism.

Form the Catholic point of view those Christians who called themselves Orthodox broke off from us. From their point of view those Christians who called themselves Eastern Catholic broke off from them, so they were automatically excommunicated.

A thousand years have passed. Pope Paul VI, who was himself a Doctor of Canon Law, did not see the need to rehash who had the right to excommunicate whom. By the 20th century every Catholic and every Orthodox was a child of either the Catholic or the Orthodox Church. Neither one had an ax to grind with the other.

For the record, I agree with your assesment that the Eastern excommunications of the West are not valid. Just thinking out loud. I’d say anyone who holds that they were valid, would open up all sorts of problems which naturally follow from that premise.

When he lifted the excommunications and anathemas against the Orthodox, they reciprocated by doing the same, lifting the excommunications and anathemas against the Western Church. The pope didn’t bother challenging this action on their part. To do so would have sent us back into another cold war between Catholic and Orthodox. The gesture toward reconciliation was far more important than the legality of it all.

As I started to say, it’s a point the Church historians and those who study Canon Law have a field day with. At this point, the Church doesn’t really care whether anyone believes the validity of the mutual excommunications or not, because it’s over. My tendency is to say that we did not break off from the Orthodox Christians and that the excommunication toward us was not valid, because we never committed the crime. There are historians who argue from the other side. Does it really change anything at this point?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Very interesting. Your response does open up a whole can of worms in regards to the possible canonizatoin of Archbishop Lefebvre which has come up a few times here. Some, including yourself Brother, have asserted that validly excommunicated person can not and have not been declared saints. If the Orthodox validly excommunicated the Western Church, it would be interesting to see which declared Saints if any fall under those excommunications.

For the record, I agree with your analysis Brother that the Eastern excommunications of the west were not valid. I would say, anyone who holds that they were, opens themselves up to all sorts of problems which naturally follow from that position.

Pax Christi and God bless

 

[JReducation]

Very interesting. Your response does open up a whole can of worms in regards to the possible canonizatoin of Archbishop Lefebvre which has come up a few times here. Some, including yourself Brother, have asserted that validly excommunicated person can not and have not been declared saints. If the Orthodox validly excommunicated the Western Church, it would be interesting to see which declared Saints if any fall under those excommunications.

For the record, I agree with your analysis Brother that the Eastern excommunications of the west were not valid. I would say, anyone who holds that they were, opens themselves up to all sorts of problems which naturally follow from that position.

Pax Christi and God bless

The good thing is that a canonization is an Ex Cathedra Decree. There is no doubt as to the validity of the canonization.

The reason that Bl. John Paul set it up so that the Archbishop’s case cannot come up, unless he’s overruled, was because of the break with a Primacy that the Archbishop acknowledged. In the case of the early Orthodox, they did not acnowledge the Primacy of Peter as we understand it. He was the first among equals, not the Vicar of Jsus Christ. Msgr Lefebvre died believing that the pope was the Vicar of Jesus Christ, but also accepting to be excommunicated from the Vicar of Christ. There is the glitch that Bl. John Paul could not reconcile.

As to postulating the Archbishop’s cause, people need to remember that only two bodies can do this. The Archbiishop was a religious. It would be up to his religious community to present the cause for consideration. To the best of my knowledge, he never left his religious community. The SSPX would have no canonical claim over him. If he had left his religious communnity and joined the SSPX, not just founded it, then there is still the issue of the SSPX’s canonical status. You can’t present a cause until you’re fully inside.

This is one of those cases where I believe that it’s better to leave it alone. If he’s in heaven, it does not matter to him whether the Church venerates him or not. To bring this up requires that eithre a bishop of a dioces give permission to even discuss it, which is difficult because he was not part of a diocese. He had already retired. Or a major superior must give permission to study the case. That would be the SVD. I don’t see the SVD General Superior opening this case.

I’m just expressing an opinion here based on the rules that have to be followed for a canonization. The pope can change those rules at the drop of a hat and it has been done. He can even make exceptions for certain people and not for others. That too has happened. The most famous exceptions were the Francscan and Dominican founders. No investiagation, no required miracles, no beatification, no proof a a life of heroic virtue. The popes said, “These were my friends. I saw their holiness with my own eyes, case closed. And he canonized.”

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Morgan_Hiver]

Br. JR,
So, the mutual excommunications of the Catholic and Orthodox that were lifted were only lifted for those living and not the dead, correct? All those that were not alive at the time are still excommunicated?