Excommunication of the SSPX Bishops to be lifted!?!

[BobCatholic]

The excommunications simply never happened, and the Pope is now set to acknowledge this.

Lifting an excommunication does not mean it never happened. You can’t lift something nonexistent. Trust me on this, I cannot lift a living unicorn.

 

[Christus_Rex_1]

If the excommunication is being lifted it means they were correct in the first place. You cannot lift something that never happened.

Yes, but don’t forget the rumor from a few weeks ago, which said that there sat, on the Pope’s desk, a decree stating that the excommunications were null and void due to a defect in form.

If that is what it says, it is not a true lifting of the excommunication but a decree stating that they were never valid to begin with. We’ll have to wait and see what the decree actually says. And there are now more sources reporting the news. It looks like there may be something to it. We’ll see.

 

[Rogerteder]

I know I’m going to get flack for this, but “technically” consecrating Bishops without the permission of the Pope is not in and of itself, a schismatic act (that is to say, it doesn’t automatically incur an excommunication).

I think the issue wasn’t the number of Bishops in the Church, but the number of Bishops in the Church that would have been willing to celebrate the Traditional Mass. Because Archbishop Lefebvre believed that Tradition was going to be lost, he mad the determination that there existed a state of emergency.

Whether you choose to agree with the fact that a true “state of emergency” existed or not, that’s fine. But I think its worth clearing up the fact that he didn’t simply consecrate Bishops randomly or without explanation.

I agree that it is debatable whether the Society is in schism. However, it is not debatable that the Pope(John Paul II) excommunicated Lefebvre, and the Bishops consecrated.

Just read the Pope’s words. Do I really need to paste them here?

 

[Rogerteder]

I know I’m going to get flack for this, but “technically” consecrating Bishops without the permission of the Pope is not in and of itself, a schismatic act (that is to say, it doesn’t automatically incur an excommunication).

I think the issue wasn’t the number of Bishops in the Church, but the number of Bishops in the Church that would have been willing to celebrate the Traditional Mass. Because Archbishop Lefebvre believed that Tradition was going to be lost, he mad the determination that there existed a state of emergency.

Whether you choose to agree with the fact that a true “state of emergency” existed or not, that’s fine. But I think its worth clearing up the fact that he didn’t simply consecrate Bishops randomly or without explanation.

anyone can have an explanation—So what if Bishops werent willing to sanction the Latin Mass. The Church existed for years before there was a Tridentine Mass. If what you are saying is true then anyone can say they believed there is an emergency, SLIPPERY SLOPE!!

 

[Christus_Rex_1]

I agree that it is debatable whether the Society is in schism. However, it is not debatable that the Pope(John Paul II) excommunicated Lefebvre, and the Bishops consecrated.

Just read the Pope’s words. Do I really need to paste them here?

Actually, he didn’t excommunicate him. He said the Archbishop incurred an ipso facto excommunication. That is different than John Paul II excommunicating him.

When you read what canon law says about incurring an ipso facto excommunication, there are a lot of qualifications, and a lot of things that nullify it. For example, if a person truly thinks what they are doing is necessary (even if they are wrong), they do not incur the excommunication.

The SSPX has always argued that the Archbishop acted out of, what he believed to be, a necessity. Whether you agree with them or not about there being a state of necessity, I don’t think too many people believe that Archbishop Lefebvre did not truly believe he was acting out of necessity; and if he was, the excommunication was null and void from day one due to a defect in form - which is what the SSPX has always said.

 

[maurin]

anyone can have an explanation—

Including you…and explanations are like common sense, though not everyone makes the best use of what God gave them.

 

[Christus_Rex_1]

Here’s the latest from rorate-caeli:

All signs now seem to indicate that the removal, withdrawal, or annulment of the excommunications of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre (+ 1991), Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer (+ 1991), and of the four Bishops consecrated by them for the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX) in Ecône, Switzerland, on June 30, 1988 is imminent. The Papal act on the matter has almost certainly been signed, and it will be made public shortly: read Surprise 2 - UPDATED; and Surprise 1.

RORATE CÆLI has been covering this matter since its beginning. Here is a guide of posts for those who wish to understand the situation.

1. The Events of 1988. The events which led to the consecrations of June 30, 1988, and to the subsequent reaction by the Holy See are summed up in two posts: 20 years on: Reliving the Events of 1988, Part I and Part II.
2. The Process of Regularization of the FSSPX. The process is clearly following the One-Two-Three Strategy, first explained by this blog here. The first step was accomplished, first, by the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, and will be completed with the removal of the excommunications.
3. Rumors on the papal decree. Rumors regarding the removal of excommunications have been reported at least since the Jubilee discussions of the Holy See and the SSPX, begun during the Pontificate of John Paul II. The current procedure for the removal of the excommunications began in earnest in the audience granted by Pope Benedict to the Superior General of the FSSPX, Bishop Fellay, in August 29, 2006.

**As Fellay himself described,

At a certain point [during the audience], the Pontiff himself put the matter on the table: pondering on the state of the Church in countries such as France and Germany, Benedict XVI recognized as perfectly well-grounded the question of the subsistence of the state of necessity in such countries… [sic] The Pope said this, not we.**

In November 2007, a few months after Summorum Pontificum, Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, declared that the lifting of the excommunication weighing on the bishops of the Priestly Fraternity of St. X since 1988 “can happen” but that it definitely “depends on them."

Castrillón and Fellay set the final process in motion in their meeting of June 4, 2008, when the conditions agreed by both parties were written down. Fellay soon sent the official response of the Fraternity.

In late October 2008, the Fraternity launched its Rosary Crusade for the withdrawal of the excommunications, and in early November it was rumored that the decree was already on the Pope’s desk. (More information on the events of the past few months in posts labeled Decision 2008.)

 

[JPUSC]

That’s good news. If the SSPX supporters and sedevacantists come back to the Church, then Christ’s Body will be healed one division at a time. Church relations with the Orthodox and Protestants are good too.

 

[Sir_Anthony]

Can the excommunication on Williamson stand? I mean he is one of those conspiracy theory nuts that certainly the Church does not want, then again I guess he can’t be much worst than Cardinal Mahoney.

 

[Christus_Rex_1]

That’s good news. If the SSPX supporters and sedevacantists come back to the Church, then Christ’s Body will be healed one division at a time. Church relations with the Orthodox and Protestants are good too.

But the SSPX never left. It was all an illusion. Just as it was an illusion that the old Mass had been abrogated and required a special indult.

 

[Benno]

I don’t know if I’m alone in thinking this way, but if the excommunications are “lifted” then I’ll see that as a very positive thing. Some of the more extreme Society folk will probably split off into a new group led by Bishop Williamson (that’s been coming for a while) and some of the more extreme anti-SSPX folks among Catholics will have to stop thinking so black and white, and maybe even be more open to learning from what’s good in the Society.

If, on the other hand, the excommunications are declared null and void, to be honest I think my faith in the Church will be shaken. I know it shouldn’t be, but it will be. To me, and no doubt to many SSPXers, there’s a huge difference between the Church accepting them back and .saying it was wrong to discipline them in the first place. To say that they shouldn’t have been disciplined in the first place seems to me to be absolutely scandalous and wrong.

 

[BayernAnhaenger]

I for one shall be praying that this is true!

 

[Dauphin]

If, on the other hand, the excommunications are declared null and void, to be honest I think my faith in the Church will be shaken. I know it shouldn’t be, but it will be. To me, and no doubt to many SSPXers, there’s a huge difference between the Church accepting them back and .saying it was wrong to discipline them in the first place. To say that they shouldn’t have been disciplined in the first place seems to me to be absolutely scandalous and wrong.

A recognition that no excommunication was incurred under Canon Law is not a vindication.

Many sins don’t cause a person to incur automatic excommunication, but that doesn’t make them right.

 

[Extempore]

That’s good news. If the SSPX supporters and sedevacantists come back to the Church, then Christ’s Body will be healed one division at a time. Church relations with the Orthodox and Protestants are good too.

I think it will take much more to bring the sedevacantists back since (amongst other things) they don’t currently recognize the authority of the Pope (to be distinguished from the SSPX). So too with the Orthodox and the Protestants. These will be a slow process that may not occur for a very long time, but I agree that we should pray for a resolution.

If, on the other hand, the excommunications are declared null and void, to be honest I think my faith in the Church will be shaken. I know it shouldn’t be, but it will be. To me, and no doubt to many SSPXers, there’s a huge difference between the Church accepting them back and .saying it was wrong to discipline them in the first place. To say that they shouldn’t have been disciplined in the first place seems to me to be absolutely scandalous and wrong.

I am sorry to hear that. I am not sure why it would be so scandalous if Rome chooses to recognize that there was, in fact, a legitimate state of emergency within the Church at the time the consecrations were made.

As for the SSPX, I am confident that they will agree to be regularized if doing so will not require them to compromise traditional Catholic doctrine and practices. As for split-offs, that may happen though I am confident and hopeful that such a thing will not be widespread.

 

[palmas85]

Like I said I’d change my mind. It won’t happen though.

It is good to know that you are in the inner circle that knows these things before they happen. You sound kind of like all those who swore up and down that the Holy Father would never, ever free up the restrictions on the Traditional Mass and then seemed shocked and scandalized when he did,.

As for me, I’ll hold off on the bombastic prophetic statements until the truth, whatever it is comes out.

I will say this though, if the Holy Father does indeed lift it or declare it null and void or whatever he may do, then I will be really interested in how the SSPX, for lack of a better word, haters, on this forum will react.

It will be one heck of a show, I’ll guarantee you that:thumbsup:

 

[BayernAnhaenger]

It is good to know that you are in the inner circle that knows these things before they happen. You sound kind of like all those who swore up and down that the Holy Father would never, ever free up the restrictions on the Traditional Mass and then seemed shocked and scandalized when he did,.

As for me, I’ll hold off on the bombastic prophetic statements until the truth, whatever it is comes out.

I will say this though, if the Holy Father does indeed lift it or declare it null and void or whatever he may do, then I will be really interested in how the SSPX, for lack of a better word, haters, on this forum will react.

It will be one heck of a show, I’ll guarantee you that:thumbsup:

Uh oh!

I need popcorn!

 

[jakobsprenger]

YAY. We need a Motivational-type poster…Pope Bendedict XVI; Healing the Church - one division at a time. Or something…wish I wasn’t such an e-tard or I’d make one myself.

And isn’t there a SSPV society as well??

 

[pnewton]

Trust Me!!! Lefebvre Was Clearly Wrong!!! The Excommunications Will Not Be Lifted. Stop Giving Latria To A Disobedient French Archbishop!!!

Book It It Aint Gonna Happen!!

How sad. This seems almost jubilant at a situation that at the very least would suggest mercy be extended. It is also very ignorant and presumptious. I put no stock in this rumor until Rome speaks. Unnames sources have been wrong more often than not since I have been posting here. But I take no delight in the division.

On a side note, does anyone here really thing that the SSPX leadership is willing to relinquish their authority and submit once again to Rome for instruction, assignment, being under a local ordinary, etc.?

 

[I_Believe]

Trust Me!!! Lefebvre Was Clearly Wrong!!! The Excommunications Will Not Be Lifted. Stop Giving Latria To A Disobedient French Archbishop!!!

Book It It Aint Gonna Happen!!

You are terrified aren’t you ?

 

[I_Believe]

I have little doubt that if this happens it is due to the rosary campaign.
*
Edit: Fixed grammer mistake*

Prayer changes things