From Fr. Z's blog

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cluny
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cluny

Guest
His comments are in brackets

Lifting of bishops’ excommunication doesn’t mean they are in full communion with church

By Jennifer Haselberger For The Catholic Spirit
Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Canon 1382 of the Code of Canon Law imposes the penalty of latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication on both the ordaining bishop and the ordinand when the consecration of a bishop occurs without a pontifical mandate. Only the Holy See can remove this penalty. On June 30, 1988, the penalty was incurred by Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta of the Fraternity of St. Pius X after they received illegitimate Episcopal consecration at the hands of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

On Dec. 15, 2008, the four men requested that the excommunication be lifted, citing the suffering that it has caused them and affirming their belief in the primacy of the Holy Father and their willingness to accept the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, Pope Benedict XVI, taking into account the “spiritual distress of the parties” and “trusting in their commitment . . . to spare no effort in exploring as yet unresolved questions,” authorized the removal of the penalty of excommunication. This became effective on Jan. 21, 2009, with the Decree of the Congregation for Bishops.

The decree frees the four bishops from the penalty of excommunication, but it does not change the status of the Society of St. Pius X, which is not recognized by the Roman Catholic Church. [Indeed, this is the case.] While no longer excommunicated as a result of their illegitimate Episcopal consecration, the four bishops are not clergy of the Roman Catholic Church and may not exercise ministry on behalf of the church.

All baptized Roman Catholics are obliged to maintain communion with the Roman Catholic Church. This communion is expressed through the bonds of the Profession of Faith, the sacraments and union with the Roman Catholic hierarchy. When someone does not profess all of the faith, or rejects one or more of the sacraments, or rejects the ecclesiastical governance of the hierarchy, they are no longer in full communion. The remission of the excommunication of the four bishops, which was an act of charity on the part of the Holy Father, did not bring the individual bishops or the Society of St. Pius X into full communion with the Catholic Church. That will only happen when the society demonstrates its recognition of and fidelity to the Magisterium and the authority of the pope, and is visibly united to the Roman Catholic Church. [Right. They can state all they want about their fidelity to the Holy Father, but formal adherence is another.]

Subsequent to the lifting of the excommunication, the Holy Father further clarified that Bishop Williamson’s viewpoints on the Holocaust are unacceptable and firmly rejected by the Holy See. Moreover, while regrettably Bishop Williamson’s statements do not result in the imposition of additional penalties under canon law, the Holy Father has specified that Bishop Williamson must unmistakably distance himself from such viewpoints before he can be admitted to Episcopal functions in the Roman Catholic Church.

Jennifer Haselberger is archdiocesan chancellor for canonical affairs and director of the Office of Conciliation.
 
That’s sound pretty balanced to me. True, the SSPX bishops are valid but they do also lack jurisdiction (same as the Eastern Orthodox). This lack of jurisdiction does have it’s consequences however. Both the confession and matrimony offered by the priest of the SSPX may be considered dubious at best even if the Society does try to claim “supplied jurisdiction” due to state of necessity.
 
By Jennifer Haselberger For The Catholic Spirit
Wednesday, 25 February 2009

Moreover, while regrettably Bishop Williamson’s statements do not result in the imposition of additional penalties under canon law…
This is an unfortunate way of putting things. Why could one possibly “regret” that canon law does not treat this matter?
 
That’s sound pretty balanced to me. True, the SSPX bishops are valid but they do also lack jurisdiction (same as the Eastern Orthodox). This lack of jurisdiction does have it’s consequences however. Both the confession and matrimony offered by the priest of the SSPX may be considered dubious at best even if the Society does try to claim “supplied jurisdiction” due to state of necessity.
Hey, I agree with Kearney. So it can happen 😉 .
 
Both the confession and matrimony offered by the priest of the SSPX may be considered dubious at best even if the Society does try to claim “supplied jurisdiction” due to state of necessity.
I know what you’re trying to say but you need to rephrase this somehow. No one “marries” the couple; they marry each other.
 
I know what you’re trying to say but you need to rephrase this somehow. No one “marries” the couple; they marry each other.
Perhaps it could be said that the blessing of the union is dubious. What ProVobis says is true - the sacrament of marriage/matrimony is not administered by the priest/bishop, it is administered by the husband and wife to each other.
 
Moreover, while regrettably Bishop Williamson’s statements do not result in the imposition of additional penalties under canon law
.
I guess she would propose that Canon Law be amended to say that anyone who questions a statistic pertaining to a secular historical event would be subject to excommunication? That is clearly what Abe Foxman wants but its unfortunate that a Catholic would feel that way. How about we put a little trust in the Holy Father? He can do his job without a new Canon to lean on.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProVobis View Post
I know what you’re trying to say but you need to rephrase this somehow. No one “marries” the couple; they marry each other.
Perhaps it could be said that the blessing of the union is dubious. What ProVobis says is true - the sacrament of marriage/matrimony is not administered by the priest/bishop, it is administered by the husband and wife to each other.

Not in the Byzantine tradition.

That is why deacons of the Byzantine churches cannot officiate at a wedding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top