S
ServusChristi
Guest
Robert Sungenis:
“…if the pope says there was an excommunication, then there was an excommunication. It doesn’t matter what form the excommunication is manifested. The pope can use any means he wants to make the excommunication valid. Vatican I says we cannot contravene a disciplinary decision of the pope. Apparently, the pope thinks that the latae sententiae is sufficient, and that’s where the matter rests.”
“Telling Arch. Lefebvre not to consecrate four bishops without the pope’s approval is not a command to do evil. If anything is “evil” it is a bishop who presumes upon himself to contravene a direct order of the pope and disobey canon law. It is also “evil” for the SSPX to invoke the “necessity” argument when the pope has given no indication to them that he has accepted it, nor have they sought his will on this, for the last 16 years.”
“…When they decided to contravene his direct authority, the pope had no choice but to consider it a threat to the papacy and its authority, and that simply could not stand. In that sense Archbishop Lefebvre did us a great disservice.”
“Such hairsplitting arguments only show that Lefebvre and the SSPX are not willing to abide by the pope’s intention. They know precisely what the pope wanted, but they decided to go against it. That is very clear.”
“God blesses obedience, not presumptuousness. As it stands now, the only thing God has to look upon is a group of schismatics who have assaulted the very thing that makes the Catholic Church what it is. All the devotion and holiness in the world is not going to make an excuse for contravening a direct papal order regarding who has the right to consecrate bishops. If the pope does not have the right (whether he or his decision is good, bad or indifferent) to say who can consecrate and who cannot consecrate, then we have no Catholic Church, and you are living in an illusion.”
“…if the pope says there was an excommunication, then there was an excommunication. It doesn’t matter what form the excommunication is manifested. The pope can use any means he wants to make the excommunication valid. Vatican I says we cannot contravene a disciplinary decision of the pope. Apparently, the pope thinks that the latae sententiae is sufficient, and that’s where the matter rests.”
“Telling Arch. Lefebvre not to consecrate four bishops without the pope’s approval is not a command to do evil. If anything is “evil” it is a bishop who presumes upon himself to contravene a direct order of the pope and disobey canon law. It is also “evil” for the SSPX to invoke the “necessity” argument when the pope has given no indication to them that he has accepted it, nor have they sought his will on this, for the last 16 years.”
“…When they decided to contravene his direct authority, the pope had no choice but to consider it a threat to the papacy and its authority, and that simply could not stand. In that sense Archbishop Lefebvre did us a great disservice.”
“Such hairsplitting arguments only show that Lefebvre and the SSPX are not willing to abide by the pope’s intention. They know precisely what the pope wanted, but they decided to go against it. That is very clear.”
“God blesses obedience, not presumptuousness. As it stands now, the only thing God has to look upon is a group of schismatics who have assaulted the very thing that makes the Catholic Church what it is. All the devotion and holiness in the world is not going to make an excuse for contravening a direct papal order regarding who has the right to consecrate bishops. If the pope does not have the right (whether he or his decision is good, bad or indifferent) to say who can consecrate and who cannot consecrate, then we have no Catholic Church, and you are living in an illusion.”
