Milingo and his bunch... excommunicated

[rien]

Immediacy? How long ago did he publically take a “wife” in the Moonie ceremony?? It was clear then that he was a screwbalI out for notoriety at the expense of the RCC. IIRC, the powers in Rome even let him back into the Vatican afterward! But that was under JPII. I wonder who’s financing his globe-trotting, RCC-embarrassing hijinks.

A new rule is needed for wayward bishops and archbishops; *one *strike and you’re out.

Exactly - in my diocese there are "affirming " parishes which are defacto in schism but nothing is done. And there are more of them over the years. One features a Goddess rosary.

I think the Vatican is afraid to crack down because of money - the large amount it gets from the US. But, in the end, better to have a small flock than a large flock which does not at all believe and continually draws Catholics away from orthodoxy as is happening here. Its a disaster and the new Pope has been as disappointing as the previous one in this regard. And is there any other regard?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

How so?

This African bishop clearly has no respect for the celibate priesthood. He is a modernist, plain and simple.

While in the case of the SSPX it could be argued that Archbishop Lefebvre had no choice but consecrate new Bishops to ensure that the SSPX, and traditional Catholicism, would not die when he did. Now, granted Cardinal Ratzinger and other senior officials were working for his cause attempting to get Papal approval for these new Bishops and Lefebvre got impatient with the red tape (or was coerced as some may say) and went ahead with the Episcopal ordinations, but the fact remains that the SSPX was at one time loyal to the Holy See, even if some of the more liberal Bishops did not think so, and because of them in many ways the Church allowed for the use of the Traditional Roman Rite.

You used the term faithful. Disobedience is never faithful. That’s my only quibble. And it can’t be argued that he had no choice. If you’ve come to believe that’s so, Caesar, then I’m grieved, because I can only imagine the sources from which you are getting your information (it isn’t the Holy See). And it’s illogical to say that the SSPX “was at one time loyal to the Holy See” in this context. Archbishop Milingo was, as well. Neither perservered in that loyalty, however. You make the observation that the one Archbishop is a “modernist.” Maybe (personally, I think he’s simply very, very deeply disturbed, profoundly neurotic if not out and out psychotic). I make the observation that the other is an “excommunicate.” If I’m correct (and I’m only guessing by his bizzare behavior) and Milingo is nutters, who do you reckon will have the greater culpability, Milingo or Lefebreve?

 

[Caesar]

You used the term faithful. Disobedience is never faithful. That’s my only quibble. And it can’t be argued that he had no choice. If you’ve come to believe that’s so, Caesar, then I’m grieved, because I can only imagine the sources from which you are getting your information (it isn’t the Holy See). And it’s illogical to say that the SSPX “was at one time loyal to the Holy See” in this context. Archbishop Milingo was, as well. Neither perservered in that loyalty, however. You make the observation that the one Archbishop is a “modernist.” Maybe (personally, I think he’s simply very, very deeply disturbed, profoundly neurotic if not out and out psychotic). I make the observation that the other is an “excommunicate.” If I’m correct (and I’m only guessing by his bizzare behavior) and Milingo is nutters, who do you reckon will have the greater culpability, Milingo or Lefebreve?

Actually, in post 9 and in post 19, I never used the word faithful. I called the SSPX (or, at least what the SSPX used to be) loyal- certainly they have changed since Archbishop Lefebvre died (now view Vatican II and the Pauline Mass as invalid, and they harbor Sedevacantists- in fact one of the Bishops ordained by Lefebvre broke from the SSPX and founded the Sedevacantist SSPV), but at one time the SSPX was completely loyal to the Holy See. Moreover, today they hold that their status is not schismatic, that the actions of Lefebvre did not incur automatic excommunication and that the Holy See never officially issued one. The SSPX also upholds the teachings of the Church.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

but at one time the SSPX was completely loyal to the Holy See. Moreover, today they hold that their status is not schismatic, that the actions of Lefebvre did not incur automatic excommunication and that the Holy See never officially issued one. The SSPX also upholds the teachings of the Church.

I ask your pardon if I misread you. The point remains, however, that “at one time,” Milingo, too, was completely loyal to the Holy See (or so we must subjectively, really objectively, assume), though he certainly is not now.

“Moreover, today they hold…” True enough, they do. And Anglicans maintain they have valid orders, and Baptists insist on the full immersion of adults as being the only normative baptism, and the Orthodox insist that while there may exist for Rome a primacy of honor, there is not and never was a primacy of rule. On each and every one of those other issues, the Church has firmly and consistently taught otherwise. It doesn’t matter what the SSPX “holds” as regards the truth of their status in the Church. The Archbishop WAS excommunicated and died in that state. The Holy See confirms it.

As to Milingo, we must pray that he, while he has time, will see the grave error and sin he’s fallen into and return.

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

Immediacy? How long ago did he publically take a “wife” in the Moonie ceremony??

DWPC, please read my complete sentence. I said: “I for one have to say I’m impressed at the immediacy of the response to his latest escapade” {bolding mine}

 

[DWPC]

DWPC, please read my complete sentence. I said: “I for one have to say I’m impressed at the immediacy of the response to his latest escapade” {bolding mine}

Point taken…but I still believe he should have had his wings clipped with the first offense.

 

[Adonis33]

These ordinations are invalid because the married state is a canonical impediment to ordination, & he lacks the jurisdiction required to empower him to dispense those whom he has attempted to ordain from this impediment.​

Result: they are not bishops.

It’s all very sad - no one is any the better when these things happen; not him, nor the others excommunicated, nor the Church. ##

Interesting - thank you.

I didn’t event think of this.