Pope Lifts Excommunications of SSPX Bishops

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wolseley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The healing of this schism is an internal matter for the Church. The shepherd may bring his straying sheep back into the fold; it’s part of the job description.

A conservative group like SSPX will naturally attract right-wing people. A political-historical opinion of one bishop, offensive or no, is just that, an opinion; it’s not a matter of Catholic doctrine, faith or morals.

Some people also deny the moon-landings or the details of 9/11. All you’d need to do is walk them through the actual evidence. In the case of the moon landings, it’s the physics of the moon that foxes uneducated people.

A great many people find the mere existence of the Catholic Church offensive. I think John Stuart Mill, in ‘On Liberty’ said that causing offence was no basis for legal action, as everything is offensive to someone.

If a bishop had said that homosexuality was super and pride a terrific emotion, I dare say he would be feted in the media these days. (Indeed, wasn’t there an episcopalian gay bishop in a prominent role at President Obama’s inauguration, or did I dream that?)
 
The SSPX and their attitudes towards Jews:

for killing Jesus] is the punishment of blindness to the things of God and eternity, of deafness to the call of conscience and to the love of good and hatred of evil which is the basis of all moral life, of spiritual paralysis, of total preoccupation with an earthly kingdom."
– The Angelus, March 2004 (Reposted on SSPX USA Web site)

“[T]he Antichrist will be Jewish….The devil will not fail to make use of their blindness to foist the Antichrist upon them. Christ, whom they have rejected, is the Truth. Thus the curse of St. Paul will apply to the Jews…”
– From “Is Anti-Christ Coming?” by Rev. Fr. Emmanuel Herkel, SSPX

“The Jewish people, once a mystery of goodness, is now changed into a mystery of iniquity. It is no longer Isaac, but Ishmael. No longer Jacob, but Esau. No longer Abel, but Cain.”
– “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” By Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“Judaism is inimical to all nations in general, and in a special manner to Christian nations…. The Jewish people, if it has not converted to Christianity, will, even if it does not wish to, seek to ruin Christianity… Christendom and Jewry are destined inevitably to meet everywhere without reconciliation or mixing. It represents in history the eternal struggle of Lucifer against God, of darkness against the Light, of the flesh against the spirit.”
– “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“As once they treated Christ, ever since, to persecute Christianity is their theological preoccupation. This theological law is stronger than all human plans and expedients. The Jewish people realizes this law. The law contained in the Talmud, which governs Jews, orders enmity with Christians….The Talmud got particularly virulent after Christianity appeared. Insolent and sacrilegious infamies against Christ and Christians were written into it, which is why copies were burnt by order of Christian rulers and popes.”
– “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magaine).

“A Catholic prelate who visits and prays at a synagogue betrays Jesus Christ, as the visit grants public legitimacy to a religion that holds Jesus Christ in disdain, believing Him to be a liar and deceiver.”
– Ecumenical Archbishop Levada to Head Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, by John Vennari
 
As early as 200 the Church author Tertullian remarked that as Catholic faith goes up, so Jewish power goes down, while as Catholic faith goes down, so Jewish power goes up. In the Catholic Middle Ages the Jews were relatively impotent to harm Christendom, but as Catholics have grown over the centuries since then weaker and weaker in the faith, especially since Vatican II, so the Jews have come closer and closer to fulfilling their substitute-Messianic drive towards world dominion."
– “WTC – The Scourge of Sin” by Bishop Richard Williamson,
October 1, 2001

“Unquestionably one main grievance of Arabs against the United States, provoking their terrorists to lash out as we have seen, is the United States’ one-sided favoring of Israel over the Arabs for the last forty years. But each time the United States attempts to act even-handedly towards the Arabs, Jewish power inside the United States - e.g. virtual control of finance and the media - blocks the attempt, and the United States returns to oppressing the Arabs.”
– “WTC – The Scourge of Sin” by Bishop Richard Williamson,
October 1, 2001

"On the political level, we can be virtually certain that the vile media will not tell us the full story. There is serious reason to believe–that in 1898, it was not the Spaniards who sank the “USS Maine”; that in 1917, it was not the Germans who set up the “Lusitania” as a target; that in 1941 it was not the Japanese who set up Pearl Harbor for attack; that in 1963 it was not Lee Harvey Oswald who killed President Kennedy. In 1990 it was certainly not Saddam Hussein who promised not to react if he invaded Kuwait. In 1994 it was certainly not Timothy McVeigh’s van exploding outside the Alfred Murrah building in Oklahoma City which brought the front of the building down. In 2001…? Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic, now Osama bin Laden, from CIA-assets to personal enemies of the American people --how many more times will the trick work?

“Politically, behind the Arab terrorists are most likely the would-be architects of the New World Order, who have long been using the United States as an instrument to achieve their control of the world. Long ago they planned three World Wars to achieve their aim. It is they who provoked the sinking of the “Lusitania” and the attack on Pearl Harbor to bring the USA into the first two. Now they seem to be using the Arabs also. Humanly, they are clever. They are even diabolically clever.”
– “WTC – The Scourge of Sin” by Bishop Richard Williamson, October 1, 2001

"[Jews are] unable to perpetrate evil except also in a great, a terrible way. We will discuss four of these ways….
  1. The Jewish people persecute Christendom….
  2. The Jewish people conspire against the Christian State….
  3. The Jewish people win control of property by usury….
  4. Jews are known to kill Christians….
    As grisly as they are, these four accusations can be documented in every period and country where Jews live with Christians."
    – From “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (Originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).
“[T]hough the Jewish people must be protected, it was recognized [by the Church that] it was dangerous enough to be isolated into its own neighborhoods. Was this an offense against its natural human rights? —No, for this people refuses to assimilate itself into the country that gives it hospitality, and lives by Talmudic laws contrary to the common good.”
– From “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (Originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“[T]he Jewish people hope to exercise their astuteness to realize their ancient dream of a world empire.”
– From “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (Originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“Judaism has created international capitalism to gain international wealth…. Beyond its financial influence, Judaic thinking comes to dominate the cultural and educational fields. The pattern repeats: Jews get into posts of influence, and submit society to a high degree of corruption in ways of thinking and acting, which leads to a reaction of public opinion against them.”

– From “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (Originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“God puts in men’s hands the ‘Protocols of the Sages of Sion’ and the ‘Rakovsky Interview,’ if men want to know the truth, but few do.”
– Bishop Richard Williamson, May 1, 2000

“[Jews are] a wild solitary people, rebellious against all law, hostile to all fraternity, shut against every beautiful, noble and generous ideal; a miserable little nation made bitter by isolation, made brutish by a narrow education, demoralized and corrupted by an unjustifiable pride.”
“The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (quoting from l’Antisemitisme by Bernard Lazare, 1894. Originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).
 
If Catholics are taught anything it is to forgive

This is an important time in the history of our church

Remember St Paul and how he persecuted Christians and how God used him to His glory?

God and the pope will handle this…I have no fear…no one is beyond forgiveness and repentence
 
The pope has managed to give legitimacy to the views of the SSPX with their classic Catholic anti-semitism against the Jews (deicide, the Jew as cursed and rejecting “god”, the Jew as undermining Christianity '[Jewish naturalism"], given legitimacy to Holocaust denial and set back Vatican II reforms toward Jews as well as Catholic-Jewish dialog fifty years. Quite an accomplishment, especially at a time when anti-semitism is reaching levels unprecendented since the 1930’s. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
I’ll address just one point, dear chosen people: Bp Williamson spoke out of turn, and has given his enemies a great stick to beat him with by the classic tactic of ‘guilt-by-association’. he has done huge damage to the Trad cause, and allowed the media to put the slant on it that they have. You notice, of course, that he made these comments last November; his enemies in the media saved it up and ran the story last week: 'Timing is everything in Politics".
At this point I am not concerned to comment on Bp Williamson; but I must protest at your blaming the Holy Father. This Process of Lifting the Excommunications has been rumbling on for many years. The HF cannot possibly have known about Bp W’s TV interview. Bp W’s comments, whatever else can be said about them, would not have constituted grounds for witholding the lifting of the decree.
 
Hello again,

Just a couple points. First, I would like to know of a few names of among the “many who make” the point you are making. Second, in order to make sense of any canon we have to read it in context. So, the canon speaks of someone being coerced by grave fear…or due to necessity. This would presume some external force acting on a person, right? At least, in the case at hand, you say the archbishop was coerced by some necessity. Ok, fine. Then, the burden is (was) on the archbishop to demonstrate the reality of this necessity and that it coerced him to act.

Also, if in July of 1988, the archbishop was claiming that he was acting out of necessity and attempted to prove it to the Holy Father, he apparently failed to do so. That is why the excommunication was declared. Certainly, ecclesiastical penal law gives a wide latitude to the subjective state of the “offender.” This is merciful and just. Nevertheless, simply claiming necessity or ignorance or whatever other mitigating factor you choose is not enough when it comes to an actual ecclesiastical trial. You need proof, like in any other juridical system.

I can’t speak for others but I am not denying anything. I am asking for a clear demonstration that this supposed necessity actually existed and forced the archbishop to ordain other bishops. It seems to me that a tipping point is the “protocol” that the archbishop and Cardinal Ratzinger agreed to in May of 1988. If there was no necessity in May, why was there one a month later?

If you haven’t read it, I again suggest you read the commentary I linked to earlier. It is more convincing than these ramblings of mine.

Thanks for your time.
Dan
tnx again for the debate.
I’ll comment again on the point at issue when i’ve looked at your link more closely; in the meantime:

Roman canonists declare that the “excommunications” in this case are null and void
The following Roman canonists have publicly declared their finding that any purported “excommunications” in this case are null and void under canon law:

Castillo Cardinal Lara, J.C.D., President of the Pontifical Commission for Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law
Edward Idris Cardinal Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity
Alfons Cardinal Stickler, former Prefect of the Vatican Archives and Library
Fr. Gerard E. Murray, J.C.D., of the United States
Fr. Patrick Valdini, J.C.D., Dean of the Faculty of Canon Law
Fr. Rudolf Kaschewski of Germany
Count Neri Capponi, D.Cn.L., Ll.D, Professor of Canon Law
Professor Geringer, J.C.D.

It should be noted that the question of excommunication does not come up under the traditional Code of Canon Law (1917), which does not provide for the penalty of excommunication for the consecration of a bishop without papal approval.
(that, of course, is not why they reach the conclusion they have, but it is noteworthy. NB that the Old code had, i think, 51 categories of offence meriting excommunication. the New Code has 5 or 6. The old list makes interesting reading. Nearly all Catholic School Boards would be excommunicated, for example.)
 
**OK, all those quotes above appear to emanate from about four people max. **

When I hear people talk about the Zionist Conspiracy and the Knights Templar and such, I just turn off. I’d guess a lot of Catholics do too.

If you had a bag of magic stones which, when throwing them out the window, would hit only people who believed in one conspiracy theory or another, you might be surprised how many people in your neighbourhood would get a bump on the head.
**
We also have people in our Church who think homosexuality, contraception, socialism, ecological activism and eating carrot cake are just dandy. We don’t exclude them either,** 'though we take issue with the first two items.
 
The SSPX and their attitudes towards Jews:

for killing Jesus] is the punishment of blindness to the things of God and eternity, of deafness to the call of conscience and to the love of good and hatred of evil which is the basis of all moral life, of spiritual paralysis, of total preoccupation with an earthly kingdom."
– The Angelus, March 2004 (Reposted on SSPX USA Web site)

“[T]he Antichrist will be Jewish….The devil will not fail to make use of their blindness to foist the Antichrist upon them. Christ, whom they have rejected, is the Truth. Thus the curse of St. Paul will apply to the Jews…”
– From “Is Anti-Christ Coming?” by Rev. Fr. Emmanuel Herkel, SSPX

“The Jewish people, once a mystery of goodness, is now changed into a mystery of iniquity. It is no longer Isaac, but Ishmael. No longer Jacob, but Esau. No longer Abel, but Cain.”
– “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” By Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“Judaism is inimical to all nations in general, and in a special manner to Christian nations…. The Jewish people, if it has not converted to Christianity, will, even if it does not wish to, seek to ruin Christianity… Christendom and Jewry are destined inevitably to meet everywhere without reconciliation or mixing. It represents in history the eternal struggle of Lucifer against God, of darkness against the Light, of the flesh against the spirit.”
– “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magazine).

“As once they treated Christ, ever since, to persecute Christianity is their theological preoccupation. This theological law is stronger than all human plans and expedients. The Jewish people realizes this law. The law contained in the Talmud, which governs Jews, orders enmity with Christians….The Talmud got particularly virulent after Christianity appeared. Insolent and sacrilegious infamies against Christ and Christians were written into it, which is why copies were burnt by order of Christian rulers and popes.”
– “The Mystery of the Jewish People in History” by Rev. Frs. Michael Crowdy & Kenneth Novak (originally printed in the April 1997 issue of The Angelus magaine).

“A Catholic prelate who visits and prays at a synagogue betrays Jesus Christ, as the visit grants public legitimacy to a religion that holds Jesus Christ in disdain, believing Him to be a liar and deceiver.”
– Ecumenical Archbishop Levada to Head Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, by John Vennari
Well, the point at issue was whether the generally-quoted account of the Holocaust is accurate.
 
**
We also have people in our Church who think homosexuality, contraception, socialism, ecological activism and eating carrot cake are just dandy. We don’t exclude them either,** 'though we take issue with the first two items.
Well, I would with the carrot cake too - but mostly 'cause I’d want to eat all of it myself 😛
 
tnx again for the debate.
I’ll comment again on the point at issue when i’ve looked at your link more closely; in the meantime:

Roman canonists declare that the “excommunications” in this case are null and void
The following Roman canonists have publicly declared their finding that any purported “excommunications” in this case are null and void under canon law:

Castillo Cardinal Lara, J.C.D., President of the Pontifical Commission for Authentic Interpretation of Canon Law
Edward Idris Cardinal Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity
Alfons Cardinal Stickler, former Prefect of the Vatican Archives and Library
Fr. Gerard E. Murray, J.C.D., of the United States
Fr. Patrick Valdini, J.C.D., Dean of the Faculty of Canon Law
Fr. Rudolf Kaschewski of Germany
Count Neri Capponi, D.Cn.L., Ll.D, Professor of Canon Law
Professor Geringer, J.C.D.
Were they speaking to the excommunication of the 4 bishops or to the question as to whether all adherents of the Society were excommunicated? My understanding has always been that they were addressing the second point.

Perhaps you will want to provide the sources in which they offered such an interpretation to clarify the point. I do see such a list at wikipedia in which the text begins “It has been claimed that . . .” A wiki footnote continues " Fr. Murray and Prof. Geringer have since stated that their views have been misrepresented." I suspect that is true of the cardinals. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ec%C3%B4ne_Consecrations#cite_note-20 for that documentation.

Identifying if the sources other than the current or former members of the Roman curia are in full communion with the Holy See will also be useful.

Without this information, one is at a loss to evaluate the assertion correctly…
 
It should be noted that the question of excommunication does not come up under the traditional Code of Canon Law (1917), which does not provide for the penalty of excommunication for the consecration of a bishop without papal approval.
(that, of course, is not why they reach the conclusion they have, but it is noteworthy. NB that the Old code had, i think, 51 categories of offence meriting excommunication. the New Code has 5 or 6. The old list makes interesting reading. Nearly all Catholic School Boards would be excommunicated, for example.)

Hello again,

Do you mean that there was no automatic excommunication for illicit episcopal consecration in the 1917 Code? That is true, since Pope Pius XII promulgated such a law, with the automatic excommunication, in 1951. And, no, you can’t say that was just in regard to the situation in China.

Also, speaking of all the conditions that can mitigate or eliminate a penalty, conditions which you think are nonsense, if you check out canons 2199-2206 (or thereabouts) of the 1917 code, you will find basically the same conditions: in particular, 2205 regarding “necessity.” (Pius XII’s penalty for illicit consecrations, on the other hand, didn’t allow for grave fear being a mitigating factor.)

Yes, the 1917 code can be quite interesting!

Dan
 
Thank you for posting this, chosen people. As disappointing as it is to see that their website has this kind of stuff, it’s good to know about it.

It’s disappointing because these Traditional groups also have a good side: they have opposed the dilution of the faith since the 1960’s that has happened elsewhere.

Perhaps as a Jew living in Israel, you could give some advice. How do conservative and orthodox Jews maintain their objective thinking with absolutes that go along with conservative religious beliefs, but at the same time show respect for gentiles? Is there any difficulty doing both at once?
Here’s a little something from sspx.org:

" International Judaism wants to radically defeat Christianity and to be its substitute. Its chief armies are the masons and the communists. This process of the Revolution began at the end of the Middle Ages, developed itself by pagan Renaissance, jumped forwards by leaps and bounds with the Reformation, destroyed the political and social basis of the Church by the French Revolution, tried to overthrow the Holy See with by an attack on the Papal States, emptied the Church’s resources on the occasion of the secularization of the goods of religious (orders -Ed’s) and dioceses, was the cause of a very grave internal crisis with the advance of Modernism, and finally, with communism, it invented the decisive instrument to delete the name of Christian from the very face of the earth."

sspx.org/MISCELLANEOUS/wh…ldhavedone.htm
 
I thank you, chosen_people, for posting those tragic quotations. They are shameful, indeed, and we Catholics do need to be aware that this whole issue concerns not just one maverick bishop but a virulent ideology running throughout the SSPX’s teachings.

And we also have to admit that anti-Semitism has often found a home elsewhere in the Church, throughout its history. In my view it is not for Catholics like certain members of the SSPX to repeat the old medieval mistake of harping on the Jews’ supposed “deicide” when we have so much to atone for in our own Church’s historical treatment of Judaism and of Jews.

But of course, that is beside the point. The point is, I hope that you do recognize, all the same, the sincere commitment of the modern Church to Jewish relations. We Catholics are shaken by this event, though you might not know it from reading this fairly conservative forum. I could cite many sources, including numerous personal conversations that I’ve had lately, but here are two links for the time being…

A statement from a Jesuit priest blogging at America magazine, who condemns some of the very same quotations you have cited:
americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&id=2D6AFB07-1438-5036-4F1C9D841C32199D

And if the Jesuits (who are sort of the negative image of the SSPX in several senses!) are not an objective enough source, then this comes from the US Bishops:

catholicreview.org/subpages/storyworldnew-new.aspx?action=5539

Of course we stand by the Holy Father, who has made an overture towards this group to see if he can’t guide them closer towards the new orthodoxy – that is, acceptance of Vatican II, including Nostra Aetate. And we recognize in him a pastor who has made so many other peaceful gestures towards the worldwide Jewish community that there is surely not an anti-Semitic bone in his body. We hope that this may be some solace to you as you go about judging his decision and anticipating his next steps.

But at any rate, the process of cauterizing a wound can be painful; this operation concerning a part of the Catholic Church has caused a great deal of pain in the broader Judeo-Christian family. Please know that there are many Catholics who stand by you in that pain.

Peace,
+AMDG+
 
Bah, this anti-semitism hoo-hah has ‘red herring’ written all over it. Its purpose is to distract from a momentous event in Church history:

The Catholic Church is becoming more rigourous. It is a joyous time.

This drives some some non-Catholics and liberal Catholics crazy. The former’s opinions are irrelevant, 'though the experiment with ecumenism may have given them the contrary impression.

The trend is conservative. The reforms of Vat. II have been disastrous. Ecumenism is indifferentism by the back door.

**We wish greater communion with Christ The King, The Messiah. The traditional rites, doctrine and practices of the Catholic Church are the best and safest method for this. **Join up or risk damnation.
 
Were they speaking to the excommunication of the 4 bishops or to the question as to whether all adherents of the Society were excommunicated? My understanding has always been that they were addressing the second point.
Ahead of tracking the quotes down, my understanding (for what it is worth) is the opposite.
Perhaps you will want to provide the sources in which they offered such an interpretation to clarify the point. I do see such a list at wikipedia in which the text begins “It has been claimed that . . .” A wiki footnote continues " Fr. Murray and Prof. Geringer have since stated that their views have been misrepresented."
In the case of Fr Murray, he submitted a doctoral thesis to the Pontifical University of Rome, in which, after (I think) 3 years’ work, his evaluation was that the excommunication of the SSPX bishops was null and void. He was awarded a A for his thesis, and got his doctorate. Then he returned to his diocese in the USA, and within a very short time publicly retracted the conclusions of his thesis. I am sorry, but I found that very fishy. {And nothing to do with the USA as such}.
I suspect that is true of the cardinals.
Cdl Stickler & Count Neri Capponi most definitely were not misrepresented.
Talking of evaluation, it’s well worth looking up “Lourdes” in wikipedia. You’ll see why.
Identifying if the sources other than the current or former members of the Roman curia are in full communion with the Holy See will also be useful.
I don’t know about the priest from Germany, but the others, as you will see, were among the highest authorities on canon law in the church, and were not affiliated with the SSPX. Neither were they suspended. They disagreed with the contention that the SSPX were validly excommunicated; I don’t know whether that disqualifies them from full communion …
Without this information, one is at a loss to evaluate the assertion correctly…
I haven’t tried googling tonight yet. I have hard copy in the usual boxes somewhere in my collection. This is all available in the public domain, but i don’t know how much is online.
 
Were they speaking to the excommunication of the 4 bishops or to the question as to whether all adherents of the Society were excommunicated? My understanding has always been that they were addressing the second point.

Perhaps you will want to provide the sources in which they offered such an interpretation to clarify the point. I do see such a list at wikipedia in which the text begins “It has been claimed that . . .” A wiki footnote continues " Fr. Murray and Prof. Geringer have since stated that their views have been misrepresented." I suspect that is true of the cardinals. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ec%C3%B4ne_Consecrations#cite_note-20 for that documentation.

Identifying if the sources other than the current or former members of the Roman curia are in full communion with the Holy See will also be useful.

Without this information, one is at a loss to evaluate the assertion correctly…
Here is what I’ve gleaned so fartonight…
websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/apologia/vpost?id=2987839

 Sept 22, 2008 at 08:46 AM

This interview took place in 2004 shortly before Mr. Davies died…
*
christianorder.com/features/features_2004/features_dec04.html
*
Quote:
MD: … I must point out that nobody excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre. Not Cardinal Ratzinger. Not the Pope. He had what is called an ‘automatic excommunication’.
JB: So no one formally said, “I excommunicate thee”?
MD: No, no. If you consecrate a bishop without the authority of the Pope you are automatically excommunicated but it is not for schism. It’s for…
JB: For disobedience?
MD: No. It is what is called “usurping an ecclesiastical office” and there are very good reasons for claiming that this excommunication was invalid. I’ll just give examples. If you break some article of Canon Law because a state of emergency exists in the Church, even if you incur excommunication that excommunication is invalid. Now, even if no objective state of emergency exists, if the person who thinks it does sincerely believes it does, then he is not excommunicated. . . Our canonical expert from Una Voce, Count Neri Capponi, said that in 1983 the Vatican brought in a new Code of Canon Law which is absolutely pathetic. It is almost impossible to be excommunicated and so, he said, they cannot resurrect the 1917 Code of Canon Law just to fix Archbishop Lefebvre.

MD: … The Ecclesia Dei Commission which was set up by the Vatican to help with the restoration of the 1962 Missal said you fulfil your obligation by going to Masses celebrated by priests of the Society of St Pius X and [chuckles] you can make “a modest donation.” So if you were a bit parsimonious that might be a good reason for going to Mass at St Pius X!

=========================
The 1988 Consecrations: A Canonical Study
Si, Si, No, No. March 2000
*
Before analyzing schism from the juridical point of view, we want to observe how the non-mention of Canon 1324 {in the notice in l’Osservatore Romano that announced the excommunications - num} [which was heavily discussed in Part II of this canonical study in Si Si No No, Jan. 2000, #36 —Ed.] is tantamount to the exclusion by the Conciliar Church of every possible attenuating circumstance useful to defending Archbishop Lefebvre and those others who, such as Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, maintained and are maintaining themselves faithful to the dogmas of the Faith. This has become a constant in the Conciliar Church which has provoked a distorted representation of Canon 1324 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
With this is mind, we make reference to the opinion of the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts which attempts to debunk the well-founded thesis of canonist Fr. Gerald Murray regarding the validity of the latae sententiae excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre. Fr. Murray is an American priest who has no connection with the Society of St. Pius X. The Murray Thesis, receiving the highest grade at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, holds that the excommunication latae sententiae declared against Archbishop Lefebvre, Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, and the four bishops consecrated, was not valid according to strict canonical law nor is the accusation of schism valid in the formal sense [see Si Si No No, #36, The Angelus, Jan. 2000, p.18]. Against the Murray Thesis, the Pontifical Council said:
“Nevertheless, the validity of the excommunication of the Bishops, declared by the motu proprio and by the decree, cannot be reasonably doubted. In particular, the possibility of looking for attenuating or nullifying circumstances concerning the imputability of the offense (Canons 1323,1324 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law) does not seem admissible. As far as concerns the state of necessity in which Archbishop Lefebvre would have been able to find himself, it is necessary to remember that such a state must exist objectively and that the necessity of consecrating bishops contrary to the will of the Roman Pontiff, head of the College of Cardinals, never happens.”

This “clarification” clearly contradicts what is established in the 1983 Code of Canon Law. It affirms, in fact, that for the 1983 Code the state of necessity “must objectively exist,” but in fact, according to the same 1983 Code, the state of necessity, as we have already shown, can exist only subjectively. Hence, the “clarification” misrepresents the norms in force, as if the 1983 Code considered the state of necessity only in its objective reality, as is the case of the 1917 Code of Canon Law. The Pontifical Council passes over in silence the attenuating circumstances that the Holy See should have legitimately considered had it wanted to, in order to prevent the application of a latae sententitae excommunication that was not only unjust but also invalid.
 
Sorry I can’t get the quotes here. Anyway, regarding Pius XII, here is the Latin text (can’t find English at the moment…can try to translate it but I think you know Latin):

Under the pontificate of Pius XII, the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office decreed that, “Episcopus, cuiusvis ritus vel dignitatis, aliquem, neque ab Apostolica Sede nominatum neque ab Eadem expresse confirmaum, consecraus in Episcopum, et qui consecrationem recipit, etsi metu gravi coacti ([c*.] 2229 §3:3o [CIC/17]), incurrunt ipso facto in excommunicationem Apostolicae Sedi specialissimo modo reservatam.”

This is from April 9, 1951. I don’t know if you can find it online…

As far as excommunications being reduced, I guess you are referring to latae sententiae excommunications. I have no problem with the lower number. It seems to me that penalties should be externally, judicialy applied, not automatic. THat was one of the principles in the revision of the Code, I think–limiting the number of automatic penalties. I really don’t have much of an opinion other than that.

Besides automatic penalties, there can be others: the so-called ferendae sententiae penalties. That seems like a better way to go, as I said, and there are many opportunites for those in the Code.

Dan

P.S. I see you just put up some further reflections on the excommunications. Here is a link to a long paper on them, from the other side.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=1392&CFID=18133691&CFTOKEN=94690228#EXCOMMUNICATION%20AND%20SCHISM
 
The SSPX hasn’t changed and worse they have been invited back without changing. The split with the Church because they could not stomach Vatican II reforms, not least of which the reforms of attitudes toward Jews. Through their website, through books and tapes and interviews they have promulgated the ideas of the Jew as guilty of deicide, the Jew as cursed for rejecting “god”, the Jew as seeking world domination, the Jew as contaminating and destroying Christianity. To the best of my knowledge their is not a single group that monitors anti-semitism that has not labeled the SSPX as virulently anti-semitic.
 
Thank you for posting this, chosen people. As disappointing as it is to see that their website has this kind of stuff, it’s good to know about it.

It’s disappointing because these Traditional groups also have a good side: they have opposed the dilution of the faith since the 1960’s that has happened elsewhere.

Perhaps as a Jew living in Israel, you could give some advice. How do conservative and orthodox Jews maintain their objective thinking with absolutes that go along with conservative religious beliefs, but at the same time show respect for gentiles? Is there any difficulty doing both at once?
Jews believe it is easier for the gentile to get into the world to come as they have only to follow the seven Noahide commandments. Jews don’t teach or believe that if you don’t adopt Judaism you suffer in any way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top