If that is the case then I suppose the SSPX Priests ordained by these same SSPX Bishops cannot possibly be validly ordained and not being ordained cannot confect a valid Eucharist.
Christus Dominus is not speaking about the validity of the ordination of the bishops. It’s speaking about the canonical place in the Church. Archbishop Lefebvre was a validly ordained bishop. His act was a schismatic act, to ordain bishops without a papal mandate. However, the ordination is valid. They are true bishops and true successors to the Apostles. Therefore, they have the power to ordain deacons, priests and more bishops. What they lack is jurisdiction. Thus, any ordination by them is illegal or illicit. Any deacon or priest who accepts ordination by them is automatically suspended. Any bishop who accepts ordination from them is automatically excommunicated.
Even bishops who are in good standing with the Church cannot legally ordain unless they have jurisdiction. How does one get jurisdiction?
If you’re the diocesan bishop, you have jurisdiction over the secular and lay Catholics in your diocese.
If you’re an auxiliary bishop you have no jurisdiction. The diocesan bishop must grant you permission to ordain.
If you’re gong to ordain a member of a religious order, only the religious superior can grant you jurisdiction, even if you’re the diocesan bishop or a cardinal of the Roman Curia, you do not trump a religious superior. He alone has jurisdiction over his men and he alone decides whether to grant a bishop jurisdiction to ordain his men.
The SSPX bishop do not have jurisdiction because they are not diocesan bishops; therefore, they are not ordinaries. They are not auxiliaries; therefore, no diocesan bishop and no religious superior can give them jurisdiction to ordain.
When they ordain, the act is a schismatic act, but the ordination is valid.
Think of it this way. You graduate from medical school with a doctorate in medicine. Therefore, you are a Doctor of Medicine or physician, whichever term you prefer. You cannot practice medicine without a license. If you perform heart surgery, it’s a real surgery; but it’s illegal. You’ll spend a lot of time in jail, even if you save someone’s life.
Only those bishops whom the pope acknowledges as having jurisdiction can validly celebrate the sacraments or those bishops who receive jurisdiction from an ordinary. The ordinary can be either the diocesan bishop or a religious superior of men.
For example, I can grant any bishop permission to ordain any of my brothers, even if he’s from out of town. I’m their superior. I can grant any priest faculties to hear the confessions of those who live in our houses. The only ones whom I can’t grant faculties to ordain or hear confessions are the SSPX. However, if they ordain one of my brothers, without permission, the ordination is a done deal, even though it’s illegal and that brother is suspended. I don’t suspend him, the law suspends him. I don’t have the authority to lift the suspension. Only the pope can do that. I can only lift a suspension that I impose.
If someone goes to that priest for confession and does not know that he’s suspended, the absolution is valid. If the penitent knows that the priest is suspended, then the absolution is invalid. The penitent is aiding and abetting a sin. No deacon, priest or bishop may exercise the ministry without permission.
You can still go there because the SSPX is in disobedience (for good reasons) not schism.
read the book ’ The Novus Ordo Question " by Robert T Hart at
sicutincaelo.org/booklets.html.
You’ll be greatful. Thank you.
Slow down here my friend. You’re walking on thin ice and encouraging others to do the same. The Church has already decreed that the Ordinary Form of the mass is valid and licit. It has been repeated many times. Even if it had not been put on paper, the fact that it has matter, form and intent makes it valid, regardless of the appearances or the form.
In addition, the Holy Father has already told the SSPX that one demand for their return is that they admit that the OF is valid and licit. In this case, it cannot be that the SSPX has to accept the the OF is valid and licit and the rest of us get a pass. The sacraments don’t work that way.
Finally, you’re placing the writings of Robert Hart over the authority of Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, Bl. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. Your crediting on man with great authority than four popes. That in itself constitutes schismatic thinking. I don’t think you want to do that. When one prefers the authority of an outside source over the authority of the Pontiff, then one is breaking communion with the Pontiff. That’s a schismatic act. The next rung on the ladder is to publicly reject his authority in all matters of faith, morals and law. Then the schism is complete.
You may want to rethink this and not make such a recommendation to any Catholic. You are suggesting that they buy the opinion of one who has no authority over that of Peter.
It sounds like what the English bishops did when the placed Henry’s authority over that of the pope. That’s too dangerous for my blood.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
