Vatican: Pius X Society Ordinations Are Illegitimate

  • Thread starter Thread starter Will_S
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Will_S said:
The SSPX, in a response to the declaration of Fr. Lombardi that the SSPX ordinations were ‘illegitimate’, has posted, on their US website, the sermon, which Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre preached at the ordination of 16 men to the priesthood at Écône in 1978.

sspx.org/archbishop_lefebvre/ordination_sermon_econe_june_29_1978.htm
Click to expand...
Will, we have to be very careful not to just post these statements without clarifying for others that the final word of the Holy See trumps any interpretation and complaint by any society or individual.

The content of this statement have been heard many times and have been rejected as invalid by two popes and now to Prefects for the Congregation for the Faith. Canon Law is very clear. You cannot appeal past a pope. You can’t even appeal to law. The pope has the power to annul the law and say that it does not apply to you.

I remember that Bl. John Paul did say that this state of emergency did not apply to the SSPX and the Archbishop. Once a pope states that, one can repeat the law over and over again and it does not make it stick.

We have to go with the current position of the Holy See. The ordinations are illegal and everything possible is being done to regularize the status of these priests. The Church cares for these priests, but she is not willing to regularize their status until they submit to what Cardinal Levada has put on the table.

The argument that there was no trial can be an emotionally valid argument, because the people involved feel that they should have had a trial. It is not legally valid, because the law of the Church only applies if and when the pope allows it and how he allows it to apply. Every law that is contained in Canon Law is beneath the pope. It does not bind him. Therefore, if he or the person whom he appoints to act in his name, decides that there is no need for a trial, because he has already passed judgment on the situation, there is no moral obligation to go any other route and there is no legal way around it.

No Catholic has a right to appeal those decisions. However, the Holy Father does want to help them.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
Will, we have to be very careful not to just post these statements without clarifying for others that the final word of the Holy See trumps any interpretation and complaint by any society or individual.

The content of this statement have been heard many times and have been rejected as invalid by two popes and now to Prefects for the Congregation for the Faith. Canon Law is very clear. You cannot appeal past a pope. You can’t even appeal to law. The pope has the power to annul the law and say that it does not apply to you.

I remember that Bl. John Paul did say that this state of emergency did not apply to the SSPX and the Archbishop. Once a pope states that, one can repeat the law over and over again and it does not make it stick.

We have to go with the current position of the Holy See. The ordinations are illegal and everything possible is being done to regularize the status of these priests. The Church cares for these priests, but she is not willing to regularize their status until they submit to what Cardinal Levada has put on the table.

The argument that there was no trial can be an emotionally valid argument, because the people involved feel that they should have had a trial. It is not legally valid, because the law of the Church only applies if and when the pope allows it and how he allows it to apply. Every law that is contained in Canon Law is beneath the pope. It does not bind him. Therefore, if he or the person whom he appoints to act in his name, decides that there is no need for a trial, because he has already passed judgment on the situation, there is no moral obligation to go any other route and there is no legal way around it.

No Catholic has a right to appeal those decisions. However, the Holy Father does want to help them.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your clarification, Brother JR.
 
Will_S said:
I appreciate your clarification, Brother JR.
Click to expand...
This is just a very sad situatioin. According to a statement from Bishop Fellay, he has to go back to meet with Cardinal Levada in the Fal, I believe he said October. We will have to wait and see what they have to say to each other.

I don’t know much about Cardinal Levada. I’ve read his writings and remember some comments from when he was stationed in the USA. From what I can read and have heard, he is a very good theologian, very faithful to the Holy Father and looks at things from different angles. His doctoral dissertation is a masterpiece. There is no reason to believe that he will be unfair.

Fraternally,

Br. JR,OSF 🙂
 
Will_S said:
Right. These ordination pictures are from the SSPX seminary in Winona, Minnesota, which is full far beyond capacity. Some seminarians have to sleep three-to-a-room, in what are supposed to be single-occupancy dorms.

The seminary in Virginia is being built to replace the Winona seminary, and will be large enough to accomodate the current numbers comfortably plus have room for future enlargement.
Click to expand...
Does this make sense?

Bishop Fellay is complianing about the lack of vocations, but his Seminary is burtsing at the seams?
 
Yes, but their point is that the same rationale stated by ABL in the 70’s, in the speech they re-printed on that link, applies today.
 
stevusmagnus said:
Yes, but their point is that the same rationale stated by ABL in the 70’s, in the speech they re-printed on that link, applies today.
Click to expand...
I understand. I just wanted to make sure people were aware that this was not new commentary on the situation. I almost didn’t catch it when I first linked over.

Peace,
 
Not really. The article was a representation of something from 1978.
Click to expand...
It is but in the light of the fact that the Pope has ruled the TLM had never been abrogated, the point raised against the penalty imposed on them in 1975 may not have been valid, IF they were penalized for celebrating the TLM. However, this doesn’t excuse the recent ordinations.
 
ProVobis said:
It is but in the light of the fact that the Pope has ruled the TLM had never been abrogated, the point raised against the penalty imposed on them in 1975 may not have been valid, IF they were penalized for celebrating the TLM. However, this doesn’t excuse the recent ordinations.
Click to expand...
Their argument is that the 1970’s original suspension was illicit and canonically irregular and therefore not binding. IF this is true, then they were never suspended and the most recent ordinations are legitimate.

The Society also uses the example of St. Athanasius, who, I believe, ordained priests without the required permission in the early centuries. I could be wrong. Would like to see any research/resources people have on this issue.

Of course the current Pope technically sees them in an “irregular canonical situation”. Then again, the previous Pope acted as if the TLM were abrogated and we later learned that it was not under BXVI. In the same manner, a future Pope may decide that the 1970’s suspension was indeed canonically invalid.

In a recent talk Bishop Fellay recounted how a Cardinal in Rome said there would be no problem with the approval of previous ordinations upon request soon after the lifting of the excommunications. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that Rome again gave private permission for the ordinations, and that the Vatican press secretray was unaware of it.

cfnews.org/fellay-40th.htm
Another example: during the great storm that erupted in January 2009 after the “excommunications” were “lifted”, the Vatican Secretary of State issued a decree stating that the Society of St. Pius X does not exist, that it is not Catholic, and that the SSPX must absolutely recognize Vatican II and all the teachings of the Popes since the Council.
Click to expand...
Code: 
        Later that year, two weeks before Easter, Bishop Fellay received an intervention from Rome. The German bishops were putting pressure on the Vatican, and were threatening to excommunicate the SSPX if they performed ordinations at their German seminary. In a gesture toward the Pope, Bishop Fellay moved the ordinations from Germany to Econe.
Click to expand...
Code: 
        While the Vatican was trying to stop the ordinations, a Cardinal told Bishop Fellay, “Just ask the Pope for permission and I can almost guarantee you will receive his permission, and untill Easter, the Society of St. Pius X will be recognized.”
Click to expand...
Code: 
        Bishop Fellay responded, “But wait a minute! What about that Decree from the Secretary of State” that claims the SSPX is not part of the Church and that it must accept the Council?
Click to expand...
Code: 
        The Cardinal responded, “That is only a political text. It is not even signed by the Secretary of State, and it is not what the Pope thinks.”
Click to expand...
Code: 
        This is the type of contradiction from Rome the SSPX constantly encounters.
Click to expand...
 
ProVobis said:
It is but in the light of the fact that the Pope has ruled the TLM had never been abrogated, the point raised against the penalty imposed on them in 1975 may not have been valid, IF they were penalized for celebrating the TLM. However, this doesn’t excuse the recent ordinations.
Click to expand...
Many good priests were suspended by their bishops from the 1970’s through 2007 for simply saying the TLM without “permission”. Now that the Pope has publicly declared the TLM was never forbidden, why aren’t these priests, who were unjustly suspended, reinstated, given apologies, and given back-pay & benefits?
 
stevusmagnus said:
Many good priests were suspended by their bishops from the 1970’s through 2007 for simply saying the TLM without “permission”. Now that the Pope has publicly declared the TLM was never forbidden, why aren’t these priests, who were unjustly suspended, reinstated, given apologies, and given back-pay & benefits?
Click to expand...
because they were disobedient?
 
stevusmagnus said:
Many good priests were suspended by their bishops from the 1970’s through 2007 for simply saying the TLM without “permission”. Now that the Pope has publicly declared the TLM was never forbidden, why aren’t these priests, who were unjustly suspended, reinstated, given apologies, and given back-pay & benefits?
Click to expand...
Yes, I made that same point recently. There were many outside the SSPX ranks who fell into that category.

Unfortunately, unlike civil law, I don’t think there are any such remedies in canon law.
 
Aramis said:
Worse was rampant prior to V II… but most didn’t notice, lacking the skill and not hearing what the priest whispered at the altar.
Click to expand...
I am sick and tired of hearing this ****, with no prove, other than so & so said so!!!:mad:
 
Like said:
lol The asterisks are not mine, I assume a mod did it & I certainly am glad he did so.😊
Click to expand...
It automatically does that. You can see this if you type something colorful and click “preview post.” It will filter “colorful” words.
 
The Society of St. Pius X is not in schism.

Here the Society’s website answers that question: sspx.org/SSPX_FAQs/q12_sspxschismatic.htm

I also have an article that uses Canon Law to prove that the SSPX is not in schism but I do not have the link because a family member of mine copied and posted the entire article in an email. I’ll be happy to send that to anyone who asks because it is way to long to post here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top