The Church imposes the Responsibility of Organizing Itself
Apr 16, 2018 11:25:41 GMT
Post by Admin on Apr 16, 2018 11:25:41 GMT
The Catholic Church imposes upon Tradition the Responsibility of Organizing itself
Adapted from the Cor Mariae forum,by Machabees, Jul 15, 2016.
We have come a long way in this conciliar crisis of Vatican II. Did we learn anything?
We should. The fundamental understanding in this spiritual chastisement with wolves in higher places trying to apostate us is that God is a King over us and all the universe. He is in control, not man.
The same too for the universal jurisdiction of His Catholic Church over all men's minds and hearts; whether they accept it or not.
When there is a crisis in any area, we are obliged to go back to the foundation and re-access what went wrong. Usually the simplest solution is the most overlooked. So too in this crisis. Back to the foundation of our baptism and remember our promises to God being faithful to Him over all material and inanimate things. There, if we correct those abuses in our lives, many of our problems will go away re-anchoring oneself back on God who is our reason to live. It is more than honor, we owe God every breath and existence of our life.
In this crisis of the Catholic Church for the last 50 years, unprecedented as it is, we are thwarted by a false sense of obedience and Catholic duty. Something of which the Blessed Mother had said will be the down fall of priests, religious, and faithful alike.
The Catholic Church cannot empty herself of her substance or her essence.
Organization in any sphere of society needs a head to lead the common good toward God; that good is established by God and must be represented and delegated by his authority to others to govern others to sanctification and salvation in the life of His Church. Which is a hierarchical Catholic society. Society we must remember is a creature; it is created by God to serve Him. It is not an 'automated' machine to do what it wants and sin at will without consequences. The Encyclical Quas Primas of Pius XI, 11 December 1925, explains this altogether.
Like any organism, the need to survive is vital and innate. So too is the life of the Church in her mission for the salvation of souls. "Ecclesia supplet"—"the Church supplies" is the breath of the Church in necessity when sin blocks or any other circumstance is in the way to impart grace to a soul to be in union with God.
It is extremely troubling when we hear from Bishop Williamson, and echoed in the other two bishops in the resistance against modernism, that they emphatically defend their own error and liberal novelty to maintain a "loose organization" within the work and mission of the Catholic Church. They state, we do not have "ordinary jurisdiction to lead or set up any structure", as if that stopped them to be consecrated bishops, and they say, "the traditional structure of the Church is not possible anymore"; "authority is no longer visible". (sic)
Let's see what the Church has to say about this:
"This contention [of being illicit] does, however, illustrate a very important point. If there were no extension of supplied jurisdiction to every aspect of the Church’s disciplinary and sacramental life, if the crisis in the Church did not impose upon Tradition the responsibility of organizing itself, and of providing for all the needs of the faithful, then we would all be forced to place ourselves under the modernists, just as the [other fallen traditional communities] are now doing. It would be complete and utter capitulation. It would be the end of the traditional resistance, and ultimately of traditional doctrine, spirituality and of the Mass that only the Society’s firm position can guarantee. How we must thank God for Archbishop Lefebvre’s clarity of foresight, and breadth of understanding of the supernatural mystery of the Church, and of supplied jurisdiction, which has protected us from the paralysis of formalism and legalism into which the modernists are constantly striving to trap us." (Fr. Peter Scott, Letter to benefactors, July 2008)
So these three [resistance] bishops consider that they can operate with supplied jurisdiction regarding serving the sacramental needs of the faithful asking it from them, but they refuse to extend that SAME supplied jurisdiction of the Church with respect to the supplying the needs and life of organization and apostolate to survive is very grave to duty and vocation as bishops. Remember, the whole reason Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated bishops is to serve any and all the needs of the Church in this terrible crisis; not to subjectively abuse that power for themselves.
Further, Fr. Scott speaks of this supplied jurisdiction for other organization, and if need to, setting up of Religious Communities, and Commissions:
"[His] claim is clearly and manifestly false, as anybody familiar with the workings of the Society of Saint Pius X since 1991 can verify. In normal times, it is the responsibility of the diocesan bishop to grant the initial approval to religious communities in his diocese, waiting for them to extend into several dioceses and be approved by Rome. While he was alive, Archbishop Lefebvre performed this function for the traditional religious communities, approving their statutes, correcting any abuses, acting as a point of reference for any disputes. This he did in virtue of supplied jurisdiction. On January 15, 1991, just two months before going to his eternal reward, he asked the Society’s bishops to keep up the same work of responsibility for the religious communities of Tradition, along with other functions of supplied jurisdiction.
[Archbishop Lefebvre:]
“As long as the present Roman authorities are steeped in Ecumenism and Modernism and seeing that all their decisions and the 1983 Code of Canon Law are influenced by these false principles, it will be necessary to form authorities of Supplied Jurisdiction, that will faithfully preserve the Catholic principles of Catholic Tradition and Catholic Canon Law. It is the only way of remaining faithful to our Lord Jesus Christ, to the Apostles, to the deposit of Faith that was handed down to their legitimate successors who remained faithful until Vatican II.
"As regards the problem of Commissions, supplying in a certain measure for the failure on the part of Roman Congregations headed by prelates imbued with the revolutionary principles of the Council, it seems to me that they ought to have modest beginnings, in accordance with arising necessities, so that this institution can be of a help to priests in their ministry or to religious in cases that they have difficulty in resolving or in cases where Episcopal authorizations are required.”
There was no doubt in the mind of the Society of Saint Pius X as to the meaning of the Archbishop’s words, and so that very year were created the Canonical Commission and the Bishop responsible for Religious, as the official Regulations of the Society of Saint Pius X published in 1997 state:
In fact, the Society has never had a narrow view of supplied jurisdiction. It has always applied the Canon Law principles of the analogy of law (=using accepted principles of law in similar situations) and canonical equity (=what is rightly required for the salvation of souls, the highest law) to prove the existence of supplied jurisdiction in situations not specifically mentioned in the Code. For all that it has to do is to establish a positive and probable doubt in such situations, in which case the Church certainly does supply jurisdiction (Ib.). Thus the above mentioned document states: “The bishops of the Society, devoid of all territorial jurisdiction, have, nevertheless, the necessary supplied jurisdiction to exercise the powers that are attached to the Episcopal office…” (Ib.)
Furthermore, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais clearly explained these principles in a lengthy conference given to traditional Catholic study groups in Paris on March 10, 1991, whilst the Archbishop was still alive:
This is a clear statement that supplied jurisdiction extends as far as the needs of the faithful. For priests and religious this need includes traditional bishops, who alone can approve statutes and foundations of religious communities and correct abuses. Like all traditional Catholics, the former Redemptorists have very frequently taken advantage of supplied jurisdiction for their own benefit, such as for Confirmations and the various Ordinations, as well as using it themselves in their pastoral work and missions. Their needs, like those of any religious community, include having a bishop responsible for religious, as the diocesan bishop normally is in his diocese. The Society has always provided for this need, through Archbishop Lefebvre until 1991, then Bishop Fellay until he was elected Superior General, and since 1994 through Bishop De Galarreta, who is the bishop responsible for the religious communities of Tradition. In the light of such clear teaching, it is hardly credible to hear Father Sim now claim that the Society “agreed that there was no supplied jurisdiction for religious superiors”, a claim, moreover, that Bishop Fellay explicitly and immediately denied.
[Archbishop Lefebvre:]
“As long as the present Roman authorities are steeped in Ecumenism and Modernism and seeing that all their decisions and the 1983 Code of Canon Law are influenced by these false principles, it will be necessary to form authorities of Supplied Jurisdiction, that will faithfully preserve the Catholic principles of Catholic Tradition and Catholic Canon Law. It is the only way of remaining faithful to our Lord Jesus Christ, to the Apostles, to the deposit of Faith that was handed down to their legitimate successors who remained faithful until Vatican II.
"As regards the problem of Commissions, supplying in a certain measure for the failure on the part of Roman Congregations headed by prelates imbued with the revolutionary principles of the Council, it seems to me that they ought to have modest beginnings, in accordance with arising necessities, so that this institution can be of a help to priests in their ministry or to religious in cases that they have difficulty in resolving or in cases where Episcopal authorizations are required.”
There was no doubt in the mind of the Society of Saint Pius X as to the meaning of the Archbishop’s words, and so that very year were created the Canonical Commission and the Bishop responsible for Religious, as the official Regulations of the Society of Saint Pius X published in 1997 state:
“These two functions were created in 1991 in order to be able to continue after the death of Archbishop Lefebvre that which he had accomplished in a suppletory manner from 1970 to 1991.”
In fact, the Society has never had a narrow view of supplied jurisdiction. It has always applied the Canon Law principles of the analogy of law (=using accepted principles of law in similar situations) and canonical equity (=what is rightly required for the salvation of souls, the highest law) to prove the existence of supplied jurisdiction in situations not specifically mentioned in the Code. For all that it has to do is to establish a positive and probable doubt in such situations, in which case the Church certainly does supply jurisdiction (Ib.). Thus the above mentioned document states: “The bishops of the Society, devoid of all territorial jurisdiction, have, nevertheless, the necessary supplied jurisdiction to exercise the powers that are attached to the Episcopal office…” (Ib.)
Furthermore, Bishop Tissier de Mallerais clearly explained these principles in a lengthy conference given to traditional Catholic study groups in Paris on March 10, 1991, whilst the Archbishop was still alive:
“Normally jurisdiction is necessary for licitness, that is to say, in order that the act of the priest be licit or permissible. For example, to preach a priest must have a mandate, or, for a bishop to confirm in another diocese than his own, he must have a mandate from the diocesan bishop. In order to ordain priests a bishop must have a mandate from the diocesan bishop. In order to ordain priests a bishop must normally have jurisdiction and this is, of course, all the more so for the consecration of bishops…In an exceptional situation the Church supplies for this absence of jurisdiction on the part of the priest or even the bishop. And the more serious the crisis is, the more necessary it will be to fall back on this supplying of the Church on a higher level. This is what happened on June 30, 1988...You can easily see, my dear friends, that it is the case of necessity amongst the faithful which is responsible for the fact that traditional priests and bishops have a supplied jurisdiction with respect to your needs. This is not only so that they may validly hear confessions and validly assist at marriages, but also for all of the acts of their priestly or Episcopal ministry.”
This is a clear statement that supplied jurisdiction extends as far as the needs of the faithful. For priests and religious this need includes traditional bishops, who alone can approve statutes and foundations of religious communities and correct abuses. Like all traditional Catholics, the former Redemptorists have very frequently taken advantage of supplied jurisdiction for their own benefit, such as for Confirmations and the various Ordinations, as well as using it themselves in their pastoral work and missions. Their needs, like those of any religious community, include having a bishop responsible for religious, as the diocesan bishop normally is in his diocese. The Society has always provided for this need, through Archbishop Lefebvre until 1991, then Bishop Fellay until he was elected Superior General, and since 1994 through Bishop De Galarreta, who is the bishop responsible for the religious communities of Tradition. In the light of such clear teaching, it is hardly credible to hear Father Sim now claim that the Society “agreed that there was no supplied jurisdiction for religious superiors”, a claim, moreover, that Bishop Fellay explicitly and immediately denied.
So Bishop Williamson knows well of this imposition of hands Archbishop Lefebvre placed on him and had lived and executed these conditions and conclusions himself for over 25-years within the necessity of supplied jurisdiction existing within the sspx -for which he still says- he is a sspx priest and bishop for which we have been asking him to do nothing else than what he is. Fr. Hewko states it well:
"Your Excellency, we do not ask or need you to do anything else but what you were consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre to do; just remain as you are; confirm the brethren. We are not asking for a 'new' congregation or for you to administrate; only to continue the SAME fight of your father Archbishop Lefebvre. Not to go and do your own thing or make up a new rule or 'loose organization'. That is against what you were consecrated for."
Bishop Williamson and the other two [resistance] bishops cannot have it both ways. Either the Church is served the way She wants or man steals from God to serve themselves. The baptized Catholic faithful need what is promised to them from God. So why then are these three bishops holding back from the flock, as if punishing them, the ministry of all the Traditional Sacraments, Holy orders, and Holy oils to baptize and anoint the sick and dying, refusing traditional seminary life and refusing to supply and teach within the traditional seminaries?
In all charity to correct these abuses and errors from these bishops, as St. Paul to St. Peter, we receive an unwarranted painful rebuke, as Bishop Fellay resumes and wanting to control his outcome, when Bishop Thomas Aquinas states:
"People who disagree with or criticise Bishop Williamson should not be made welcome. Priests who disagree with or criticise Bishop Williamson should not be received and the faithful should not go to their Mass. Criticising Bishop Williamson has consequences." (Letter of Dom Tomas Aquinas to Fr. Cardozo).
The Church will always survive in her substance and organize; with or without bishops or priests who go astray.
Our Lady Queen of Heaven, pray for us...
[Red font emphasis - The Catacombs]