FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? (/showthread.php?tid=52074)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Vetus Ordo - 01-05-2012

If the Pope can completely override Canon Law at his whim like John Paul II did in 1988, then Canon Law has little reason to exist: it's a legal fiction.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Old Salt - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 03:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If the Pope can completely override Canon Law at his whim like John Paul II did in 1988, then Canon Law has little reason to exist: it's a legal fiction.
No it is not legal fiction.
The Supreme legislator has the authority to interpret it.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Old Salt - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 03:28 PM)wallflower Wrote:
(01-05-2012, 12:02 PM)cgraye Wrote:
(01-04-2012, 09:55 PM)JMartyr Wrote: No, because 1983 code said so.

Not only is the very idea of the Code of Canon Law invalidating the actions of a pope (the ultimate judge of that law) logically ridiculous, but the specific arguments for why it was true in this case fail to convince on any objective level.

In any case, I'd say the SSPX lost their chance to even make that argument when they asked for and accepted the lifting of the excommunications.

Were the excommunications "lifted" though? IIRC the Pope used different terminology that tended towards them not being formally excommunicated in the first place. I'm not about to look it up but maybe someone else knows offhand.
From the official Vatican decree on the lifting of the excommunications:

"On the basis of the powers expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, by virtue of the present Decree I remit the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae incurred by Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson and Alfonso de Galarreta, and declared by this Congregation on 1 July 1988. At the same time I declare that, as of today’s date, the Decree issued at that time no longer has juridical effect."

This states that the HF will "remit the penalty of excommunication latae senteniae incerrred by ..." [in other words the excommunications occurred, and the HF is remitting them "lifting them]
Once the escommunications are lifted they no longer have any juridical effect.
The suspensions, however, remain



Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - cgraye - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 03:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If the Pope can completely override Canon Law at his whim like John Paul II did in 1988, then Canon Law has little reason to exist: it's a legal fiction.

I think it has a very important reason to exist - as a codification of all the laws that would otherwise only be found in many different places.  And there needs to be such a source for people to refer to - most matters are not handled by the pope personally, after all.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Someone1776 - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 03:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If the Pope can completely override Canon Law at his whim like John Paul II did in 1988, then Canon Law has little reason to exist: it's a legal fiction.

If a layman can completely override the Pope at his whim by appealing to Canon Law, than the Pope has little reason to exist: he's an ecclesiastical fiction. 


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Vetus Ordo - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 04:30 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-05-2012, 03:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If the Pope can completely override Canon Law at his whim like John Paul II did in 1988, then Canon Law has little reason to exist: it's a legal fiction.

If a layman can completely override the Pope at his whim by appealing to Canon Law, than the Pope has little reason to exist: he's an ecclesiastical fiction. 

If Canon Law declares that a faithful in a given situation does not incur excommunication and then the pope comes along and says that such given faithful is indeed excommunicated after all, although the situation is identical as the one envisaged by Canon Law, then I guess there isn't much left of the law that is altogether relevant. If a pope can simply ignore Canon Law at his whim, then I don't see the point. No-one in his right mind believes the excommunications of Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Castro Mayer to have been valid, much less their logical consequences: the eternal damnation of both these valiant clerics who fought for the faith when the rest of the Church was abandoning it.

On the other hand, the reason for the existence of the papal office isn't confined to being the supreme arbiter, or should I say trumper, of Canon Law.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Old Salt - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 05:21 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(01-05-2012, 04:30 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-05-2012, 03:34 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If the Pope can completely override Canon Law at his whim like John Paul II did in 1988, then Canon Law has little reason to exist: it's a legal fiction.

If a layman can completely override the Pope at his whim by appealing to Canon Law, than the Pope has little reason to exist: he's an ecclesiastical fiction. 

If Canon Law declares that a faithful in a given situation does not incur excommunication and then the pope comes along and says that such given faithful is indeed excommunicated after all, although the situation is identical as the one envisaged by Canon Law, then I guess there isn't much left of the law that is altogether relevant. If a pope can simply ignore Canon Law at his whim, then I don't see the point. No-one in his right mind believes the excommunications of Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Castro Mayer to have been valid, much less their logical consequences: the eternal damnation of both these valiant clerics who fought for the faith when the rest of the Church was abandoning it.

On the other hand, the reason for the existence of the papal office isn't confined to being the supreme arbiter, or should I say trumper, of Canon Law.
So you are saying Pope Benedict XVI and the majority of Catholics are insane.
Your credibility has eroded very far away.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - cgraye - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 05:21 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If Canon Law declares that a faithful in a given situation does not incur excommunication and then the pope comes along and says that such given faithful is indeed excommunicated after all, although the situation is identical as the one envisaged by Canon Law, then I guess there isn't much left of the law that is altogether relevant. If a pope can simply ignore Canon Law at his whim, then I don't see the point. No-one in his right mind believes the excommunications of Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Castro Mayer to have been valid, much less their logical consequences: the eternal damnation of both these valiant clerics who fought for the faith when the rest of the Church was abandoning it.

The case of these consecrations is hardly the kind of exception that the canons you refer to provide for.  Why would there be a provision in Canon Law that allows people to loophole their way out of having to obey the explicit commands of the pope?  And even if there were, what difference would it make when the pope explicitly affirms the excommunications?  If the automatic excommunications prescribed in Canon Law were not actually incurred due to an exception provided for in the law, but in the pope's judgment they were the proper response, he could just explicitly excommunicate them anyway.  Either way, the result is the same.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Vetus Ordo - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 05:28 PM)Old Salt Wrote: So you are saying Pope Benedict XVI and the majority of Catholics are insane.

Does the pope and the majority of Catholics believe that Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Castro Mayer, who both died presumably under the penalty of excommunication given to them by John Paul II, to be eternally damned?

That is, those among them who still believe in hell or in "no salvation outside the Church" which isn't likely to be many.

Quote:Your credibility has eroded very far away.

I'm not exactly worried about how credible you think I am.


Re: Did JP2 excommunicate "ALL" SSPX priests at one point? - Vetus Ordo - 01-05-2012

(01-05-2012, 05:36 PM)cgraye Wrote:
(01-05-2012, 05:21 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: If Canon Law declares that a faithful in a given situation does not incur excommunication and then the pope comes along and says that such given faithful is indeed excommunicated after all, although the situation is identical as the one envisaged by Canon Law, then I guess there isn't much left of the law that is altogether relevant. If a pope can simply ignore Canon Law at his whim, then I don't see the point. No-one in his right mind believes the excommunications of Abp. Lefebvre and Bp. Castro Mayer to have been valid, much less their logical consequences: the eternal damnation of both these valiant clerics who fought for the faith when the rest of the Church was abandoning it.

The case of these consecrations is hardly the kind of exception that the canons you refer to provide for.  Why would there be a provision in Canon Law that allows people to loophole their way out of having to obey the explicit commands of the pope?  And even if there were, what difference would it make when the pope explicitly affirms the excommunications?  If the automatic excommunications prescribed in Canon Law were not actually incurred due to an exception provided for in the law, but in the pope's judgment they were the proper response, he could just explicitly excommunicate them anyway.  Either way, the result is the same.

The end result is a positivist attitude towards the role of the pope. The same attitude is displayed regarding other issues such as his ordinary teachings and so forth.

Canon Law was clearly on the side of Abp. Lefebvre since he clearly believed there was a state of necessity, although this state of necessity was not his mere subjective perception but an objective fact. Either way, he could not incur excommunication according to the Church's law. Nevertheless, John Paul II decided to turn him into an example - unlike the hordes of heretics and pedophiles under his watch - and therefore excommunicated him against the letter and spirit of Canon Law. If this kind of despicable and unlawful course of action is divinely sanctioned, then there's no point in the law to begin with since all we have to do is rely on the whim of each and every pope according to the circumstances.